home
***
CD-ROM
|
disk
|
FTP
|
other
***
search
/
TIME: Almanac 1995
/
TIME Almanac 1995.iso
/
time
/
100592
/
1005991.000
< prev
next >
Wrap
Text File
|
1994-03-25
|
4KB
|
80 lines
<text id=92TT2188>
<title>
Oct. 05, 1992: In for Keeps, or Just for Kicks
</title>
<history>
TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1992
Oct. 05, 1992 LYING:Everybody's Doin' It (Honest)
</history>
<article>
<source>Time Magazine</source>
<hdr>
THE WEEK, Page 18
NATION
In for Keeps, or Just for Kicks?
</hdr><body>
<p>Perot is on the move, while Bush has yet to make a dent in
Clinton's lead
</p>
<p> He's baaaaaack. Ross Perot was poised last week to jump back
into the presidential race he abandoned less than three months
ago. Perot had been signaling the move for weeks with repeated
-- and justified -- warnings that neither George Bush nor Bill
Clinton is grappling with the nation's fundamental fiscal
problems. But Perot is driven by two other forces: he is anxious
to rehabilitate the reputation he tarnished by quitting the race
in July. And he seems to harbor a profound dislike of Bush.
</p>
<p> What's still unknown is whether Perot would come in for
keeps, or just for kicks. Perot met last week with White House
chief of staff James Baker, in part to determine whether Bush
might adopt Perot's own rigorous plan for fixing the nation's
economic problems. Bush officials regarded that probe as a ploy.
Said one: "He was just going through the necessary steps so he
could say when he got in that `Bush isn't serious about fixing
the problem.' "
</p>
<p> Perhaps not coincidentally, a hush seemed to fall over the
campaign last week. Resting up for the final push, Bush took the
better part of two days off -- a move that left Clinton's
quick-reaction team without much to react to. Both campaigns put
new negative ads on the air: Clinton's commercials attacked
Bush's poor handling of the economy, while Bush's ads lampooned
Clinton's enthusiasm for raising taxes in Arkansas. The race is
sure to get nastier: both camps consider this first wave of
negative spots to be in the kinder and gentler category.
</p>
<p> The White House and Little Rock also continued to bicker
over the terms of possible debates, with the result being that
both sides now privately acknowledge that only a single debate
is likely before the election. Bush refused to discuss a
compromise on debate format because he believes that just by
appearing on the same stage with Clinton he will narrow the
"stature gap" he enjoys over the man he calls "the Governor of
a small Southern state." As a Bush aide put it, "Win or draw,
the first debate will allow Clinton to narrow the stature gap."
</p>
<p> By stalling on debates, Bush and Baker run the risk of
allowing Clinton to paint the President as a chicken for another
week or two. But it is a risk Bush is willing to take if he can
drive up Clinton's negatives in the meantime. "Baker is making
a calculation that as long as we're going negative, and it's
working, there is no reason to debate yet," the official said,
adding, "And until we know what Perot's going to do, it makes
sense to stand pat."
</p>
<p> Maybe so, but Baker and his team have yet to make any dent
in Clinton's lead, and some polls, including TIME's latest
survey, suggest that the Arkansas Governor is actually pulling
ahead. Such polls explain why some Bush aides now privately
believe Baker needs to agree to a speedy debate in the hope that
a strong Bush showing might "transform" the race. As one
Republican analyst said, "The longer Bush's numbers don't move,
the more skeptical the public becomes, not only of Bush's
ability to win but also his ability to lead the country."
</p>
</body></article>
</text>