What are the chances Hillary Clinton wins the white vote in 2016?

[Matty]

A lot of people would immediately dismiss it as in impossible feat, but it isn't out of the question. Bill almost won it twice, and you can't use Obama's performance among whites to make a rational prediction, for very obvious and unfortunate reasons.

[IceSpear]

Only if the GOP nominates a horrible candidate like Cruz, Carson, etc.

[Nichlemn]

Obama only won 39% of the white vote in 2012. A bit of that was due to racism, but probably not more than a couple of percentage points (a lot of racists weren't voting for any Democrat, or voted for Obama in spite of their racism). 

Unless the Republican improved significantly with the minority vote at the same time Clinton improved with whites, then Clinton would be winning something like 58%+ of the popular vote. So however likely that is, maybe 1%.

[Matty]

Romney won the female white vote (or maybe married female white vote) by a decent margin. I could see that dramatically reversing, which is why I think there is a strong chance.

[Mister Mets]

Clinton got about 39 percent of white voters in 1992, and 43 percent in 1996.

Hillary Clinton would have to significantly outperform two people who still managed to become President in order for this to happen. It seems very unlikely.

[IceSpear]

Clinton got about 39 percent of white voters in 1992, and 43 percent in 1996.

Hillary Clinton would have to significantly outperform two people who still managed to become President in order for this to happen. It seems very unlikely.

That's a bit misleading though due to the presence of Perot. Bill definitely would've cracked 45% in 1996 if Perot wasn't on the ballot.

But yeah, this would only be plausible if the Republicans nominated a real whackjob. And even then, they would probably still narrowly win whites.

[Bureaucat]

There's virtually no chance of any Democrat winning a majority of white votes in 2016, but any white nominee would score better than Obama's 39%.

[Mister Mets]

There's virtually no chance of any Democrat winning a majority of white votes in 2016, but any white nominee would score better than Obama's 39%.

Obama's performance with the white vote has generally been on par with previous Democrats.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/19/15282553-obama-performance-with-white-voters-on-par-with-other-democrats?lite

A candidate who runs under less favorable circumstances will probably do worse with the group than Obama did.

[Bureaucat]

There's virtually no chance of any Democrat winning a majority of white votes in 2016, but any white nominee would score better than Obama's 39%.

Obama's performance with the white vote has generally been on par with previous Democrats.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/19/15282553-obama-performance-with-white-voters-on-par-with-other-democrats?lite

A candidate who runs under less favorable circumstances will probably do worse with the group than Obama did.

Perhaps, but I doubt if a white Dem does any worse than Obama did in 2012. Race shouldn't matter to voters, but to a few it does. Maybe a better question would be, how much over the 59% of the white vote won in 2012 will the GOP need to win in 2016, since the white vote is expected to account for 70% of the vote in 2016 as compared with 72% of the vote in 2012?

[Mister Mets]

There's virtually no chance of any Democrat winning a majority of white votes in 2016, but any white nominee would score better than Obama's 39%.

Obama's performance with the white vote has generally been on par with previous Democrats.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/19/15282553-obama-performance-with-white-voters-on-par-with-other-democrats?lite

A candidate who runs under less favorable circumstances will probably do worse with the group than Obama did.

Perhaps, but I doubt if a white Dem does any worse than Obama did in 2012. Race shouldn't matter to voters, but to a few it does. Maybe a better question would be, how much over the 59% of the white vote won in 2012 will the GOP need to win in 2016, since the white vote is expected to account for 70% of the vote in 2016 as compared with 72% of the vote in 2012?

It's complicated.

If the GOP does better in 2016 than in 2012, they'll presumably do better with Hispanics, African-Americans and Asian Americans as well.

It's also worth noting that less people voted in 2012 than in 2008. But it was also a rare election in which the black voter turnout rate exceeded the white voter turnout rate. So non-white turnout is likely to be lower without the first African American President on the ballot.

[henster]

I don't believe any Democrat since 1964 has won the white vote, unless Hillary is winning with 60+ of the PV then it's not happening.

[tallguy23]

Clinton would probably win young whites and unmarried female whites. I don't think she'd win the overall white vote, but she'll make gains among married and older white women.

[Joshgreen]

Clinton would probably win young whites and unmarried female whites. I don't think she'd win the overall white vote, but she'll make gains among married and older white women.

This is the correct answer.

[morgieb]

About a 0.0001% chance. That would require like a 20 point victory or something.

[Adam Griffin]

If she wins 80% of the non-white vote, then she'd 59.3% of the PV.

If she wins 75% of the non-white vote, then she'd 57.5% of the PV.

[Frodo]

Practically none considering the candidates most likely to win the GOP nod -if she gets between 40 and 45 percent, we're in good shape. 

[TDAS04]

Close to 0.  I'd be surprised if she wins the white female vote.

[NewYorkExpress]

Exactly 0%

Most likely she'll match Obama's percentage of the White Vote, as people who voted against Obama based on race (basically anyone who didn't normally vote Republican, and came out to specifically vote against Obama) are probably also very sexist too. That being said, I don't see significant drop in non-white votes for her as likely.

[henster]

I don't even think she could win the white female vote Obama lost it in both 2008 & 2012 despite winning the women's vote by double digits. The white female vote has been between 53-56% for Republicans in the past decade.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

If she renounces all support for any policy that might actually do some good in the world, she might win the white vote. 

[Indy Texas]

There's virtually no chance of any Democrat winning a majority of white votes in 2016, but any white nominee would score better than Obama's 39%.

Obama's performance with the white vote has generally been on par with previous Democrats.

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/19/15282553-obama-performance-with-white-voters-on-par-with-other-democrats?lite

A candidate who runs under less favorable circumstances will probably do worse with the group than Obama did.

Yes, but the difference is that in earlier elections like Clinton's and Carter's, they either won with a plurality or in a very close race. Obama was able to win two elections fairly easily without significantly improving among white voters. What infuriates the Buchananite Republicans is the fact that now a candidate who gets the votes of less than 4 out of 10 White Americans can still win the election by a fairly respectable margin.

[MATTROSE94]

Hillary Clinton would probably lose the white vote by a 5-10% margin against Scott Walker of Jeb Bush, but might actually win it against Ben Carson or Allen West.

[SWE]

None

[H. Ross Peron]

Only if the GOP nominates a horrible candidate like Cruz, Carson, etc.

What if the GOP nominated a horrible minority candidate (Carson, Cain etc.)? Where would the racist vote go?

[MurrayBannerman]

Hillary Clinton would probably lose the white vote by a 5-10% margin against Scott Walker of Jeb Bush, but might actually win it against Ben Carson or Allen West.

Well, I'm sure she'd have a chance against any terrible candidate.