Changes

<ref>  http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,260688,00.html </ref>

<ref>  http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,260688,00.html </ref>

==Analysis==

==Analysis==

The 1992 election was unique for a number of reasons: a perception that economic conditions were worse than they actually were, which harmed incumbent President Bush; a strong third-party candidate in Perot; a backlash against 12 years of a conservative presidency; and, perhaps most importantly, Bill Clinton's ability to unite not only the Democratic Party, but a number of heterogeneous coalitions, much as Franklin Roosevelt, also a consummate politician, did in the [[New Deal Coalition]] after 132.<ref> Seymour Martin Lipset, "The Significance of the 1992 Election." ''PS: Political Science & Politics'' 1993 26(1): 7-16. 1049-0965 </ref>  

The 1992 election was unique for a number of reasons: a perception that economic conditions were worse than they actually were, which harmed incumbent President Bush; a strong third-party candidate in Perot; a backlash against 12 years of a conservative presidency; and, perhaps most importantly, Bill Clinton's ability to unite not only the Democratic Party, but a number of heterogeneous coalitions, much as Franklin Roosevelt, also a consummate politician, did in the [[New Deal Coalition]] after 1932.<ref> Seymour Martin Lipset, "The Significance of the 1992 Election." ''PS: Political Science & Politics'' 1993 26(1): 7-16. 1049-0965 </ref>

 

==Further reading==

==Further reading==