Clinton, because his election actually brought a national realignment. Obama couldn't have won in 2008 if Clinton hadn't in 1992.
1992 was not a realignment. If it was, WV, LA, AR, KY would still be voting Democrat.
1988 was a realignment.
1992 was a realignment because most of the Northeast and Upper Midwest have been voting D ever since. 2000 was only a regional realignment because the Outer South began shifting to the GOP nationally, but the rest of the country stayed the same.
By that criteria, if 1992 was a realignment then was so 2008 because of states like VA, NC, and CO switching partisan allegiances. Certainly there aren't political realignments every 16 years.
In fact, looking trying to define political realignments based on how certain areas with certain characteristics vote is quite silly for the simple reason that the characteristics of any particular place are unlikely to stay constant for any considerable period of time. It makes no sense to compare the voting habits of Forsyth County, GA in 1980 with Forsyth County, GA in 2008 because, between 1980 and 2008, Forsyth County might as well not even be the same place anymore. Rather, it makes sense to define realignments based on changes in the party's respective coalitions or the rise/fall of wedge issues.