Obama / Biden vs. Paul / Cain

[Jerseyrules]

Barrack Obama essentially won in 2008 on the backs of two major voting blocks: the African-American vote (97%) and the youth vote (unsure of stats).  Ron Paul clearly takes the youth vote away, and with Herman Cain at the bottom of the ticket...discuss, post maps; you know what to do

[Modernity has failed us]

Ron Paul would never pick Herman Cain as VP.

[Jerseyrules]

Ron Paul would never pick Herman Cain as VP.

You sure?  He's rather ambiguous on everything but the economy, especially civil liberties and foreign policy.  This is also assuming no sex scandals.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Ron Paul would never pick Herman Cain as VP.

You sure?  He's rather ambiguous on everything but the economy, especially civil liberties and foreign policy.  This is also assuming no sex scandals.

Cain was on the FED. Not happening.

[Vermin Supreme]

Ron Paul would never pick Herman Cain as VP.

You sure?  He's rather ambiguous on everything but the economy, especially civil liberties and foreign policy.  This is also assuming no sex scandals.

Cain was on the FED. Not happening.

[Jerseyrules]

Ron Paul would never pick Herman Cain as VP.

You sure?  He's rather ambiguous on everything but the economy, especially civil liberties and foreign policy.  This is also assuming no sex scandals.

Cain was on the FED. Not happening.

It's not if, as it obviously would never happen, but come on, the idea of killing Obama's ONLY TWO statistical ADVANTAGES (disregarding opinion of his presidency)?!

[Stranger in a strange land]

[NHI]

D: 473
R:  65

[Jerseyrules]

D: 473
R:  65

Doubt it would be that bad.  Would be 1964 worst case, and I think that's still pushing it.  Maybe 1996.

[gsmiro]

Well, I doubt that Ron Paul would pair up with Cain.  But Ron Paul definitely has a more draw towards the Libertarians leaning voters, independent voters and young voters.  During the primaries, he even polled within 2% of BO. 

I think it would have been a great match up if Republicans really nominated Paul.  He will be truly representing everything that Obama and the Democrat is not.  And we will truly have an election worthy watching. 

[gsmiro]

D: 473
R:  65

Doubt it would be that bad.  Would be 1964 worst case, and I think that's still pushing it.  Maybe 1996.

Judging from the Republican primaries and if the Republican establishment will not sabotage his campaign, Ron Paul can carry all the traditional Republican (Blue) states (the lesser of the 2 evil arguments still can apply and the main stream Rep voters would go with Paul).

Besides that, Paul will carry Nevada, with a strong Libertarian leaning and very well organized base. Also, NH and VI would vote for Paul also, as shown in the Republican primaries.  Even a district in Maine.  Paul really is more accepted than the media and the establishment parties wants people to believe.  I think if he had run against Obama, it would been an easy victory for the Republicans.

[Maxwell]

Paul would've done fine or even better than Romney against President Obama, but not with Herman Cain at the bottom of the ticket.

Paul/Hagel or Paul/Johnson would've won it all.

[Comrade Funk]

D: 473
R:  65

Doubt it would be that bad.  Would be 1964 worst case, and I think that's still pushing it.  Maybe 1996.

Judging from the Republican primaries and if the Republican establishment will not sabotage his campaign, Ron Paul can carry all the traditional Republican (Blue) states (the lesser of the 2 evil arguments still can apply and the main stream Rep voters would go with Paul).

Besides that, Paul will carry Nevada, with a strong Libertarian leaning and very well organized base. Also, NH and VI would vote for Paul also, as shown in the Republican primaries.  Even a district in Maine.  Paul really is more accepted than the media and the establishment parties wants people to believe.  I think if he had run against Obama, it would been an easy victory for the Republicans.

Don't worry, there's always Ron Paul 2024. It's inevitable.

[Jackson]

I doubt that Ron Paul would win any electoral votes at all. IMHO he would win at most 15% of the popular vote.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

[badgate]

I have been laughing literally for 30 seconds at "Ron Paul would clearly take the youth vote". Seriously. Pass me that joint you're smoking. It clearly did the trick.

[Right to Life]

Obama-410
Paul-128

Paul gets ROADED

[Blackacre]

Ron Paul could take the youth vote, so Obama would take it back by campaigning on student loans and Obamacare, both of which are awesome for young people. Herman Cain might maybe take really religious blacks, but Obama would still win them for being on the top of his ticket. Ron Paul's ideas would be examined. Clinton would have a field day debunking Ron Paul's economic policies (like the gold standard thing) on the campaign trail, while Ron Paul would be given the national spotlight to propose them for the first time. It'd be an interesting race.

But Obama would win a landslide, for a couple reasons. One, Paul won't get a cent from the super-PACs that supported Romney and gave him an advantage. He might get one plus the grassroots donations, putting him even with Obama. Also, the Republican base would not support Paul. Paul could appeal to their religion, but social issues (marijuana) plus foreign policy (he's no hawk) puts him at odds with his party. Plus the old white southern racists wouldn't put Cain a heartbeat away from the presidency, not with Paul's age being what it is. Obama wins a landslide.

[Jerseyrules]

Ron Paul could take the youth vote, so Obama would take it back by campaigning on student loans and Obamacare, both of which are awesome for young people. Herman Cain might maybe take really religious blacks, but Obama would still win them for being on the top of his ticket. Ron Paul's ideas would be examined. Clinton would have a field day debunking Ron Paul's economic policies (like the gold standard thing) on the campaign trail, while Ron Paul would be given the national spotlight to propose them for the first time. It'd be an interesting race.

But Obama would win a landslide, for a couple reasons. One, Paul won't get a cent from the super-PACs that supported Romney and gave him an advantage. He might get one plus the grassroots donations, putting him even with Obama. Also, the Republican base would not support Paul. Paul could appeal to their religion, but social issues (marijuana) plus foreign policy (he's no hawk) puts him at odds with his party. Plus the old white southern racists wouldn't put Cain a heartbeat away from the presidency, not with Paul's age being what it is. Obama wins a landslide.

I'm going to ignore the thing about Cain being black because there's so few people in this country that are like that it wouldn't affect the election at all.  Plus if you're really so racist you don't want a black VP I think you'd jump at the opportunity to vote out a black president.

I think it's a little sad that people think so lowly of young people that they believe they would vote for a candidate based on "we'll give you stuff".  That wouldn't work.  Maybe for some but not for all.  Same with women and abortions.  I doubt that student loans would make more than a dent in Ron Paul's following.  Many forget to factor in something critical: with Ron Paul leading the ticket, no matter who's on the bottom, the voting demographics would be very different.  A LOT of people who didn't vote would turn out and few of those that did turn out wouldn't.  Factor in all the disaffected people who didn't vote and I'd bet 80-90+% of them would break in Ron Paul's favor.  That's why I think he'd win, potentially in a landslide.

[Goodwin]

A Paul/Cain ticket would have been destroyed. I think a Paul/Johnson ticket would do a lot better, competing well out in the West, but it wouldn't be enough to prevent a strong Obama victory.     

[JRP1994]

In 2008, Obama absolutely demolishes Paul. Obama probably reaches 400 electoral votes rather easily. And this comes from someone who supported Paul in 2012.