Home > Politics > Political Punch
Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

The June Myth

May 08, 2008 8:54 AM

"It's still early," said Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY yesterday. "I mean, everybody is so focused on where we are right now -- I guess I remember that, in June of 1992, that's when Bill really wrapped up the nomination -- the middle of June, after the California primary."

We've vetted this claim before and found its accuracy to be wanting.

Then- Gov. Bill Clinton literally did not secure enough delegates through the primary and caucus process until the California primary, June 2, 1992.

But he had sewn up the nomination long before then.

Months before then.

Moreover, the first real contest that year was on February 18, 1992. (No one competed in the Iowa caucuses since Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, was a candidate that year) The first real contest this year, the Iowa caucus, was January 3, 2008. So you'd also expect that race to last later in the calendar -- it started more than a month and a half later.

But regardless of that, here are some key dates for that 1992 race that indicate how misleading this argument is.

February 18, 1992 -- Sen. Paul Tsongas, D-Mass., wins New Hampshire primary. A scandal-plagued Gov. Bill Clinton comes in second.

February 20, 1992  -- San Diego Union-Tribune headline: "Tsongas got most votes, but Clinton says he won".

February 25, 1992 -- Sen. Bob Kerrey, D-Neb., wins the South Dakota primary.

March 3, 1992 -- Clinton wins Georgia. Tsongas wins Maryland. Harkin wins Minnesota and Idaho. Former California governor Jerry Brown wins Colorado. Still all very much up for grabs.

March 5, 1992 -- With no money, Kerrey ends his campaign. "We were ready to go full throttle," Kerrey says, "but unfortunately we ran out of gas."

March 7, 1992 -- Clinton wins South Carolina.

Harkin announces he will drop out.

March 10, 1992 -- Clinton cleans up on Super Tuesday, winning Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas. Tsongas wins Massachusetts and Rhode Island.

Kerrey: "I would say he's got a very clear path to the nomination. But it's not a path without mine fields. There are still things out there that he's got to worry about. He's got to win."

Jim Lehrer on PBS: "David, how close is Bill Clinton to being the Democratic nominee tonight?"

David Gergen: "He's on the verge."

March 17, 1992 -- Clinton wins Illinois.

At this point, it becomes clear Clinton will be the nominee.

Tsongas drops out. Only Brown remains in the race.

March 20, 1992 -- The Dallas Morning News: "Former Sen. Paul Tsongas abruptly halted his presidential candidacy on Thursday, effectively ending the Democratic contest and turning the primary campaign into a mop-up operation for Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton. 'It was clear that we did not have the resources necessary to fight the media war in (the April 7) New York (primary),' Mr. Tsongas told a packed crowd of supporters in Boston."

The Boston Herald: "A no-holds-barred presidential race between Democrat Bill Clinton and President George Bush - in a clash of generations and vastly different values - was all but sealed yesterday as Paul E. Tsongas ended his quest for the Democratic nomination."

March 24, 1992 -- Brown wins Connecticut. Clinton holds a seven-to-one lead in delegates.

March 26, 1992 -- Harkin endorses Clinton, expressing concern that the fight between Clinton and Brown will cause divisions in the party that would hurt the nominee in November.

"I say it's time for Democrats to link arms, dig in our heels, set our sights to work together to put Bill Clinton in the White House in 1992," Harkin says.

Harkin is the first of Clinton's former opponents to endorse him, and the party begins to officially rally around the presumptive nominee.

April 1, 1992 -- Former President Jimmy Carter endorses Clinton, calling him "an honest, decent, competent, idealistic, practical man" who doesn't deserve to have his character questioned. "Pretty obviously, Gov. Clinton is going to get the nomination," Carter says.

April 4, 1992 -- Before the New York primary, Gov. Mario Cuomo says Clinton would be a "superb president."

April 8, 1992 -- Bryant Gumbel: "Good morning. Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton, call him flawed, call him slick, but call him a winner this morning. He swept the primaries in New York, Kansas and Wisconsin. Big strides toward the Democratic nomination that seem his for the taking today, Wednesday, April the 8th, 1992."

As a slap in Brown's face, Tsongas -- no longer in the race -- comes in second in New York.

April 12, 1992 -- House Majority Leader Richard Gephardt, D-Missouri, endorses Clinton. "Bill Clinton will be the kind of president the United States needs to recapture our economic strength and leadership in the post-Cold War world," Gephardt says.

