THat;s because the cuckoo has yanked the right so far beyond its level of partisan insanity that the center teeters on the edge of that far-right cliff.

- And the Fascist march continues in the midwest.
(Just not for long. You know what they say about payback, and duped voters are very unruly when discovering they’ve been had by liars. But greed has never been known for its restraint.)

The endurance of this particular myth, regular readers will recognize, is particularly bothersome to me, and I’ve written about it several times. Easterbrook is hardly the only one who’s still pushing it. I can’t tell you how many times I have heard someone matter-of-factly make this claim in the past few years. Generally, it’s from conservatives who like to pretend that Bill Clinton’s ’92 victory was a fluke, but there are liberals who still fall for it too.

Instead of recounting all of the details of the ’92 race here, I’ll simply refer you to one of my previous posts on the subject. If you want the Cliff’s Notes version it goes like this: (1) Economic anxiety was high, causing Bush’s poll numbers to drop to poisonous levels — by the fall of ’92 he was not an incumbent who, on paper, should have won reelection; (2) Not a single public opinion poll from the middle of July (when Perot dropped out the race) through the end of September (when Perot returned) gave Bush a lead over Clinton — not even in the immediate wake of the August ’92 GOP convention. In fact, Clinton’s average lead in this period was double-digits — and the race was not tightening at the time Perot jumped back in; (3) A comprehensive national exit poll found that Perot voters were divided almost evenly on their second choice and that Clinton — in a two-way race — would still have beaten Bush by 5.8 million votes (his actual margin was 5.3 million in initial ’92 tally). Here’s how the Washington Post summarized the exit poll:

Ross Perot’s presence on the 1992 presidential ballot did not change the outcome of the election, according to an analysis of the second choices of Perot supporters.

The analysis, based on exit polls conducted by Voter Research & Surveys (VRS) for the major news organizations, indicated that in Perot’s absence, only Ohio would have have shifted from the Clinton column to the Bush column. This would still have left Clinton with a healthy 349-to-189 majority in the electoral college.

And even in Ohio, the hypothetical Bush “margin” without Perot in the race was so small that given the normal margin of error in polls, the state still might have stuck with Clinton absent the Texas billionaire.

In most states, the second choices of Perot voters only reinforced the actual outcome. For example, California, New York, Illinois and Oregon went to Clinton by large margins, and Perot voters in those states strongly preferred Clinton to Bush.

Repeat after me: Ross Perot did not “cost” George H.W. Bush the 1992 election. If you see or hear a commentator using this claim as supporting evidence, immediately discount whatever argument that commentator is advancing. The poor economy doomed George H.W. Bush in 1992 — not a short billionaire from Texas.

Your article explains the process well enough and calls for people to be engaged. I get that. It also discourages throwing away a good vote on a third party candidate, I couldn’t agree more.

Wether or not one votes in the primaries has nothing to do with getting a lesser of two evils scenario. That doesn’t downplay the importance of the primaries. The best outcome would be for all losing candidates to throw their supporters over to the winner (not likely, as Perot didn’t). In any case, we disagree that elections are about the lesser of two evils. I fully believe this since government (of both parties) does more to restrict our freedoms than not. There is no righteousness in government, therefore how can we expect pure goodness from it? Ah… lesser of two evils.

Your article explains the process well enough and calls for people to be engaged. I get that. It also discourages throwing away a good vote on a third party candidate, I couldn’t agree more.

Wether or not one votes in the primaries has nothing to do with getting a lesser of two evils scenario. That doesn’t downplay the importance of the primaries. The best outcome would be for all losing candidates to throw their supporters over to the winner (not likely, as Perot didn’t). In any case, we disagree that elections are about the lesser of two evils. I fully believe this since government (of both parties) does more to restrict our freedoms than not. There is no righteousness in government, therefore how can we expect pure goodness from it? Ah… lesser of two evils.

If your main point was that every election is always a choice between the lesser of two evils, I disagree.

Not every GOP candidate is evil. All with the exception of one have something about them I like. All of them have characteristics I dislike. There is no perfect candidate.

I’ll be avoiding all of your future posts.

Moot point. Assume you have 8 candidates, each candidate will draw their share of votes. So even if everyone got off their butts and voted for their candidate, the losers are still left with a lesser candidate. And it’s the losing candidate supporters stuck with a choice likened to the lesser of two evils.

Every election is a lesser of two evils proposition, since their is no righteousness in government. RINO’s only complicate the issue with their lukewarm appeal.

Adhering to the straight-forward principles and values of our Founding Fathers clear instructions is not perfection. Having the commonsense we all should have been born with isn’t either. This isn’t rocket-science. These clowns are either self-serving, stone ignorant or just flat out stupid. All of which we were specifically warned against.

“It seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force.
If there be any truth in the remark, the crisis at which we are arrived may with propriety be regarded as the era in which that decision is to be made; and a wrong election of the part we shall act may, in this view, deserve to be considered as the general misfortune of mankind.” — Alexander Hamilton (Federalist No. 1, 27 October 1787) Reference: Hamilton, Federalist No. 1.

Again, the point of the article is to stay focused on the primaries to avoid having another McCain to vote for. If you’re saying that you can’t find anyone to vote for and you have the records to back up your stance … it means you are waiting for perfection in a human. That’s only happened once in the entirety of human history and projected to only happen once more.

Some advice: I have all of their information, records, etc.

The system has clearly failed us as even the simplest of checks and balances were intentionally denied us. Despite millions of personal requests to elected officials and numerous lawsuits, both Obama’s eligibility to hold office and his criminal use of Social Security numbers not his own is still being outright ignored. The fact of whether he is ineligible and/or guilty is irrelevant as no agency, high official or judge actively pursued a Constitutionally mandated investigation. In fact, I remember hearing the drool of a clown official that We, The People were responsible for vetting presidential nominees.

“In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit. In that transfusion of blood which drains the good to feed the evil, the compromiser is the transmitting rubber tube.” – Ayn Rand

Elections are always about the lesser of two evils. If you are waiting for the perfect candidate, you might as well stop voting, because they don’t exist. It isn’t about the person as it is about the system, and America has the right mix of checks and balances to keep far-left Obama-nuts from destroying it, as well as far-right wackos.