Clinton vs. Gingrich 1996

[NHI]

A mini election night timeline coming soon.

[netzero19]

Clinton curbstomps Gingrich.

[a Person]

Clinton curbstomps Gingrich.

This.

[shua]

my prediction:


406-132

[a Person]

Hang on. Is Ross Perot still going to run and pull his 7-8%?

[shua]

Hang on. Is Ross Perot still going to run and pull his 7-8%?

maybe 5-6%.
someone needs to stand up for the anti-NAFTA crowd.

[MAINEiac4434]

Clinton curbstomps Gingrich.

Yup.

[heatmaster]

I think Clinton would do better than 406-132 EV

[Liberalrocks]

Clinton/Gore (D)   51%  403
Gingrich/Frist (R)   39%  135
Perot/Choate (I)     9%      0
Others                    1%

The Clintons crush Gingrich and carry everystate they did in 1992 except Gingrich's homestate of Georgia. I believe Perot would perform a few points better nationally because people who lean to the right would want an alternative to Gingrich. Clinton would crack the 50% mark despite it being a three man race. This due to Gingrich's unpopularity after the government shutdown and his likely incompetently run campaign....(an example to this is happening in his current miserable campaign...lol)   Easy Clinton landslide.

[Senator Snowstalker]

Gingrich was only a congressman, and an underperformer at that. He probably loses GA and NC.

[Liberalrocks]

Possibly, A funny ticket would be Gingrich/Santorum....however I went with a 'safe' choice of Bill Frist.

[Jerseyrules]

Gingrich and Clinton both appear more extreme, causing many 1992 Perot voters to flock back to the Reform Party:

Clinton: 43%
Gingrich: 41%
Perot: 15%

[Jay20]

Clinton wins Montana again as he did in 1992, carries VA as suburban soccer moms vote in greater numbers for Clinton against Gingrich, Gingrich lacks strength in non-Mormon western states too. Both Gingrich's and Clinton's perceived lack of ethics and fidelity are a wash: Clinton goes head-on against the guy who shut down the government, was reviled by his own GOP colleagues, etc.

Pop vote (no Perot): Clinton/Gore: 58
Gingrich/whoever: 41

Pop vote (with Perot): Clinton/Gore 55
Gingrich: 37
Perot: 7

[I Can't Get That Sound You Make, Out Of My Head]

Clinton wins big.

[MorningInAmerica]

Unlike most, I happen to think Gingrich would perform better against Clinton that Dole. It's easy to forget that Dole only lost by 8 pts (49-41-8%), and was a completely inept campaigner (I mean, c'mon, falling off a barnstorming stage??). Gingrich, as polarizing as he was, is much more charismatic than Dole, and probably, much more willing to draw a stark contrast from Clinton than Dole.

Having said that, I Clinton still wins by healthy margin. The growing '96 economy would still be too much to overcome.

Clinton - 352 (-27)
Gingrich - 186 (+27)

Clinton wins 48-41-9%

[Jay20]

Unlike most, I happen to think Gingrich would perform better against Clinton that Dole. It's easy to forget that Dole only lost by 8 pts (49-41-8%), and was a completely inept campaigner (I mean, c'mon, falling off a barnstorming stage??). Gingrich, as polarizing as he was, is much more charismatic than Dole, and probably, much more willing to draw a stark contrast from Clinton than Dole.

Having said that, I Clinton still wins by healthy margin. The growing '96 economy would still be too much to overcome.

Clinton - 352 (-27)
Gingrich - 186 (+27)

Clinton wins 48-41-9%

Gotta remember that by Clinton's own admission, he went easy on Dole the last few days to try to win seats back in Congress, which I think was a mistake because getting under 50% twice, I think, severely undermined his political power (altho he was STILL more effective than Obama). But I don't think Clinton would have done the same against Newt, because Newt was more hated than Dole, even then, and Newt would have made it more personal against Clinton than Dole did, so Clinton would have gone for the slam dunks ahead by 30 in the last 2 minutes

[MorningInAmerica]

I can see your point. I just think Newt would have been a much more pugnacious campaigner than Clinton's actual opponent, and that can make a real difference. Newt's favorability would have hurt. Gallup had them at 32/56% in August of 1996, while Dole was at 49/44% according to Gallup. But I think the partisan nature of the campaign would have made at least as many Republicans come home as they did with Dole. The 1996 campaign remains a tiny blip in presidential election history somewhat due to Bob Dole's uninspired, bumbling, lethargic campaign. I definitely don't know for certain what would have happened in the event of a Clinton-Gingrich showdown in 1996. But I'm certain it would have been much more entertaining than the real one.

[mondale84]

I can see your point. I just think Newt would have been a much more pugnacious campaigner than Clinton's actual opponent, and that can make a real difference. Newt's favorability would have hurt. Gallup had them at 32/56% in August of 1996, while Dole was at 49/44% according to Gallup. But I think the partisan nature of the campaign would have made at least as many Republicans come home as they did with Dole. The 1996 campaign remains a tiny blip in presidential election history somewhat due to Bob Dole's uninspired, bumbling, lethargic campaign. I definitely don't know for certain what would have happened in the event of a Clinton-Gingrich showdown in 1996. But I'm certain it would have been much more entertaining than the real one.

I agree to an extent, but isn't this the same argument as let's go with the more vocal, base-inspiring wacko, we'll be more competitive that way!!! I don't think that would have worked out too well for Gingrich...

This is my predicition, and before you go bonkers, let me remind you, Gingrich was VERY unpopular in '96 and Dem turnout would have probably been sky-high given the frightening possibility of Gingrich in the Oval Office.



Clinton: 459 (53%)
Gingrich: 79 (36%)
Perot: 0 (11%)

[MorningInAmerica]

LoL at the bonkers comment. These are nothing more than speculative threads, and as long as you state your prediction and can back it up, I'm completely fine with it. I can even see why you would predict a Clinton landslide on the scale FDR v Landon. I just see a way that it could go differently.