Could Sarah Palin be the 2016 nominee?

[Fuzzy Bear]

The idea that Palin would defeat Hillary in Alaska of all places is absurd.

Not really.  Palin has burned a lot of bridges in Alaska, and is at the center of a personal feud with the Murkowski family.  While she defeated Frank Murkowski in the 2006 GOP Primary for Governor, Murkowski remains one of the richest men in Alaska.  She tried to crush Lisa Murkowski, but she came back from a primary defeat to keep her seat in a write-in.  There are a lot of Republicans in AK who hate Palin and would be able to organize a campaign to sabotage her Presidential bid in AK.

[Maxwell]

The idea that Palin would defeat Hillary in Alaska of all places is absurd.

Not really.  Palin has burned a lot of bridges in Alaska, and is at the center of a personal feud with the Murkowski family.  While she defeated Frank Murkowski in the 2006 GOP Primary for Governor, Murkowski remains one of the richest men in Alaska.  She tried to crush Lisa Murkowski, but she came back from a primary defeat to keep her seat in a write-in.  There are a lot of Republicans in AK who hate Palin and would be able to organize a campaign to sabotage her Presidential bid in AK.

Didn't you just argue for SWE's case?

[Mr. Illini]

Clinton/Palin

The country is too polarized to go beyond this, I feel. Still leaves Sarah with only 124 EVs.

[Rockefeller GOP]

I think people are too tied to the rigid, Obama era map and think that it's the only explanation of elections going forward.  Referencing the first post in this thread, there is NO WAY that Arkansas would vote over 60% for Sarah Palin over Hillary Clinton!!  That's hilarious.

[IceSpear]

Palin (R) vs Anyone (D)

This looks about right, but TX/KS/ND/SD/NE probably go for Palin.

[dmmidmi]

Clinton/Palin

The country is too polarized to go beyond this, I feel. Still leaves Sarah with only 124 EVs.

If Hildog is beating everybody except for Huckabee in Arkansas, she is also beating Sarah Palin.

[Liberalrocks]

Being pretty generous to Palin here. In actuality I could see Clinton carry both Dakota's and possibly Mississippi narrowly. While an outside chance of Palin grabbing West Virginia.
Hillary Clinton 56% (40 States)
Sarah Palin     42% (10 States)
Others             2%

Clinton 486 Electoral Votes.
Palin      52 Electoral Votes.

[SWE]

There really isn't any way Hillary could win Mississippi, even against Palin. Remember, Mississippi is the most inelastic state. If Hillary is doing well enough to win Mississippi, she's also winning Utah and Wyoming. 1

[7,052,770]

There really isn't any way Hillary could win Mississippi, even against Palin. Remember, Mississippi is the most inelastic state. If Hillary is doing well enough to win Mississippi, she's also winning Utah and Wyoming. 1

"Most inelastic state" (which is a pretty dubious designation based on very small sample size as it is) is not the same thing as "the last state to flip to the Democratic side."

It just means that Mississippi is the least susceptible to moving to national trends. However, because of Mississippi's relatively high Democratic floor, it would still be much easier for Hillary to win Mississippi against Palin than a state like Utah, Wyoming, Kansas, etc.

[Fuzzy Bear]

The idea that Palin would defeat Hillary in Alaska of all places is absurd.

Not really.  Palin has burned a lot of bridges in Alaska, and is at the center of a personal feud with the Murkowski family.  While she defeated Frank Murkowski in the 2006 GOP Primary for Governor, Murkowski remains one of the richest men in Alaska.  She tried to crush Lisa Murkowski, but she came back from a primary defeat to keep her seat in a write-in.  There are a lot of Republicans in AK who hate Palin and would be able to organize a campaign to sabotage her Presidential bid in AK.

Didn't you just argue for SWE's case?

Wow, I read that wrong.  I thought he was saying it was ridiculous to think Hillary would beat Palin in Alaska (the reverse of what he said).

I think she'd carry Alaska vs. Hillary, but it would be super-duper close, and for reasons mentioned, she might well not do so.

[Mr. Illini]

I think people are too tied to the rigid, Obama era map and think that it's the only explanation of elections going forward.  Referencing the first post in this thread, there is NO WAY that Arkansas would vote over 60% for Sarah Palin over Hillary Clinton!!  That's hilarious.

Eh, yes and no. Absolutely no way Palin would break 60 in Arkansas. I don't know that people are too tied to the Obama maps, though. I think they have departed from the Obama map in states Hillary could, like Missouri and the coastal south. However, to pretend like Hillary will depart drastically from Obama's maps because she is from the south or because she is white or something is incorrect, IMO. She may do better in the upper south than Obama (because he's like the worst possible candidate for that area) but she is still seen as a northerner, as an environmentalist, and as a liberal. Appalachia won't swing back for any Democrat that isn't going hard for coal.

And the lower south is gone for the Dems, of course, as it has been for a few decades.

[henster]

Palin probably carries most of the South/Appalachia. GA is definitely flipping maybe even SC, TX maybe it'd be closer than usual, basically any state Romney won with less than 10% margin I think could flip.

[crash1984]

Palin probably carries most of the South/Appalachia. GA is definitely flipping maybe even SC, TX maybe it'd be closer than usual, basically any state Romney won with less than 10% margin I think could flip.

Sounds about right except I kind of doubt South Carolina would go for Hillary. Yeah it was within ten points last election and Palin vs. Hillary would make it very tight but at the end of the day Palin wins it.