(2 of 3)
During his 1992 campaign and United We Stand's toddler stage in 1993, Perot fended off pressure to organize a full-fledged party. He knew that the procedural obstacles were towering. But recently Perot shifted, possibly because of rebellions within several state chapters and a general sense that his organization was groping for a new mission. In Pennsylvania organizers of Perot's 1992 petition drive converted that effort into the Patriot Party. Its chairman, Nicholas Sabatine, is working with splinter groups in two dozen states in an attempt to go national. Pollster Gordon Black, a founder of New York's Independence-Fusion Party, thinks these efforts can be woven together with United We Stand's. But like some other new-party advocates, Black yearns for an appealing ticket. "Perot as kingmaker," he says tactfully, "is a more formidable proposition than Perot as candidate."
In either role, Perot thinks he has the luxury of time. He can wait until Sept. 1, he says, before deciding whether to plunge in. But, as he did in 1992, he insists that he is not eager to run: "I wouldn't give you two cents for the title."
A run by Perot or any other well-financed candidate courting disgruntled independents could be a huge break for Clinton, because it might draw millions of votes away from the Republicans. Clinton's survival would then depend on the core Democratic vote, including African Americans, some Hispanics and blue-collar workers. But that is Jesse Jackson's constituency too. An independent run by Jackson, says a Democratic strategist, "costs us the election. You say goodbye to Illinois, Michigan and Ohio, for starters."
That potential leverage explains why Jackson, who twice sought the party's nomination, this time is considering apostasy. Jerry Austin, Jackson's manager in 1988, explains that "as an independent, he's in the finals and can affect the outcome." By Jackson's lights, it is Clinton who is betraying the old-time Democratic religion by embracing too tightly the centrist, free-market agenda of the Democratic Leadership Council. "I just fear," Jackson told TIME, "that there is a D.L.C.-Demopublican party emerging."
Jackson argues that Clinton surrendered too easily in 1993 when conservatives challenged his economic-stimulus package. Last week Jackson staged a press conference starring representatives of feminist, Hispanic and labor organizations to defend affirmative action against the assault from conservatives. He chided Clinton for timidity in this fight. How the President handles this issue and related ones, Jackson said, will be "big factors" in his decision whether to challenge Clinton.
Last fall, as Jackson campaigned hard for Democratic candidates, he tried to interest Clinton in staging a "White House conference on jobs, racial justice and gender equality," he says. The only response he received was a pro forma phone call from a White House aide. When the White House chose new Democratic National Committee members, it did not bother to solicit Jackson's opinion. In fact, Jackson does have access to White House staff members who plan to discuss his idea for a conference on jobs. Furthermore, Vice President Al Gore met privately with Jackson two weeks ago to talk about some of his complaints.