| TheSource said: Jackson have you seen the electoral college map from 1992? Clinton won tons of normally republican states by only a few points because of Perot. |
Yes, I have looked at the EC map and I find it spurious to say that Clinton won tons of GOP states because of Perot. If one looks at the exit polling from the 92 election, one will find that had Perot not been on the ballot, 38% of his voters said they would have voted for Clinton and 38% said they would have voted for Bush. The same thing happened along ideological lines. Perot received an equal number of conservatives and liberal votes (18%) and received 21% of the moderate vote. Reagan was the last Republican to win the moderate vote as it almost always breaks Democrat. There are factors that hurt Bush (30-49 age group and gender) and some that hurt Clinton (moderate vote, 18-29 age group and union households). Of course, these are national numbers and not based on state-by-state results. Nevertheless, I still maintain that Perot negatively effected both Clinton and Bush fairly equally. If anything, Perot may have prevented Clinton from winning a majority of the popular vote as opposed to costing Bush the election.
