close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Welcome to Glock Talk

Why should YOU join our Glock forum?

  • Converse with other Glock Enthusiasts
  • Learn about the latest hunting products
  • Becoming a member is FREE and EASY

If you consider yourself a beginner or an avid shooter, the Glock Talk community is your place to discuss self defense, concealed carry, reloading, target shooting, and all things Glock.

America could be ‘taken over,’ warns Ross Perot

Discussion in 'Political Issues' started by Ruble Noon, Oct 1, 2012.

  1. The Maggy

    The Maggy

    3,348
    20
    Dec 24, 2008
    Stillwater, OK
    20 years ago, he was made fun of for predicting our current crisis. I hope that he is wrong about this one.
     


  2. JBnTX

    JBnTX Bible Thumper

    20,018
    4,167
    Aug 28, 2008
    Fort Worth Texas
    "Former presidential contender and billionaire Ross Perot is worried that America is a sitting duck for an unnamed foreign invader."


    That "unnamed foreign invader" has a name.
    It's the Militant Islamic Fundamentalist Movement led by Iran.
     
  3. Bren

    Bren NRA Life Member

    42,061
    8,913
    Jan 16, 2005
    Kentucky
    20 years a go he personally started us on the road to our current crisis by causing Bill Clinton to be elected president - events like dominoes brought us from there to here.

    If he couldn't predict that very obvious result, I have to question his predictive powers.
     
  4. Ruble Noon

    Ruble Noon "Cracker"

    11,018
    2
    Feb 18, 2009
    No Bren, you caused Clinton to be elected.
     
  5. GAFinch

    GAFinch

    5,912
    28
    Feb 23, 2009
    Georgia
    Many Republicans have already admitted to having a problem and are taking a harder stance on spending, which is why they're being vilified as right wing extremists by the left, even thought they're just using common sense in the face of an imminent economic disaster. Either progressivism or capitalism will get blamed for the disaster and the winner will probably drastically shape the future of this country.
     
  6. juggy4711

    juggy4711 Nimrod Son

    3,060
    0
    Sep 20, 2006
    Galveston County, TX
    Is this some deranged, bizarro version of it's Bush's fault? It's Perot's fault that it is Clinton's fault?
     
  7. TheExplorer

    TheExplorer

    1,322
    0
    Apr 16, 2012
    That's what I thought.:rofl:
     
  8. countrygun

    countrygun

    17,069
    17
    Mar 9, 2012
    News flash for you Slick.

    A lot of us voted for Perot and got Clinton as a result. We learned about third parties, the braindead still dream and refuse the intrusion of reality and continue of their fantasy, OR they were asleep in history class and are merely first time ignorant who haven't been taught about the effects of third parties
     
  9. G17Jake

    G17Jake

    6,128
    314
    Sep 13, 2002
    America has already been taken over. It is time to take it back.
     
  10. Snowman92D

    Snowman92D

    3,889
    14
    Oct 6, 2001
    Indianapolis
    The Clinton thing was my fault. I was one of the dumbasses who voted for Perot because he was the Real Deal, I was tired of voting against the "lesser of two evils", and I wanted to teach the Republican Party a lesson.

    Mea culpa.
     
  11. Ruble Noon

    Ruble Noon "Cracker"

    11,018
    2
    Feb 18, 2009
    Nah, it was Bren's fault for not voting for liberty as is the crash that ensued because he voted against Perot.
     
  12. The Maggy

    The Maggy

    3,348
    20
    Dec 24, 2008
    Stillwater, OK
    No one has yet been able to show Perot's causation of Clinton. There is only a loose correlation between Perot being on the ballot and Clinton winning.

    Using the same logic; someone could assume crime rates increase because more ice-cream is being sold through the summer months.

    Will one of you three that keep claiming this show me some math behind how Perot caused Clinton?
     
  13. countrygun

    countrygun

    17,069
    17
    Mar 9, 2012
    An that would prove either Perot helped Clinton,

    or

    it would prove that a vote for a libertarian now, would be as useless as a vote for Perot was then,

    either way it makes a case for voting Romney
     
  14. Bren

    Bren NRA Life Member

    42,061
    8,913
    Jan 16, 2005
    Kentucky
    Perot took many times the voters that Bush needed to beat Clinton (I posted the actual numbers in another thread). If you were around back then, you know he took the majority of them from the Republican party. Had he not done so, Bush would have won the popular vote by a very wide margin and, fairly certainly, the electoral vote.

    That would have meant, no Bill Clinton, first or second term. Maybe no AWB. No Janet Reno. Likely No Waco and then no Oklahoma City, just among the first things that come to mind. Then, likely no Barack Obama, no Hillary Clinton as candidate or sec of state, a completely different course of events in the middle east - even 9/11 is fairly questionable.
     
  15. Snowman92D

    Snowman92D

    3,889
    14
    Oct 6, 2001
    Indianapolis
    George H.W. Bush had made some comments about the imminence of a "new world order" during the run-up to the first Gulf War, and that...and a few other issues that now were clearly irrelevant...caused a substantial number of conservatives to leave the Republican fold, in a snit, to vote for Perot.

    That was a very costly lesson that we're still trying to dig out from under.
     
  16. OctoberRust

    OctoberRust Anti-Federalist

    5,668
    0
    Jun 15, 2011
    Texas

    Yes!!! Just like Iraq about to invade us in 2003, right? :rofl:
     
  17. QNman

    QNman resU deretsigeR Silver Member

    9,970
    421
    Oct 5, 2005
    St. Louis, MO
    THIS is why I voted for Perot.
     
  18. QNman

    QNman resU deretsigeR Silver Member

    9,970
    421
    Oct 5, 2005
    St. Louis, MO
    H. w. lost for the same reason W. would have lost had his first term looked more like his second - because he was a mealy-mouthed moderate "centrist" trying to pretend he was a conservative.
     
  19. Skyhook

    Skyhook

    13,068
    1
    Nov 4, 2002
    USA
    Yes, a lot of otherwise intelligent folks went with Perot. That lack of savvy, political sophistication some may call it, seems to dominate our younger set.

    If you voted for Perot back then, you had lots of well-meaning company which resulted rather directly in a Republican loss. Splitting the group weakens it and the Democrats are extremely good at dividing us as we see by the efforts of Obama's admin.