Why didn't Buchanan secure the Republican nomination in 1992?

[Anarchist420]

Why did the Republicans nominate that liberal loser GHW Bush instead of Patrick J Buchanan?

Pat Buchanan is against amnesty for illegal aliens.

He opposes spending.

Bush supported the Gulf War, Buchanan did not.

Buchanan supported lower taxes.

Buchanan sincerely opposed abortion.

Buchanan opposed all gun control.

Buchanan supported the death penalty without being a killer himself.

Buchanan opposes the Federal Reserve.

Buchanan would've been the best President ever, and the first Old Right, America First, TRUE conservative since Silent Cal left the White House in 1929.

Why does the Republican party always choose the most liberal, democratic-socialist, anti-American, anti-Jeffersonian, rest-of-the-world-first candidate?

I mean, do you know how well off we'd be if Buchanan if won?

 

[Brainonska511]

 

[drebo]

RINOs run the party so RINOs get the nominations and party support. It'd be great to have a truely conservative party in the mainstream. Sadly, we're left to be independents and libertarians.

 

[Jhhnn]

Maybe because he tried to unseat a president of his own party... I don't think that's ever been done, nor likely will it be...

 

[Anarchist420]

James Buchanan got unseated.

 

[Jhhnn]

James Buchanan got unseated.

I don't think he was unseated, rather that he chose not to run, like Johnson in 1968. Buchanan was never nominated in the 1860 Democratic convention...

 

[Noobtastic]

Buchanan is a certified bigot and antisemite.

 

[Lemon law]

The entire flaw in the Anarchist420 argument is contained in, " I mean, do you know how well off we'd be if Buchanan if won."

I beg to differ, instead we later got a mental midget named GWB, who aped some of the Buchanon policies, and those policies flopped flatter than a pancake and collapsed our economy.

Get em clue, Pat Buchanon as Prez would have been a total national disaster, GHB was distinctly the lesser of that Buchanon evil, and anyone who thinks that Calvin Coolidge,
Warren Harding, Ronald Reagan, GWB, or a Pat Buchanon had a clue about good governance is a total idiot.

Sadly, both Hoover and GHB, were somewhat victims of the past idiotic policies of their predecessors.

 

[Mucho]

Didn't Pat Buchanan totally destroyed the Reform Party.

 

[cubby1223]

I think this Anarchist guy has smoked a little too much dope in his hey-day.

 

[Jaskalas]

Republicans are not true to conservative values, though they like to pretend they are to secure the vote.

 

[Blackjack200]

James Buchanan got unseated.

I don't think he was unseated, rather that he chose not to run, like Johnson in 1968. Buchanan was never nominated in the 1860 Democratic convention...

Please, God, let's not start discussing two different Buchanans. This thread will get confusing as hell.

And I think the OP may have been, as they say at SomethingAwful, a fakepost.

 

[Jhhnn]

Please, God, let's not start discussing two different Buchanans. This thread will get confusing as hell.

And I think the OP may have been, as they say at SomethingAwful, a fakepost.

Just keeping the record straight..

The modern Buchanan's run in 1992 was more of a protest than anything else, an effort to influence the Party platform... and some self aggrandizement, as well. As demagogues go, he's pretty boring, with an occasional bit of insight, but then, even a blind squirrel finds a few acorns...

 

[Blackjack200]

Just keeping the record straight..

The modern Buchanan's run in 1992 was more of a protest than anything else, an effort to influence the Party platform... and some self aggrandizement, as well. As demagogues go, he's pretty boring, with an occasional bit of insight, but then, even a blind squirrel finds a few acorns...

Wasn't he on the ballot in 2000 too? I seem to remember a bunch of Floridians claiming they accidentally voted for him, and this being parodied on Futurama.

 

[Lemon law]

Didn't Pat Buchanan totally destroyed the Reform Party.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Somewhat the wrong song man, the reform party was a one man brainfart of H. Ross Perot, and as such had a certain legitimacy based on the personality of H. Ross Perot.

Regardless of the question if any of us agreed or disagreed with the platform of H. Ross Perot's reform party, none of us can disagree that the reform party became a not only a legitimate force in American politics, but more importantly, polled enough votes to place it automatically on the ballot in the next election cycle.

But the problem became, come next election cycle, H. Ross Perot declined to run. Leaving the reform party automatically on the ballot up for grabs. And as history shows, Pat Buchan hijacked the reform party and thus got on the ballot on all 50 states.

The myth is and remains, that the politics of H. Ross Perot and Pat Buchanon had anything in common. But cheer up, Pat Buchanon had so little national appeal, and as a result the reform party died thereafter, because it failed to poll enough to get on national ballots thereafter. So simply regard Pat Buchanon as the assassin of the reform party.

 

[sandorski]

Too Radical.

 

[Red Dawn]

I think this Anarchist guy has smoked a little too much dope in his hey-day.

My bet it was sniffing glue.

 

[heyheybooboo]

'Patrick J Buchanan' was on the lunatic fringe in 1992, and has 'softened' the rough edges a bit since then.

And the growth of the internets has given rise (and a voice) to the thug mentality he represents.





--

 

[nageov3t]

a president or VP would have to be profoundly unpopular not to win his party's primary and, facing the prospects, would probably be more likely not to run at all than risk suffering such a humiliating defeat.

say what you will about GWHB's popularity in retrospect, but there's a pretty decent chance that he would have won in 1992 without the Perot factor.

 

[Anarchist420]

Buchanan is a certified bigot and antisemite.

No he's not. He had a black running mate. But I would expect you to hurl an insult at him, since you favor Israel over America.

The entire flaw in the Anarchist420 argument is contained in, " I mean, do you know how well off we'd be if Buchanan if won."

I beg to differ, instead we later got a mental midget named GWB, who aped some of the Buchanon policies, and those policies flopped flatter than a pancake and collapsed our economy.

Get em clue, Pat Buchanon as Prez would have been a total national disaster, GHB was distinctly the lesser of that Buchanon evil, and anyone who thinks that Calvin Coolidge,
Warren Harding, Ronald Reagan, GWB, or a Pat Buchanon had a clue about good governance is a total idiot.

Sadly, both Hoover and GHB, were somewhat victims of the past idiotic policies of their predecessors.

Hoover's economic policy was totally different than his predecessors, AND Reagan/GWB are NOTHING like Buchanan. Buchanan was fiscally conservative and anti-war, quite the opposite of Bush and Reagan.

a president or VP would have to be profoundly unpopular not to win his party's primary and, facing the prospects, would probably be more likely not to run at all than risk suffering such a humiliating defeat.

say what you will about GWHB's popularity in retrospect, but there's a pretty decent chance that he would have won in 1992 without the Perot factor.

Clinton still would've won. Bush would've continued spending and he was going to raise taxes. Perot was openly pro-choice and more pro-gun control than Bush and Clinton. If anything, Perot hurt Clinton.