William B. White
WHITEWB at JCCW22.CC.SUNYJCC.EDU
Wed Feb 21 11:26:26 MST 1996
From: NAME: Bill White
TEL: 326/371 <WHITE, BILL AT A1 AT JCCV03>
To: IN%"rushtalk at athena.csdco.com"@MRGATE at JCCW22
>Pat Buchanan is a combination of the Ross Perot
>vote and the Christian Coalition.
Those two groups probably do support Buchanan. What percent did Perot
pull last time? 15 - 19%, I've read. They're probably going for Pat at this
time. What's the strength of the Christian coilition? Are some of them
previous Perot voters? Who knows the answer to this? If they are different
folks, Buchanan could probably bank 25-30%, just from those two groups! Add in
more undecideds; add in the Republicans who are presently critical or reserved
during the primary runs; add in those disenchanted with Clinton, who will never
vote for him again. Now we're getting someplace. I'm not a political
scientist, but I think you may continue to be surprised, as even I am and the
press is, by Buchanan's support. The saga continues . . .
>There is nothing wrong with a commentator as president, if he were able to
>get elected, and if we could give him a congress which would back him up
<from start to finish.
Agreed, of course . . .
>The trouble is that the press will spike Pat's campaign. Look at what
>to Mr. Pratt. They won't attack him directly, they'll just say "Buchanan
>working for him", and "the KKK supports Buchanan", etc. The public will
>desert him like rats from a sinking ship.
Yes, the logical fallacies (ad hominems, guilt
by association, etc.) will be trotted out and raced around the track.
>I actually think that Buchanan could do a good job as a leader if he
>himself with the right people.
Well, this is an addressable issue, and it may not be as
much of a problem as you suggest. Just visit the Whitewater pages on the WWW.
Clinton has retained his liberal supporters despite being surrounded
by a cast of clowns and convicted (!) shady characters.
More information about the Rushtalk