http://sorendayton.com/2007/09/24/1992-a-2008-redux-through-housing/ Merely an aggregation of a dispersed life online Sun, 29 Jan 2012 16:32:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 http://sorendayton.com/2007/09/24/1992-a-2008-redux-through-housing/comment-page-1/#comment-1402 Michelle Malkin » Is it 1992 all over again? Thu, 04 Oct 2007 11:52:11 +0000 http://www.eyeon08.com/2007/09/24/1992-a-2008-redux-through-housing/#comment-1402 [...] James Pethokoukis thinks so. So does Eyeon08. [...] [...] James Pethokoukis thinks so. So does Eyeon08. [...]

]]> http://sorendayton.com/2007/09/24/1992-a-2008-redux-through-housing/comment-page-1/#comment-1401 Zarathustra Wed, 26 Sep 2007 00:30:12 +0000 http://www.eyeon08.com/2007/09/24/1992-a-2008-redux-through-housing/#comment-1401 Corrigendum: "It’s doubtful that Perot cost Bush California..." Corrigendum:
“It’s doubtful that Perot cost Bush California…”

]]> http://sorendayton.com/2007/09/24/1992-a-2008-redux-through-housing/comment-page-1/#comment-1400 Zarathustra Wed, 26 Sep 2007 00:28:49 +0000 http://www.eyeon08.com/2007/09/24/1992-a-2008-redux-through-housing/#comment-1400 It's doubtful that Perot cost Clinton California as Clinton almost won an <a href="http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/pres/1992.txt" rel="nofollow">absolute majority</a> in that state 1992; Bush would have had to have taken almost 83% of Perot's voters to have carried the state, assuming that all of Perot's voters would have even voted had he not been on the ballot. It’s doubtful that Perot cost Clinton California as Clinton almost won an absolute majority in that state 1992; Bush would have had to have taken almost 83% of Perot’s voters to have carried the state, assuming that all of Perot’s voters would have even voted had he not been on the ballot.

]]>