Yes a lot of Perot`s Votes would have gone to Bush. Had 2/3 of Perot`s voters gone to Bush and 1/3 gone to Clinton. This is what each state`s results would have looked like:
Verdict: Bush wins a narrow victory over Clinton.
Alas, your premise isn't supported by the polls, which said that Bush would have profitted only marginally from Perot's absence (in marked contrast with 96 - Perot's 96 votership was a good bit to the right of his 92 one. But even for 96 your formula is probably too generous for the Republicans, simply because quite a few of Perot's voters would have stayed at home).
Of course, it would also differ from state to state.
And there's the difference between these two questions:
What would have happened if Perot had been magically removed from the ballot? That's all that the polls can answer.
What would have happened if the whole Perot campaign had never happened - if there had never even been any noises about him running, if he had never existed? That's impossible to answer exactly, although the answer would probably be somewhat more favorable to the Republicans than the answer to the first question.
Poll