House Speaker Tom Foley, D-Wash: "All the dominoes are falling in favor of Clinton. He is going to be the nominee."

At the California Democratic convention, Brown says Clinton is likely to be the Democratic presidential nominee, and says he will back Clinton if he is nominated.

Austin American-Statesman: "Brown strongly indicated that, having lost the New York primary Tuesday, he will campaign as a crusader for political change rather than as a serious contender for nomination. Ron Brown, national party chairman, said the comments were 'very positive' and hinted that the contest has entered a new phase. The two met privately earlier in the day."

April 14, 1992 -- Clinton wins the final round of Virginia's caucuses. "Uncommitted" comes in a strong second,
Brown comes in a distant third.

April 19, 1992 - Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell, D-Maine, endorses Clinton.

Earth Day, 1992 - Clinton challenges President George H.W. Bush to a face-to-face debate on the environment.

April 28, 1992 -- Clinton wins Pennsylvania primary, having earned 1,466 of the 2,145 delegates needed to win. Brown has 316 delegates.

And on and on...

This notion that the 1992 presidential race was not over until June is literally true. But it was truly over about five or six weeks after the New Hampshire primary.

Interesting, though, how Bill Clinton and his campaign lobbied big name Democrats to rally around him once it became clear that mathematically he'd be the delegate winner. Though Brown, aware that some horrible big story about Clinton might break and change everything, stuck around.

- jpt

May 8, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (151)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

By the way, dl, neither the Republicans nor any one else that can read were surprised that Obama won a state where about a third of Democrats are minority with almost 98% of that group voting for the half-black candiate.

Get a grip on the reason that Obama has won where he won. Minorities gave him caucuses and the resulting delegates in states where he could have never won a primary.

While Democrats have admitted time and time again that their rules are a flawed and have failed the process, changing them for the next election will not help them in this one.

Republicans could run Pee Wee Herman against Barack Obama and win by a landslide. Obama has effectively split the Democrat party along almost every line of contention possible.

President McCain...

Get used to it...

Posted by: Jayhawk | May 8, 2008 4:41:11 PM

Debra,

As a union member for all of my past working life, I made the choice to be a Democrat at the age of 18.

Although I didn't always agree with party positions (I am pro-gun, against illegal immigration rights, etc.), I always voted for the Democrat presidential candidate.

And, there were some losers: Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Kerry just to name a few. They were the most liberal of the liberals, but I tried to remain loyal to the party that I thought best represented my views.

Was I ever wrong! And this year's nomination debacle courtesy of the Democrat leadership and the DNC was the last straw. Obama is the worst of the worst.

Any party and candidate that is so two-faced as to cry and whine about the elections of 2000 and 2004 while they unashamedly move to do the same thing (in one way or another) to Michigan and Florida voters has lost national and international credibility and my support...permanently.

For 34 years I was a Democrat. I am now registered as an independent. As with a growing number of dissatisfied and disgusted Democrats (and former Democrats), I will vote for whoever is running against Barack Obama.

The Republican party and the ranks of independent voters will grow exponentially this year as the exodus from the failure of the Democrat party and its leadership continues.

Posted by: Jayhawk | May 8, 2008 4:32:36 PM

DL - so many counter-arguments, so little time ...

"HRC had it all ... and lost it" - polls were all it ever was, and early ones at that. People don't make up their minds until they have to. Equiv of saying "Yes I want steak for dinner" when that's the only choice, and then opting for shrimp when it's available.

"Repubs are scared to run against Obama, why else did they go easy on HRC and never bring up the scandals?" ... Hmm - b/c REPUBS WASTED 8 YRS and more than $70M (don't forget the cost of COngressional investigations to add to Starr/Ray) to prove that they couldn't prove anything! Not their best moment then, and certainly not a good idea to remind everyone of their tactics and failure back then.

"McCain is McBush ... and its the end of civilization" ... only one word - CONGRESS! Almost all of the points you mention, need to run through Congress. I'd rather vote in the right Dems (and get them to man-up) than vote for Obama.

