what is the point of interviewing somebody if you are not interested in hearing the person's answers? neil cavuto would not stop interrupting dan quayle. obviously, neil cavuto doesnt really care what day quayle has to say. so why waste dan quayle's time? neil cavuto should just spend all of his time talking to himself
Perot was an autocrat with little patience. He would have never been able to handle the legislative jostling with congress. People poke at Pres Trump's ego but Ross Perot was an ego master coupled with a billionaire napoleon complex.
If in fact Lloyd Bentsen’s “Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy” line was in fact rehearsed, and if in fact Quayle himself knew it was, then Quayle should have taken it in stride on the debate stage instead of getting all pouty about it with “That was really uncalled for, Senator.” 🙄
Yes, he looked like a deer in the headlights. It was like a guy who knew he was gonna be pummeled and just hoped for the best and that it would't be too bad. He should have had an immediate, strong response.
He says in this interview that at the time of the debate, he did not know it was rehearsed. He should have been prepped better for that situation to occur. He looked at the time genuinely surprised and insulted by it.
It was clearly rehearsed. Read or watch news from that period, and there is clearly this desire by the Dukakis campaign to paint Quayle as this "wannabe-JFK".
@@LineMountain True but the country was ready for change anyway. HE had been there for 4 years but the Republicans had been there for 24 years with only one interruption (Jimmy Carter's one term from 1977-81). Plus George H. W. Bush's strength, foreign policy, was not the main concern in 1992 - it was the economy.
@@Mat-threw Very early on he knew how to make good self-deprecation on that: « If [Bill Clinton and Al Gore] are moderates, then I’m a world class speller! »
And everybody thought that Quayle really was an idiot. The only thing he was wrong on was that Perot would actually run, which is exactly what people we're saying about Trump. What that shows more than anything is how self-assured all the establishment is and speaks a fair deal about the contempt they really have for the voters.
I’ve always liked Quayle and think he was unfairly maligned. Having said that, he sounds better with age. If he was 10 years older in 1988, he would’ve come across more seasoned, in my opinion.
Cavuto needs to let Quayle speak
what is the point of interviewing somebody if you are not interested in hearing the person's answers? neil cavuto would not stop interrupting dan quayle. obviously, neil cavuto doesnt really care what day quayle has to say. so why waste dan quayle's time? neil cavuto should just spend all of his time talking to himself
I’m sorry but if Perot and Quayle ever would have debated Perot would have obliterated him.
just shows you, any dingbat gets respected with age
If Ross Perot would have been elected we would not be having these problems today...
things would be far worse
Look up operations Red Rock 😎👍
@@mosescordovero6060 Haha yeah less debt would suck.
I think the two parties would have worked against him.
Perot was an autocrat with little patience. He would have never been able to handle the legislative jostling with congress. People poke at Pres Trump's ego but Ross Perot was an ego master coupled with a billionaire napoleon complex.
If in fact Lloyd Bentsen’s “Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy” line was in fact rehearsed, and if in fact Quayle himself knew it was, then Quayle should have taken it in stride on the debate stage instead of getting all pouty about it with “That was really uncalled for, Senator.” 🙄
Yes, he looked like a deer in the headlights. It was like a guy who knew he was gonna be pummeled and just hoped for the best and that it would't be too bad. He should have had an immediate, strong response.
He says in this interview that at the time of the debate, he did not know it was rehearsed. He should have been prepped better for that situation to occur. He looked at the time genuinely surprised and insulted by it.
It was clearly rehearsed. Read or watch news from that period, and there is clearly this desire by the Dukakis campaign to paint Quayle as this "wannabe-JFK".
Bush was not a good campaigner or debater or speech giver.
LineMountain he was good against Geraldine Ferraro and he was good when he needed to be but overall you are correct
benjianubis the economy was in a brief recession throughout 92. We had almost a continuous economic boom from 1982-2000
@@LineMountain True but the country was ready for change anyway. HE had been there for 4 years but the Republicans had been there for 24 years with only one interruption (Jimmy Carter's one term from 1977-81).
Plus George H. W. Bush's strength, foreign policy, was not the main concern in 1992 - it was the economy.
Dan Quayle’s voice has got deeper over the years!
Yeah but can he spell potato yet?
@@Mat-threw Very early on he knew how to make good self-deprecation on that: « If [Bill Clinton and Al Gore] are moderates, then I’m a world class speller! »
And everybody thought that Quayle really was an idiot. The only thing he was wrong on was that Perot would actually run, which is exactly what people we're saying about Trump. What that shows more than anything is how self-assured all the establishment is and speaks a fair deal about the contempt they really have for the voters.
He was also wrong about how to spell potato
We all know that back then when Quayle was the VP, these were Hard times, Hard times.
If you just let the VP talk!!!
Bush's name was on the ballot!
I’ve always liked Quayle and think he was unfairly maligned. Having said that, he sounds better with age. If he was 10 years older in 1988, he would’ve come across more seasoned, in my opinion.
Keeping out Perot because he was a major story. I wonder how many votes Bush would had lose much more.
Enough with the noisy, annoying graphics FOX! You're killing me!
"Inspite of being old, dan quayle is still looking young ..
neil cavuto needs to shut his hole and let his guest speak
I would have voted Perot if I was eight years older...
then i am glad you were too young to vote
You mean a billionaire with no political experience. Why does that sound familiar?
People keep voting for these two political dictator parties.
@Mark Weis Only in comparison, and it’s not a high bar.
Perot was not a spoiler, nuff said
Perot was a huge spoiler
What are you talking about, he won 18% of the vote and Clinton won the presidency that year with only 42% of the vote.
"People are a lot smarter than you give 'em credit for." Eh.....
No...I would say it was the "New Taxes"
Of course you did! Shut up all opposition to the two party system right!
Dan Quayle would of been a better president then bush and a great prez in 96, and 2000,
He got into politics too young; he squashed his potential by gaining a bad reputation for gaffes
Unelectable
Don't care for cavuto sometimes not sure what's up
Experience seems to have given him the wisdom that he lacked in his younger days
As I said, Dan who ?
ignorant much?
Quayle.