[clee1]

What allowed the Clintons two terms was:

a) Too many disillusioned (Read my lips) American conservatives throwing away their vote on a nutcase like H. Ross Perot, who stood absolutely NO chanceof winning; and

b) The Republican party running Dole, an American hero but a pi$$-poor candidate.

[Just mythoughts]

"What allowed the Clintons two terms was:

a) Too many disillusioned (Read my lips) American conservatives throwing away their vote on a nutcase like H. Ross Perot, who stood absolutely NO chanceof winning; and

b) The Republican party running Dole, an American hero but a pi$$-poor candidate."

We cannot leave out those that actually voted for him as well, so "fickle" Americans fits all categories.

[Slings and Arrows]

I'll add another, but related to b:

c) The RNC Pooh-Bahs wrongly decided that 1996 was unwinnable, and just went through the motions.

That is an inference, but the way the Dole campaign was handled seems to bear it out.

[des]

sad, but true

[vampire2191]

Try to remember the context of the times. In 1992, nobody had any reason to expect 43% of the people to vote for a draft dodger who cheated on his wife or 19% to vote for a lunatic, leaving 38% for the president. At that time, the MSM was still the only game in town, and that was pretty much the case in '96, too. Dole was a great candidate, but unless you saw him in person, you'd never know it. The MSM won the '92 and '96 elections, not Clinton, and a lot of people jumped on the media-driven bandwagon.

[Gorzaloon]

What allowed the Clintons two terms was:

a) Too many disillusioned (Read my lips) American conservatives throwing away their vote on a nutcase like H. Ross Perot, who stood absolutely NO chanceof winning;

Damned right, and Perot's entire scam was based on a personal hatred of George Bush. Perot was successful, where Rather has not been, yet.

I voted for Perot, and stand before Free Republic and the World fully revealed as a complicit A$$HOLE and sucker.