Newspaper article The Christian Science Monitor

Clinton's Thin Win in '92 Won't Make or Break His Tenure

Newspaper article The Christian Science Monitor

Clinton's Thin Win in '92 Won't Make or Break His Tenure

Article excerpt

DURING the past year conservative commentators have rarely missed an opportunity to remind Americans that President Clinton was elected by only a plurality of voters, not by a majority.

Mr. Clinton's status as a "minority president" has made it easy for conservatives to challenge the legitimacy of his presidency. In a recent rebuke, nationally syndicated columnist Mona Charen reminded readers once again of Clinton's electoral vulnerability: "Let us not forget that this president was elected with only 43 percent of the vote." How could Americans possibly forget? Conservatives won't let them. It's a rap they hope will stick with Clinton throughout his presidency.

It's funny that Ms. Charen's reminder could also be the first line in an essay commemorating the 25th anniversary of Richard Nixon's inauguration as president in 1969. Like Clinton, Mr. Nixon was a "minority president," elected with only 43.4 percent of the popular vote.

Conservative pundits like Charen would like Americans to believe that Clinton's status as a "minority president" is somehow unique or at least extremely rare. Of course, it's neither. Many American presidents were elected with only a plurality of the vote and went on to govern effectively, in some cases with distinction. But conservative critics aren't interested in the historical record since it doesn't support their easy charge against Clinton. It's time to set the record straight.

The winners in 16 presidential elections since 1824 received only a plurality of the popular vote. Six of these elections took place in the 20th century. In addition to Clinton and Nixon, John Kennedy in 1960, Harry Truman in 1948, and Woodrow Wilson in 1912 and 1916 received only a plurality of the popular vote. Not bad company at all for the current occupant of the White House.

Further, three United States presidents received an even lower percentage of the popular vote than Clinton. Wilson received 41.8 percent of the popular vote in 1912; Abraham Lincoln only 39.8 percent in 1860; and John Quincy Adams a mere 30.5 percent in 1824. Lincoln and Wilson are consistently ranked as among America's ten greatest presidents; again, not bad company for Clinton.

Conservatives also neglect to discuss the sheer number of votes cast for Clinton in 1992. Thanks to the highest voter turnout in more than 30 years, Clinton received more votes for president in 1992 than all presidents in US electoral history except Nixon in 1972, Ronald Reagan in 1984, and George Bush in 1988. Clinton outpolled every other American president including Nixon in 1968, Jimmy Carter in 1976, and Mr. Reagan in 1980. To hear conservatives tell it, one would think Bill Clinton had one of the smallest bases of electoral support in American history, and that it casts a dark cloud over his ability to govern.

Underlying this put-down of Clinton is the assumption that presidential performance is positively related to a president's margin of electoral victory: The greater the voter support, the greater the probability of a successful presidency. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.