Posted by: Sandy | May 8, 2008 4:29:49 PM

dl...get this straight. I am a 49 year old Republican. I love Hannity and O'Reilly for expressing views MILLIONS of us have. Some Amerians sitll hold values and love of our country dear to our hearts. Not the zealous, radicals that support Obama, tho. I was just reading of the threatened riots that will take place from the black organizations, letter to Dean, if Obama is not the nominee. What a shame...I wonder if they will riot when McCain wins in Nov. I am not a racist. I don't care if Obama is purple....I don't like him for a President. Pure and simple. I knew about Wright months ago, and the more I found about Obama the more I knew I could never vote for him. I have looked at this from hiring an employee standpoint, for the highest office in our country. I have two applicants for the job, either would be fine with me....Clinton or McCain.

Posted by: Debra | May 8, 2008 3:54:44 PM

Most of America is remembering that Hannity, O'Reilly, Fox are half the problem that got us into this situation in the first place.

It was those news outlets that was the megaphone for the old scare candidate last time...

We will make sure as Americans that people remember that.

Posted by: dl | May 8, 2008 3:45:02 PM

dl...yeah, I watch FOX news and Hannity and O'Reilly have done this country a service for exposing Obama for the loser he will be in Nov. No one backed off on the Bosnia fire, her only big slip up. Bill's not running so bringing up his old news ISN'T news.
Can't wait to watch my other candidate of choice, McCain, tonight on O'Reilly.

Posted by: Debra | May 8, 2008 3:23:37 PM

Debra is a 28% er Bush Loving Republican. The Democrats could run the socialist Senator from Vermont, Sanders against the decrepid and feeble minded McCain and still win. No matter how loud the Right wing nuts claim the Democrats are "liberal". All they have to do is look at the last 8 years and say, no more.

Posted by: Progressive Democrat | May 8, 2008 3:04:15 PM

and I never said the Republicans were surprised by Obama winning NC

I said they were panicked at what happened that night...

because their last hope of Hillary being the nominee was done ...

You can try and twist that but the letters and statements are out there. You as a registered republican...(now arguing for Hillary lol) should know when you watch FOX the tone changed.

Did you never ask yourself why when over the past few years all the republican pundits would laugh and say Hillary will have to avoid all the scandals...everyone would say...what Hillary brings to a run for the presidency was the clinton years ...but she also brought the scandals...as soon as the primaries started and she announced... the republican pundits never mentioned (ever) any of the Clinton scandals...

why would that be? hmmm...they didn't hold back on Obama?

Have some common sense. I am not spinning the letters newt wrote and Fox News was saying the night and next morning after NC and Ind. ... or Giuliani's reinforcement of what Newt said.

Posted by: dl | May 8, 2008 2:53:29 PM

Debra

"just look at her campaign"

she is losing.

and she had the entire democratic establishment behind her at one time ...and in most states...

actually really I should say...she lost.

She lost with millions and millions of dollars and eight years of imagery of her IN the white house...and the name recognition as the "queen" of the party...

and she still lost...and had to loan her campaign money and be a deadbeat on bills.

She lost even though not a single scandal was brought up from the "lists" of scandals in her background...and she is the one that is a "fighter"? yet never answered a single question about any of those scandals in herlong list... and she lost.

She lost with a surrogate out campaigning and getting her twice the press coverage if not more with the last Democratic President out on the stump EVERYDAY pitching for her.

and she lost.

so I agree "just look at her campaign"

Posted by: dl | May 8, 2008 2:46:30 PM

carpenter.nyc...we all know this and I'm with you. Unfortunately our MSM is all owned by the same billionaire liberals "bundling" money into BO's campaign. TIME magazine is putting out this weeks cover page with Obama's mug and the headline "And the winner is..."
Boy those leftys wish. It just won't happen with mainstream Amercica WHO HAVE HISTORICALLY VOTED MIDDLE RIGHT..LAST 8 OUT OF 10 ELECTIONS FOR PRES. HAVE BEEN REPUBLICAN! Obama is unelectable on issues of character, judgement, patriotism, and experience (he has only worked 143 days in Senate.)

Posted by: Debra | May 8, 2008 2:16:31 PM

dl...for delusional...yeah the Republicans were all surprised Obama won NC. Right. You can keep telling yourself that, but since I am a registered Republican, who voted for Hillary here in Calif, the circles I run in know she is the stronger candidate against McCain....just look at her campaign. She is still surviving with millions supporting her and Obama is running from debates again. I KNOW Hillary would be a more formidable candidate against McCain. OBAMA WILL LOSE!

Posted by: Debra | May 8, 2008 2:02:03 PM

Debra

every woman that has fought for the protection of women...and Roe vs. Wade.

