If it's Christie vs Clinton in 2016

[Matty]

Which states will Clinton win by a larger margin than Obama won against Romney? I would say New York, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, Colorado, Wisconsin, and Michigan.

[Rockefeller GOP]

I'd contest that she'd win every state you mention, but provided she did, you have a good list.  She'd also naturally make up a ton of ground (though probably not win) several other states like Arkansas, West Virginia, Kentucky, etc.

[Mr. Illini]

No on Wisconsin and Iowa because of the Obama Midwestern worker effect. No on Michigan because of the state's general trend. No on Colorado because they don't like her.

I'd say New York, Florida, Virginia, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania.

[Reaganfan]

Hard to say. I think Christie will over perform some Obama states while Clinton would over perform some Romney states.

[Never]

Clinton will probably do better than Obama in states like Arkansas, Missouri, West Virginia, Kentucky, Georgia, and Texas, but like others have mentioned, that doesn't mean she will win any of those states.

Christie might do better than Romney in most Western, Midwestern, and Mid-Atlantic states. I think Christie would definitely do better in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, along with Ohio, Wisconsin, Colorado, and Virginia. Again, this doesn't mean that Christie would win all of these states, but he could come very close in most.

[Mister Mets]

It depends a lot on the circumstances of the election.

I'd imagine Clinton will do better in states like Alabama, Arkansas, Tennessee and West Virginia. Maybe Texas. Due to high African-American turnout for Obama, I'd expect Clinton to do a bit worse in Georgia.

In 2012, Obama ran as an incumbent with a good news cycle (Economy was improving, He handled Hurricane Sandy well.) An inferior political talent running in an open election is unlikely to do as well, so I'd expect Hillary to take losses in states relative to Obama. Especially in the Western states, where she does poorly, and the Midwestern states, where Obama had a regional advantage. It won't matter, but Christie's likely to be stronger in New York, which supported Obama's response to Hurricane Sandy.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Clinton is going to do better in FL no matter the candidate. She should also improve in AZ & MO, as well as the Appalachian states. Christie would improve in CO, IA, WI, MN, MI, ect. I also don't see how he would fail to improve in NY, he should definitely get some of those moderate voters back. I think Christie would get anywhere from 37-40% there.

[IceSpear]

Florida, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia.

This is my guess for the trend map, if you assume Obama and Clinton win by identical margins:

[henster]

Christie will not overperform anywhere Clinton v. Christie would be a landslide for Clinton probably 350+ EV Christie's scandals and horrendous record as Governor make him uncompetitive.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Christie will not overperform anywhere Clinton v. Christie would be a landslide for Clinton probably 350+ EV Christie's scandals and horrendous record as Governor make him uncompetitive.

I don't disagree that his record is horrendous, but if NJ can be convinced otherwise, enough to give him 60% last year, who says other suburban states can't?

[henster]

Christie will not overperform anywhere Clinton v. Christie would be a landslide for Clinton probably 350+ EV Christie's scandals and horrendous record as Governor make him uncompetitive.

I don't disagree that his record is horrendous, but if NJ can be convinced otherwise, enough to give him 60% last year, who says other suburban states can't?

NJ has already been downgraded six times under Christie, he's already had to skip pension payments in order to fix the massive budget deficit under his leadership and the state ranks in the nearly last in job growth/business climate in the country. I can't see how this could be spun as a successful record.

[Rockefeller GOP]

I know I'm biased, but a recovered Christie can beat Clinton in a neutral climate; current Christie still is our best chance.  Doesn't matter if you win Southern/Western states by 40% or .5%, you just have to win them ... We need to expand the map, and I don't see a candidate besides Christie who even has the potential to do so.

[Mister Mets]

Christie winning a primary wouldn't occur in a vacuum. Presumably it would mean the investigations haven't found anything more serious than what's already known. If a scandal-ridden northeastern moderate gets the Republican party's nomination, things have gone very well for him, in ways that should make him strong in the general.

Unless Christie shamelessly panders to the lowest common denominator, heading to a landslide loss beyond Henster's dreams.

[NHI]

Christie winning a primary wouldn't occur in a vacuum. Presumably it would mean the investigations haven't found anything more serious than what's already known. If a scandal-ridden northeastern moderate gets the Republican party's nomination, things have gone very well for him, in ways that should make him strong in the general.

Unless Christie shamelessly panders to the lowest common denominator, heading to a landslide loss beyond Henster's dreams.

This.

[Bull Moose Base]

Romney had a ton of vulnerabilities his GOP rivals failed to hit effectively before Obama did so. No reason to assume Christie winning the nomination means he's covered his Achilles.

I'd bet on her beating Obama 2012 in CA, FL, MA, MN, NH, NM, NV, OH, PA, VA, WI + flipping AR, GA, MO.

[Mister Mets]

Romney had a ton of vulnerabilities his GOP rivals failed to hit effectively before Obama did so. No reason to assume Christie winning the nomination means he's covered his Achilles.

I'd bet on her beating Obama 2012 in CA, FL, MA, MN, NH, NM, NV, OH, PA, VA, WI + flipping AR, GA, MO.

First, Romney didn't lost that badly. Incumbent Presidents typically win reelection after one term of the party holding the White House (Carter in '76 is the only exception in over a century.) Obama's reelection numbers were also pretty low.

Romney's opposition in the primary was also much weaker. It included a congresswoman with a propensity for lying, a Governor whose best excuse for poor debate performances was that he was high on painkillers, a former Speaker whose career ended in scandal 14 years later, a very socially conservative Senator who lost his last bid for reelection by 18 points, a septugenarian congressman who once ran for Prez on a third party ticket and a lesser-known Mormon businessman turned Governor.  The 2016 crowd is going to be tougher.

[pbrower2a]

Hillary Clinton would probably win a higher percentage of the popular vote but win about as many electoral votes as Barack Obama did in 2008, The states that Obama lost by huge margins won't be so severe in their rejection of her, but they won't vote for her.  Trade Indian afor Arizona and you have my guess for 2016.

[Non Swing Voter]

Clinton will probably win these states by a larger margin than Obama did: California, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Virginia, Florida, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Delaware, Connecticut (the last two maybe not).

The poster saying New Jersey will be close is obviously a GOP hack.

[Suburbia]

If Chris Christie can survive the scandals, and win the nomination, he would do well, but still lose to Clinton if scandals still lurk in October of 2016.
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton/Virginia Senator Mark Warner-290

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie/South Dakota Senator John Thune-248