Editorial: Perot paved political pathways | TribLIVE.com
Editorials

Editorial: Perot paved political pathways

1390043_web1_1389582-2153c27549e540c4ac73fc12e21d17de

Ross Perot wasn’t a guy who did things first. He was a guy who saw a way to do them a little bit better.

Perot, who died Tuesday, wasn’t the first person to make money in Texas. He was one of the first to drill into technology instead of oil.

“Anybody can cut prices, but it takes brains to produce a better article.”

He wasn’t the first rich man to run for president.

Most of the men who have sat in the Oval Office had money, whether they came from wealth or built it from scratch. He tried to do it not by pretending to be the common man but by being open about his money and how it shaped his political decisions.

“If someone is blessed as I am is not willing to clean out the barn, who will?”

He wasn’t the first man to run as an independent.

By the time Perot ran for president in 1992, America had become accustomed to an occasional high-profile third man — George Wallace did it in 1968 and John Anderson in 1980. Perot could have given money to a candidate, but he had his own ideas.

“The budget should be balanced, the treasury should be refilled, the public debt should be reduced and the arrogance of public officials should be controlled.”

And he wasn’t the first man to lose. Or to get up and try again, and lose again. But he seemed to believe the trying was the important part — the thing that has to be done come hell or high water.

“Failures are like skinned knees, painful but superficial.”

A Republican for decades, Perot walked away from his party to do what he believed was right. He did it as an independent in 1992, and again when he created the Reform Party in 1995 and ran on that ticket in 1996.

His run has become synonymous with the dangers of a third-party candidate to a major nominee — a spoiler that can “steal” votes from a favorite.

Maybe George H.W. Bush would have won re-election if it weren’t for Perot’s 18.9% of the vote. But with no electoral votes in Perot’s column, maybe not.

Maybe the danger was more that he opened a two-party race to a dark horse that could bring up ideas that weren’t in either the Democratic or Republican lanes.

“War has rules. Mud wrestling has rules. Politics has no rules.”

A run like Perot’s paved the road for another billionaire with populist support to dive into politics and become president. It also cleared the path for the mass candidacy in the Democratic hunt for 2020.

His idea was simple: If you have an idea, and you have a voice, speak your mind. That’s never bad, whether you are running for office or not.

“Most people give up just when they’re about to achieve success. They quit on the one-yard line. They give up at the last minute of the game, one foot from a winning touchdown.”

Categories: Opinion | Editorials
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.