Clinton Had A Mandate - The Los Angeles Times Said So!

Many columnists have attempted to argue that George W. Bush doesn't really have a mandate. After all, his winning margin was only about 3.5 million voters!

Contrast recent articles, with the following excerpt from a Los Angeles Times editoral, published on November 9, 1992. Following Clinton's victory, Senator Bob Dole indicated that Clinton did not have a popular mandate, since he only won 43% of the popular vote. After reviewing a number of American Presidents who received less than 50% of the popular vote, the editoral concluded:

"The point of reviewing the numbers is to underscore that the President, after being confirmed as the electoral vote winner and inaugurated, is in fact the President. His popular vote total is irrelevant to either his political legitimacy or his potential for legislative effectiveness. Some Presidents elected by an overwhelming popular vote have in fairly short order come to grief, others -- see the list above -- have achieved greatness with only a popular plurality behind them. Bob Dole has every right to lead a vigorous opposition. But not, please, on the specious grounds that Bill Clinton lacks any claim to a mandate."

If more editorial boards and left leaning opinion leaders adopted the idea that the popular vote was irrelevant to political legitimacy after the 2000 election, perhaps there would be less divisons to heal.