<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://projects.newsobserver.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>newsobserver.com projects - Ross Perot - Comments</title>
 <link>http://projects.newsobserver.com/tags/ross_perot</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;Ross Perot&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>Re: Barr was a spoiler after all</title>
 <link>http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/barr_was_a_spoiler_after_all#comment-13771</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;The facts, while interesting....&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:11:37 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>dahedgehog</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 13771 at http://projects.newsobserver.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Re: Barr was a spoiler after all</title>
 <link>http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/barr_was_a_spoiler_after_all#comment-13731</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the thoughtful comment, but I&amp;#39;m sticking with my definition of a spoiler.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;— RTB &lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:34:22 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>ryanteaguebeckwith</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 13731 at http://projects.newsobserver.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Re: Barr was a spoiler after all</title>
 <link>http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/barr_was_a_spoiler_after_all#comment-13729</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;RTB, you should change the post.  &quot;Barr was possibly a spoiler&quot; or &quot;If you make some unrealistic assumptions on the behavior of Barr voters, then Barr was maybe a spoiler&quot;.  Either are better than the declarative statement &quot;Barr was a spoiler after all.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 13:32:17 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>dahedgehog</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 13729 at http://projects.newsobserver.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Re: Barr was a spoiler after all</title>
 <link>http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/barr_was_a_spoiler_after_all#comment-13721</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;True. It&amp;#39;s impossible to know how people would have voted, but it&amp;#39;s worth pointing out when the third-party candidate gets more votes than the margin.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;— RTB &lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:10:27 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>ryanteaguebeckwith</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 13721 at http://projects.newsobserver.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Re: Barr was a spoiler after all</title>
 <link>http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/barr_was_a_spoiler_after_all#comment-13719</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;It&#039;s just math.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:08:21 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>dwcatty</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 13719 at http://projects.newsobserver.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Re: Barr was a spoiler after all</title>
 <link>http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/barr_was_a_spoiler_after_all#comment-13717</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;The only way that Barr was the deciding factor would be if (1) all Barr voters cast a vote for president, and (2) those Barr voters favored McCain by at least 19,957 (78%) to 5,765 (22%).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Those are two big &quot;if&#039;s&quot;.  Particularly, there&#039;s no reason to think Barr voters would favor McCain by such a large margin.  &lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:04:02 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>dahedgehog</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 13717 at http://projects.newsobserver.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Barr didn&#039;t spoil anything except the Libertarian Party</title>
 <link>http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/barr_was_a_spoiler_after_all#comment-13715</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;&quot;That puts Barr into elite company in North Carolina.&quot;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It sure did! It proves that Barr is no voter getter period! My dog would have got 25 thousand votes by simply having his bone on the ballot! Where did you political training at? The Ed Cone reverse school of new age establishment math!&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:00:14 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>ConMax</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 13715 at http://projects.newsobserver.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Re: Presidential spoilers in N.C. history</title>
 <link>http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/presidential_spoilers_in_n_c_history#comment-7321</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;A valid point, but I would still count coming in second as being a spoiler. The dynamics of a two-person versus a three-person race are much different. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;— RTB &lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 12:28:44 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>ryanteaguebeckwith</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 7321 at http://projects.newsobserver.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Re: Presidential spoilers in N.C. history</title>
 <link>http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/presidential_spoilers_in_n_c_history#comment-7318</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;The rest are good examples, but the Bull Moose campaign did not earn enough votes to affect the race between the Republican and the Democrat.&lt;br /&gt;
As noted, Wilson received 59.2 percent of the vote. Even if Taft was the only other candidate in that race, he&#039;d still have lost with a maximum 40.8 percent of the vote.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I suppose Teddy spoiled Taft&#039;s chance to come in second.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 11:32:59 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>meschreiner</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 7318 at http://projects.newsobserver.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Re: Presidential spoilers in N.C. history</title>
 <link>http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/presidential_spoilers_in_n_c_history#comment-7295</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Bob Barr will be the only third party candidate to have the opportunity in NC to be a spoiler! &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Unfortunately, both Nader/Gonzalez and the Green Party has been blocked from our ballot! &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I find this to be offensive to many people in this state as well as unconstitutional! &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;It is a sad day in the United States of America when voters are disenfranchised as they have been this year! &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is not fair and true representation of &quot;we the people&quot;, nor is it true Democracy! &lt;/p&gt;</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2008 18:47:51 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>waya_ageyutsa</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 7295 at http://projects.newsobserver.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
