Changes
/* a backlash against 12 years of a conservative presidency */
::::::Point is, in the pre-Windows 95 Internet age, all the information ''was'' available, only the mainstream sources that people depend on not only ''did not'' report it, they did report Clinton's assertions such "worst economy in 50 years" etc. without challenging it. Today there's things like Fact Check, etc., in those days it was pure unadulterated media bias. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:44, 10 September 2009 (EDT)
:::::::I agree, but Bush had a huge $$$$ campaign fund and it was his job to defend himself and get the facts out on tens of thousands of TV commercials and hundreds of speeches. he failed to do so why Clinton and perot hammered away. Poor Bush got 38% of the vote, following three landslides.[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 21:49, 10 September 2009 (EDT)
::::::::All that is true, but it's also true Mondale and Dukakis polled as good as if not better than Bill Clinton. It's also true GW Bush had a higher percentage in 2000 that Clinton did 1996. It is also a '''<u>fact'''</u> that for every one vote more cast against GW Bush than for in 2000, William Jefferson Clinton had 30 votes cast against rather for. It's also true Clinton charged GHW Bush with wanted promised to "raise taxes on foreign coropations" and promised a middle class tax cut (for which he got a minority of the popular vote, 42%); as President he ''cut '' taxes on foriegn corporations (NAFTA) and raised taxes on the American people. Wheather that is liberal or conservative is a matter of debate. But the facts are his ideas only polled 42%, and he never even tried to implement those ideas. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:57, 10 September 2009 (EDT)
