I agree that a narrow Clinton victory would have been the likeliest result in both 92 and 96 had Perot not been on the ballot, but Bush would have had a chance at victory in 1992 because IA, CT and ME would have been very close and had Bush won the first two he would have gotten 270 EVs. BTW, even without Perot, TN would have voted for Clinton in 92, but would have gone for Dole in 96.
I wonder when we would have gotten Congress if he had won. 98 if a rat won in 96?