Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 5 · column 6 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
ing from Socialist to Libertarian candidates, they have had a miserable track record in Virginia.
For instance, in 1952 indpendents got just .03 percent of the vote, in 1960 only .6, in 1964 just .2, in 1972 some 2.7 percent, in 1984 just .7 percent and in 1988 less than 1 percent.
The question is whether Ross Perot’s message will be sufficient for Virginians to put him in the category of a George Wallace or a Strom Thurmond instead of in the John Anderson-Coleman Andrews ranks where he presently stands.
My guess is that Perot’s figures will rise and will probably come largely at Clinton’s expense. After all, before he dropped out of race Perot’s figures in the state were very impressive.
Yet in my unscientific conversations with former Perot supporters I get a strong impression most of them have moved on to other candidates and have no intension of returning to the fold.
They cite his decision to drop out of the race and then return as disruptive to the process of choosing a president and some also believe his deficit reduction message of cutting entitlements and increasing the gasoline tax is too strong in a time when the economic outlook is uncertain.
We will have to wait for Larry Sabato to eventually analyze the Perot effect on the presidential race in Virginia this year.
93.4%