Americans, unhappy with President Bush and Democratic challenger Bill Clinton, are turning to Texas computer tycoon Ross Perot, local political observers say.

Polls nationally show the scrappy billionaire and currently undeclared candidate continuing to garner support from both Republican and Democratic voters.

But can he win?

Two political scientists at Southeast Missouri State University contend Perot would have little chance of winning

Russell Renka of the political science faculty said Wednesday that he believes Perot has "only a slim chance of winning."

Peter Bergerson, chairman of the political science department, said third-party candidates have historically not fared well. "My guess is that he won't do any better than George Wallace."

Bergerson said, "The best third-party candidate in modern times was George Wallace and I think he got 11 percent."

But Gil Degenhardt, 8th District coordinator for Perot, believes otherwise.

"I think this campaign is unstoppable," the 71-year-old Degenhardt said Wednesday from the Perot headquarters in Cape Girardeau.

He maintained there is a groundswell of public support for Perot. "I have never seen anything as spontaneous as this. This is as purely a grassroots effort as I have seen," said Degenhardt, who campaigned for independent candidate John Anderson in 1980.

"You know the old axiom in politics: `Nothing happens spontaneously.' But this has," he said.

The Cape Girardeau County Democratic and Republican chairmen both said they have found some support for Perot in the area, but it is too early to determine the full impact of Perot's candidacy on the presidential election this year.

"I would say as far as the county is concerned, I can't see him making a difference; I really don't see him making a difference statewide," said Ralph Ford, the Republican chairman. "The national picture is another situation.

"He has a head of steam from somewhere ... He doesn't talk about issues or what he will do; he only tells us that things are wrong. It is too early to say what's going to happen between now and November."

Todd McBride, the Democratic county chairman, said he believes Perot is doing quite well at this point.

"It is kind of remarkable in a way, but I think the race will tighten up when everyone has to start being specific about talking about issues and where they stand," said McBride.

Bergerson, Renka and Degenhardt agreed that Perot's popularity reflects citizens' frustration with political leaders of both parties.

"We know there is an unprecedented level of unhappiness about both the national parties and their leaders," said Renka.

While Perot is not yet a declared candidate, Renka said, polls show he continues to have support from both Democratic and Republican voters who are dismayed with the major-party candidates.

"It's difficult not to agree with that sense of dismay after 12 years of divided government," said Renka, referring to the fact Congress has been controlled by the Democrats while the presidency has been in Republican hands.

Bergerson said, "I think he is reaping favorable polls because of the frustration with President Bush and the perceived unhappiness with Bill Clinton."

That unhappiness translated into voter support earlier in the primary season for conservative columnist Patrick Buchanan on the Republican side and former Massachusetts Sen. Paul Tsongas and former California governor Jerry Brown on the Democratic side, Bergerson said.

"This year, at least at this stage, there is a very high degree of voter dissatisfaction with both Bush and Clinton. Perot, in essence, is none of the above," said Bergerson.

"In addition, he is capitalizing on the question of leadership," said Bergerson, noting that Perot portrays himself as "very forceful, dynamic and very decisive."

Critics say Perot has avoided addressing issues.

But Renka said Perot doesn't have to address issues in any detail to demonstrate he is the alternative candidate.

Bergerson echoed that view. "He doesn't have to, because of this high frustration. All he has to do is address the question of leadership.

"In fact, the more he defines himself and the more specific he becomes on issues, the more likely he is going to lose votes.

"His greatest strength is that his positions on issues aren't well defined," Bergerson said.

"Voting is an emotional attachment," he said, with voters choosing the candidate they feel can best run the country.

Degenhardt said Perot supporters aren't as concerned about specific issues as they are the overall leadership question. "They have confidence he could get the job done," said Degenhardt.

Polls currently indicate voter approval of Perot in the 25 to 30 percent range, Bergerson said.

Those numbers, however, will likely decline in the coming months of the presidential campaign, he said. "Five months is a lifetime in politics."

Ford said he views Perot's popularity as an indication "people are a little on the unhappy side. But other than that, I don't know what it all means."

McBride said: "I think he is getting a lot of people looking at him as a change candidate - an alternative. People are fed up with politicians in general and are seeing Perot as a successful businessman willing to spend his own money to get elected."

Ford said he has not found many regular Republicans looking at Perot as an alternative. McBride, however, said he finds both Democrats and Republicans taking a look at the Texas billionaire.

The two disagreed on which presidential candidate Perot will hurt the most.

"From what I've seen, he's hurting Bush more," said McBride. "He's hurting both of them, definitely, but I still think he will hurt Bush more in the final analysis."

Ford said most of the favorable comments he hears about Perot come from people who are not active in either party.

"I tend to believe he will hurt Clinton more than Bush, but he will take votes away from both because people in both parties are unhappy," said Ford.

Bergerson said if Perot garners enough votes in November and enough electoral college votes to deny Bush or Clinton a majority, the selection of a president would be placed in the hands of the House of Representatives.

In that case, each state would have one vote in the House.

Twice in the nation's history, in 1800 and 1824, the House has selected the president, Bergerson said. In 1800, the House chose Thomas Jefferson in a three-way presidential race; in 1824, John Quincy Adams was chosen by the House in a four-way race.

Bergerson said receiving the popular vote is not enough; Perot must also win electoral votes.

In 1968, Richard Nixon won about 44 percent of the popular vote but received a majority of the electoral votes, Bergerson pointed out.

If Perot could win in states such as California, Texas and Florida, he could have enough electoral college votes to deny Bush or Clinton the presidency, thus placing the matter in the hands of the House, Bergerson said.