Ronald Reagan vs. Bill Clinton

[barfbag]

For argument sake we'll use the 1988 map since it was right in between their presidencies and say it's Reagan/Bush vs. Clinton/Gore. Having said this we have two very strong candidates who are considered the voice of their party's generation. Both have also been very popular amongst the whole country. What is your map looking like? I'll lay out the results by state too.

Alabama- Reagan 56-43
Alaska- Reagan 65-35
Arizona- Reagan 60-40
Arkansas- Clinton 52-47
California- Reagan 55-45
Colorado- Reagan 58-42
Connecticut- Reagan 53-47
Delaware- Delaware 52-47
D.C.- Clinton 86-13
Florida- Reagan 57-42
Georgia- Clinton 51-49
Hawaii- Clinton 52-48
Idaho- Reagan 68-31
Illinois- Reagan 50-50
Indiana- Reagan 60-40
Iowa- Clinton 50-50
Kansas- Reagan 63-35
Kentucky- Reagan 53-46
Louisiana- Reagan 52-48
Maine- Clinton 52-47
Maryland- Clinton 52-47
Massachusetts- Clinton 54-46
Michigan- Reagan 53-47
Minnesota- Clinton 51-49
Mississippi- Reagan 56-43
Missouri- Reagan 54-46
Montana- Reagan 60-39
Nebraska- Reagan 67-32
Nevada- Reagan 61-39
New Jersey- Reagan 53-46
New Mexico- Reagan 54-46
New York- Clinton 52-48
North Carolina- Reagan 56-44
North Dakota- Reagan 63-36
Ohio- Reagan 56-44
Oklahoma- Reagan 64-36
Oregon- Reagan 53-45
Pennsylvania- Clinton 52-48
Rhode Island- Clinton 55-44
South Carolina- Reagan 57-43
South Dakota- Reagan 60-40
Tennessee- Clinton 50-50
Texas- Reagan 58-40
Utah- Reagan 72-28
Vermont- Reagan 50-49
Virginia- Reagan 57-42
Washington- Reagan 52-46
West Virginia- Clinton 50-49
Wisconsin- Reagan 51-48
Wyoming- Reagan 65-35

[PolitiJunkie]

I'm just gonna stay out of this one.

[barfbag]

I'm just gonna stay out of this one.

I thought this would become 25 pages in a week. Let's talk about Reagan and Clinton's similarities and differences. Please?

[PolitiJunkie]

Is the election happening in 1988? If so, Reagan would win. Under most other circumstances after 1988, Clinton would win, and that's the bottom line. No matter how much you view Reagan as a savior, the truth is that Clinton is more popular with the American populous. Sure, Reagan is more popular among Republicans than Clinton is among Democrats, but Clinton's overall popularity is higher because, as a politician, he was way less polarizing. And of course there are plenty of other reasons, but I needed to highlight that one in particular. But I'm not going to get into this too much. Because as much as you pretend to want to have a diplomatic discussion, and as cute as your pleading is, I know as soon as I start to lay out my points you will just start making obscene partisan nonsense comments and I will be annoyed again.

For future reference, a good idea when you post hypothetical match-ups with maps is not to post your own map in the first post where you pose the question, because, regardless of your intent, it basically comes off as you asking and answering your own question and asserting your opinion as fact. Wait for a few people to respond to your question, then post your map. You'll get a lot more activity on your threads that way.

[barfbag]

Is the election happening in 1988? If so, Reagan would win. Under most other circumstances after 1988, Clinton would win, and that's the bottom line. No matter how much you view Reagan as a savior, the truth is that Clinton is more popular with the American populous. Sure, Reagan is more popular among Republicans than Clinton is among Democrats, but Clinton's overall popularity is higher because, as a politician, he was way less polarizing. And of course there are plenty of other reasons, but I needed to highlight that one in particular. But I'm not going to get into this too much. Because as much as you pretend to want to have a diplomatic discussion, and as cute as your pleading is, I know as soon as I start to lay out my points you will just start making obscene partisan nonsense comments and I will be annoyed again.

For future reference, a good idea when you post hypothetical match-ups with maps is not to post your own map in the first post where you pose the question, because, regardless of your intent, it basically comes off as you asking and answering your own question and asserting your opinion as fact. Wait for a few people to respond to your question, then post your map. You'll get a lot more activity on your threads that way.

Well I used the 1988 map because it's the year between when they each ran. Let's pick Reagan at his prime and Clinton at his prime with the same running mates. I agree that Reagan is more popular among Republicans than Clinton is with Democrats and Clinton has become more popular with the public than Reagan. What's interesting is that Democrats seem to accept Reagan while Republicans hated Clinton more than they hate Obama. Even talk radio has complimented Obama as a parent and husband, but still when it comes to Clinton they see the devil. I don't though I just see the devil in disguise. Yes in today's world a Clinton candidate would do better than a Reagan candidate. I was more comparing the literal Reagan to the literal Clinton. Also, yes, for me Reagan is the model all presidents should be compared to for bringing down the Soviets through capitalism and free trade. With tax cuts several Americans including Steve Jobs were able to invent their own things and start their own businesses. The 1980's was all about what "you" the individual could do and that is the America we've loved for centuries. Clinton found a way for Democrats to implement their policies in the new economy started by Reagan which was also great. There's still a need for some unions, infrastructure, public education, civil rights standards, safety nets, and environmental protection. Although, Reagan did pretty well with the environment too. Bush tried to bring back  the Reagan years and other than tax cuts, free trade, and social conservatism, his strategies didn't work. Now Obama wants to reverse the Reagan world altogether. Why do you think Clinton would win over Reagan in their primes?

[Goldwater]

I think the map would probably look something like this:

Clinton - 311 EVs[/color
Reagan - 227 EVs

[barfbag]

I think the map would probably look something like this:

Clinton - 311 EVs[/color
Reagan - 227 EVs

Back when they were in office though?

[Brewer]

Here's what I'm thinking:

Reagan/Bush: 334
Clinton/Gore: 204

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

1980 vs. 1996. Reagan's weakest to Clinton's strongest. 1980 vs. 1992 or 1984 vs. 1996 would've been ridiculous.

Reagan - 343
Clinton - 195