Perot was meant to split the vote for the Repubs so Slick Willy could get elected, thus cementing our journey to socio-fasci-communism. And it worked.
He sounded good on paper, until after the election and all the dirt about him surfaced. Had that not happened, he may have had a chance at beating Clinton in '96. This is what led to what we now today as the "wrap up smear."
I remember Reagan. I thought he was a good President. I didn't put him on the list because he handed millions of Democrat voters to the criminals with the fucking amnesty. He was good on financial issues but he didn't understand what the people that tried to kill him were about.
The unfortunate truth about Reagan is that he sold out before he was even elected.
He campaigned well, and said all the right things, but there was a massive shift the day he chose Bush as his running mate after claiming he could never pick someone like Bush because they were so ideologically opposed (all it took was one private dinner to change his mind, apparently). From that day, it was obvious he had been neutered, the degree to which only increased after the Bushes tried to have him assassinated. His small government rhetoric became massive expansion of federal government in practice. Despite his aggressive promotion of the gold standard during the primaries, and minimal effort to move us back as president, we didn't get any closer to fighting the bank's control of the currency or unchecked inflation. He was an ally to the corrupt DOJ and more corrupt CIA, though I don't believe he wanted to be any of that, but didn't have the backbone to stand up to whatever the establishment had on him.
In the end, he was just a Bush family puppet.
By contrast, Trump who had a very similar campaign to Reagan, was the first president (in my lifetime, at least) to actually follow through on his promises -- and work tirelessly to not just fight the establishment, but to beat them at their own game for the good of the country. Not to mention continuing to fight during his presidential sabbatical.
Being old enough to remember Reagan, I still concur with u/Oblakhan's assessment. Perot and then Paul/Early Tea Party (before it was taken over by special interests) worked to build a following that ultimately readied people for Trump. Paul often said his goal was not the presidency, but to start a revolution. In that way, he was extremely successful -- probably more so than if he had actually worked and succeeded to become president, since I don't think he'd have what it takes at this point to fight the establishment.
There are very few politicians that I can say are truly principled and men/women of conviction -- but both Ron and Rand Paul are on that list. I wouldn't actually even put Trump on that list (and I very much like Trump), primarily because he seems to operate on circumstance and instinct more than a conscious conviction, but that he happens to have very good instincts, and very good private advisors.
Perot was meant to split the vote for the Repubs so Slick Willy could get elected, thus cementing our journey to socio-fasci-communism. And it worked.
He sounded good on paper, until after the election and all the dirt about him surfaced. Had that not happened, he may have had a chance at beating Clinton in '96. This is what led to what we now today as the "wrap up smear."
He was just another cog in [their] machine.
I my lifetime there have been three politicians worth a shit. Ross Perot was the first. Ron Paul was the second. Donald J Trump is the third.
The fucking corrupt media went after everyone of them like a rabid dog.
I remember Reagan. I thought he was a good President. I didn't put him on the list because he handed millions of Democrat voters to the criminals with the fucking amnesty. He was good on financial issues but he didn't understand what the people that tried to kill him were about.
The unfortunate truth about Reagan is that he sold out before he was even elected.
He campaigned well, and said all the right things, but there was a massive shift the day he chose Bush as his running mate after claiming he could never pick someone like Bush because they were so ideologically opposed (all it took was one private dinner to change his mind, apparently). From that day, it was obvious he had been neutered, the degree to which only increased after the Bushes tried to have him assassinated. His small government rhetoric became massive expansion of federal government in practice. Despite his aggressive promotion of the gold standard during the primaries, and minimal effort to move us back as president, we didn't get any closer to fighting the bank's control of the currency or unchecked inflation. He was an ally to the corrupt DOJ and more corrupt CIA, though I don't believe he wanted to be any of that, but didn't have the backbone to stand up to whatever the establishment had on him.
In the end, he was just a Bush family puppet.
By contrast, Trump who had a very similar campaign to Reagan, was the first president (in my lifetime, at least) to actually follow through on his promises -- and work tirelessly to not just fight the establishment, but to beat them at their own game for the good of the country. Not to mention continuing to fight during his presidential sabbatical.
Being old enough to remember Reagan, I still concur with u/Oblakhan's assessment. Perot and then Paul/Early Tea Party (before it was taken over by special interests) worked to build a following that ultimately readied people for Trump. Paul often said his goal was not the presidency, but to start a revolution. In that way, he was extremely successful -- probably more so than if he had actually worked and succeeded to become president, since I don't think he'd have what it takes at this point to fight the establishment.
There are very few politicians that I can say are truly principled and men/women of conviction -- but both Ron and Rand Paul are on that list. I wouldn't actually even put Trump on that list (and I very much like Trump), primarily because he seems to operate on circumstance and instinct more than a conscious conviction, but that he happens to have very good instincts, and very good private advisors.
He said in his lifetime, Boomer! Jk