TIME - Man of the Year/CompactPublishing-TimeMagazine-TimeManOfTheYear-Win31MSDOS.iso/moy/111692/1116990.000

Text File | 1993-04-08 | 3.7 KB | 98 lines

                                                                                THE WEEK, Page 18

ELECTION `92

Clinton Whispered, But Voters Roared


A race that was supposedly tightening turned to solid victory


    He lost his voice but won just about everything else. On Sunday
morning, speaking in Cincinnati, Bill Clinton could manage only
21 seconds of half whisper, half gasp; even on Tuesday night,
making his victory speech, he still sounded strained and
hoarse. It hardly mattered. By then the voters had spoken, and
the election that briefly looked close had become anything but.

    Clinton's plurality in the popular vote, 43% -- vs. 38%
for George Bush and 19% for Ross Perot -- was solid rather than
spectacular. But his victory nonetheless was sweeping.
Geographically, the Arkansas Governor showed enough strength in
every part of the country to enjoy a more than comfortable
margin in the Electoral College; he won 31 states and 357
electoral votes, vs. only 18 states and 168 electoral votes for
Bush. More striking still, Clinton rolled up pluralities or
majorities in most major demographic groups: men and women;
blacks and Hispanics; every age group, from 18 to 29 to over 60;
and every income class below $50,000 a year. Bush won the votes
of whites, but by a narrow margin, and only because of the male
vote; Clinton tied him among white women. The President also won
Protestants and Asians but few other groups.

    Of those who once considered voting for Perot, 38% pulled
the lever for Clinton, vs. only 33% who stuck with Perot to the
end. Perot won a bigger share of the vote than any other
independent candidate in this century, save Teddy Roosevelt, who
got 27.4% in 1912. But the maverick Texan got little boost from
his final TV blitz. On election night he said he would continue
to be "the grain of sand" that irritates an oyster into
producing a pearl.

    How did Clinton do it? A combination of a sick economy and
an emphasis on the right issues. In exit polls 43% of the
voters said they had been moved by the issue of the economy and
jobs, more than twice as many as mentioned any other issue; they
went for Clinton 52%. Asked what "quality" most influenced
them, 37% specified a desire for change, and 25% sought the
candidate with the "best plan"; they chose Clinton by 58% and
51% respectively. Bush scored on taxes, foreign policy and the
general issue of honesty -- but those issues did not sway enough
voters to get him elected.

    In the last few days, Bush had grown unpresidentially
shrill, repeatedly calling Clinton and his running mate Al Gore
"bozos." But on election night he bowed out graciously. "We
respect the majesty of the democratic system," he told
supporters, and he congratulated Clinton on a "strong campaign."
In Little Rock, Arkansans literally danced in the streets at
their Governor's victory. Appearing on an outdoor stage, an
exuberant Clinton repeated some of his campaign themes,
asserting that the people had said "we want our future back, and
I intend to help give it to you." But he participated in the
ritual of healing, insisting that "we are all in this together,
and we will rise or fall together."

    If there was a downside for Clinton, it was his lack of
coattail pull. While women did well, Democrats fell short of
winning a "filibuster-proof" majority of 60 in the Senate; in
the House of Representatives they may lose 9 seats. Nonetheless,
Clinton's victory ended an era of divided government, as well
as 12 years of Republican control of the White House. As for
Bush, he has won an unwelcome niche in history: of the past four
Presidents, he is the third who has failed to hold on to the
White House.