1980 campaign for governor in Arkansas was contested by William Clinton, Democratic incumbent (and current President of the United States), and Frank White, Republican challenger (and recent convert from government service in Arkansas as a Democrat). From the beginning of the 1980 campaign to the end, the essential difference between the two candidates was that White behaved as an attack dog, while Clinton essentially was willing to let a commendable performance as governor speak for itself, while denying White's allegations.
Clinton's performance in his first term as governor recorded some significant successes, although some of his specific actions-highway funds, the Cuban refugee situation, and the size and composition of the governor's staff-rankled many Arkansas voters. White was effective in zeroing in on the sources of public satisfaction with Clinton, while Clinton generally took the high road by simply denying the accusations, occasionally offering some statistics to support his denial, and not countering with deceptive and self-serving charges of his own against White. Clinton's performance in the campaign, thus, bore great similarities to his performance in the recent national general election in which the Democrats took it on the chin in the congressional elections. Single-issue voters simply are not interested in facts, alternative opinions, or overall commendable performance. Clinton's experience in the 1980 campaign for governor in Arkansas apparently taught him little.
Clinton's troubled surfaced early on in the 1980 campaign for governor when he felt compelled to deny White accusations that he had increased the size of his staff after promising as a candidate to reduce the size of government (Brummett 1A). Throughout the campaign, Clinton was never able to successfully diffuse this issue. White was able to document that Clinton increased the size of his staff by 50 percent (Brummett 1A). During the earli...