WI: Atwater vs. Clinton

If Lee Atwater didn't get a brain tumour, would he have returned to support HW in 1992? If so, what attacks would he use on Clinton? Would Clinton do worse as a result?
 
Maybe 1988 had a bit more to do with the fact that there was peace and prosperity than with Atwater's alleged genius. (As I like to point out, Dukakis had lost his post-convention lead and was trailing before the Willie Horton ad, the debate, or the ride in the tank. https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...ratic-candidate-in-1988.448318/#post-17351782 ) And 1992 may have had more to do with the recession (from which the US had not really recovered in terms of unemployment. which was still 7.4% in November 1992 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/data/UNRATE.txt) than with Atwater's absence.
 
I could imagine that the GOP is more negative against Clinton, but the Democrats still win because of the recession and Republican infighting over taxes and social issues.

Maybe 1988 had a bit more to do with the fact that there was peace and prosperity than with Atwater's alleged genius. (As I like to point out, Dukakis had lost his post-convention lead and was trailing before the Willie Horton ad, the debate, or the ride in the tank.

At the end of the day it was Dukakis's fault that he lost the election. He shot himself in the foot with the tank photo and the death penalty response, which made him look silly and out of touch respectively. Not to mention that he was a monotonous speaker with a bland, empty campaign. He also made the same fatal mistake made by Tom Dewey in 1948: he never responded to his opponent's attacks. Dukakis is on record admitting that he was wrong to do this and in his mind it cost him the election. Arguably, Atwater's underhanded attacks wouldn't have stuck if the Duke had been just as aggressive in fighting back like Clinton had been in 1992. (Of course, as you have pointed out Bush was leading leading the Duke after the conventions - before the debates, the tank, and Willie Horton. So Dukakis might still have lost, but by a narrower margin.)

At any rate, since this thread is about 1992 I'll conclude by reiterating that Clinton still wins, however with Atwater alive it may mean that Bush does marginally better.
 
Last edited:
Top