Should be bothered by the fact that you post things like Hillary or McCain.

What you prove is that it is not about ending the war

or the economy
or our standing in the world
or healthcare
or the mortgage crisis
or our dependence on oil
or a right leaning supreme judicial body

or any of the other issues that McCain holds and Hillary "supposedly" holds...

It is about Hillary.

Well it's not and I think most Americans know it is about them and the government they elect...not Hillary winning her position.

Posted by: dl | May 8, 2008 1:58:04 PM

Obama can't beat McCain if he can't win white votes and majority of Independents.....

Less and less people believe his change/hope and more focus on the capability, experience and strength and policies...

He is no longer to attract independents or Reps after all his weaknesses came out...

So the question is: can his loyal AA and young voters boost him enough to win over McCain??

Posted by: True Truth | May 8, 2008 1:57:31 PM

Hillary's comments in USA Today about white voters demonstrates how divisive and self-serving her motivations are at this point. She knows that she cannot win the nomination, but she is in effect 'poinsoning the well' for Obama. She is tacitly signalling to white voters that she understands that they won't vote for Obama in the general.

The superdelegates or party elders would be wise to get her out of the race or tell her to stop the racist comments.

Posted by: suzanne | May 8, 2008 1:57:20 PM

Yeah!!!OldSpice....how beautifully said. Take comfort their are millions of us who think likewise. I listen to Repbulican talk radio often, and yesterday a gentleman called expressing his fear and anxiety over this election, but Hugh Hewitt, said don't worry, Sen. McCain will not let these out of touch liberals take over this great country. I beleve that. An Obama presidency would be devastating....it'not going to happen with college kids/blacks/radical-liberals the bulk of his base. Rest assured.

Posted by: Debra | May 8, 2008 1:56:38 PM

McCain is a great hero and a great Senator. I am glad he is one of our great leaders.

But what he has signed on for and is promising to do with the White house...will weigh so heavy on future generations that it would be impossible for anyone who cares about women's right to choose, not being financially beholden to china, who understands that all of our issues and the road we are going down have direct relation with how the world is progressively more and more viewing our country, how our safety has to do with the intelligence we receive from other countries, how the Buch economic policies of protecting the haves and saying the market will protect the have-nots...is another reason we are HERE...NOW at this point...and looking down the road at a potential disaster with oil dependence and terrorism rising out of hatred for our country.

McCain fortunately does not have the hand to win when it is finally brought out into the light of day from the shadows it has been in from this extended primary on the democratic side.

The problem is now...will there be enough time for people's eyes to adjust.

Posted by: dl | May 8, 2008 1:51:41 PM

Well we know she isn't good at math...maybe she can't read a calendar either.

Either way she is not getting out and plans an ugly ugly floor fight right after she keeps telling us Obama is the "black" candidate. I know he is and this older white woman will keep on supporting him.

Posted by: Math | May 8, 2008 1:49:42 PM

Bruce...well said...McCain's the man to do it, if Hillary isn't the woman to get the nom. It's pathetic the media/press are so liberal and do not represent the majority of Americans. You should see the horrible cover of TIME next week...they are so slick pushing Obama. Well I have spoken to Hillary's offices in the upcoming states and she is staying in this. Anybody this close in votes, would be stupid to drop out now. HILLARY OR McCAIN '08!

Posted by: Debra | May 8, 2008 1:49:32 PM

Why does Obama run scared over debates? You'd think he'd want to warm up for McCain, if he has this nom so in the bag. I just spoke to a young man in Hillary's Oregon office and they are still working hard to get him to debate her. They have offered four different dates and he still won't commit. He has done this since February, because we all know he is better SCRIPTED! Oh my god, his stutter and stammer answers are hard to comprehend. I signed a petition to get him to debate Hillary in Oregon....puss that he is.

Posted by: Debra | May 8, 2008 1:42:38 PM

If Obama's change/hope tone worked, he should have won majority of white votes and other minority votes....

Besides, what is the exact change he will bring to America with the same old politicians backing him?? Does he have a new vision of foriegn policies (the same old talk on War on Iraq and trade)? Does he have any new plans to boost our economy? Does he have any feasible solutions to our oil problems, healthcare problems, social security problems, immigration problems???

Please don't do the change just for the sake of change.. If there is no substance, it is just a fool...

Posted by: True Truth | May 8, 2008 1:42:29 PM

« Previous Comments | Next Comments »

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS