Path: bloom-picayune.mit.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!americast.com!americast.com!americast-post Newsgroups: americast.twt.news From: americast-post@AmeriCast.Com Organization: American Cybercasting Approved: americast-post@AmeriCast.com Subject: Southerners' win without South may alter politics Date: Sat, 7 Nov 92 19:23:58 EST Message-ID: \SE A;NATION;THE CLINTON TRANSITION \SS (WS) \HD Southerners' win without South may alter politics \BY David Waters \CR MEMPHIS COMMERCIAL APPEAL Tuesday's presidential election was the first to send two Southerners to the White House. It also was the first time a Democrat lost the South but won the presidency. Experts say those two developments could signal the end of the kind of sectional politics that has characterized presidential elections for the better part of two centuries. And it could mark the beginning of a new Democratic coalition that adds moderate states in the West and Midwest to the party's traditional strength in the Northeast and South. Regional rivalries have influenced presidential politics since the 1830s, when abolitionists in the North began battling slaveholders in the South. President-elect Bill Clinton of Arkansas is the second Southerner since Andrew Jackson to win every region outside the South. Lyndon Johnson of Texas swept the entire country in 1964. Republican Party strategists used Mr. Clinton's Southern roots to feed sectional stereotypes during the 1992 campaign. For example, near the campaign's end, the Republican National Committee mailed a flyer to New England voters that read, "Remember the last time we elected a Southern Governor President?" Inside was a picture of former President and Georgia Gov. Jimmy Carter. "It seems like Deja-Vu," the pamphlet said. "Once again, Americans are being promised a lot by a governor from a small Southern state." Mr. Clinton's election broke a number of presidential precedents: * He lost the South but carried the Northeast, Midwest and West; no Democrat had done that. * He was the first Democrat to lose Texas and win the election. * He became the first presidential candidate since 1952 to lose the New Hampshire primary and win the election. "Strangely enough, the South ended up being the Clinton-Gore ticket's weakest region," said Mike Nelson, a presidential scholar at Rhodes College. "But what is important is they carried critical parts of all four regions." Mr. Clinton won seven of 11 states in the West, seven of 13 in the Midwest and all 14 in the East. He won five of 12 Southern states. President Bush swept the Southern states in 1988 and won most of them this time. Mr. Bush won the South by 300,000 votes and took 108 of 153 Southern electoral votes. Historically, that would have been the death knell for the Democratic ticket. Since Thomas Jefferson in 1800, every Democrat who won the presidency won the South. Not this time. Mr. Clinton busted into Republican bedrock in the West and Midwest, winning nine of 21 states that had gone Republican in every election since 1968, including California, Colorado and Illinois. "I think we still have a lot of work to do in the South," said James Carville, Mr. Clinton's senior strategist. "I think the West is the new Democratic region." With the exception of 1964, when Democrat Lyndon Johnson swept the country, Democratic presidential candidates won three Western states in the 10 elections from 1952 to 1988. In the Midwest, Mr. Clinton was the fourth Democrat to sweep Ohio, Michigan and Illinois. * Distributed by Scripps Howard. This article is copyright 1992 The Washington Times. Redistribution to other sites is not permitted except by arrangement with American Cybercasting Corporation. For more information, send-email to usa@AmeriCast.COM