See this thread, which analyzes the polls for Bush 43 in contrast to Bush 41, showing Dubya is in a much stronger position, especially on the economy. Bush 41's numbers were in free fall at this time and were very low on the economy. Bush 43's numbers have been stable since September and his numbers on the economy are much higher. Dubya is also benefiting from coming out of the 2000 recession sooner than Bush 41 came out of the 1991 recession. http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1043836/posts
And I agree with you; Perot elected Clinton in 1992.
Remember the CBS/NYT poll that came out sunday that had bush at 50% approval? Andrew Sullivan has a great explanation for Bush's horrible ratings in that particular poll. His explanation was party id. This poll had party id at 34% GOP and 47% DEMOCRAT. You think that might help explain Bush's dismal performance in that poll?? Is the NYT skewing polls on purpose?