Wasn't 1992 a realigning election?

[RIP Robert H Bork]

No: Clinton won partly because he was able to pull the Democratic party significantly to the right of where it had been before. And even then, the Republicans made huge gains in 1994.

No, Clinton was a hardcore liberal in 1992, and then when the Republicans won in 1994 he claimed their platform as his own just so that he could be reelected.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Well certain states that hardly ever voted Democratic went Democratic for the first time like California, Vermont, Connecticut, New Jersey, Maine, Delaware and seem to have stuck that way. Which is somewhat realigning, I suppose. 

I think many of the trends that manifested itself were slowly getting their start in 1992 with NoVA, Bay Area burbs, Philly burbs, So. FL becoming more and more D.

The Southern eV's were totally won on personal appeal however.

You forgot New Hampshire. However, unlike the others, NH is more of a battleground.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Oh, yes -- I got it. I just didn't show the reality of the 1992 election,

Clinton (D)            370      
Bush (R)               188
Perot (Reform)         0

That was not the "reality" of the 1992 election at all. The right map is this:

[RIP Robert H Bork]

No: Clinton won partly because he was able to pull the Democratic party significantly to the right of where it had been before. And even then, the Republicans made huge gains in 1994.

No, Clinton was a hardcore liberal in 1992, and then when the Republicans won in 1994 he claimed their platform as his own just so that he could be reelected.

In 1992 Bill Clinton said he would cut taxes for the middle class, so he wasn't a "hardcore" liberal in 1992, and he never was. 

Well, he was still more left wing pre-1994 than post-1994.