Fox News national: Clinton leads Bush, Christie, Kasich, & Paul by double digits

[Never]

lol, not even FOX can get the Republicans within single digits.

Darn.

Also, I'm surprised that they polled Kasich this far out.

[Never]

GenXers sure don't like Hilldog

It is an interesting question as to why Hillary does so much better than Obama with the olds but poorer with the GenXers. Could it simply be identity politics. Obama is seen as a Gen Xer and Hillary is a fellow old?

Gen X seems like it does it's own thing, so it doesn't surprise me that they are the outliers  in this crosstab.

This is what a double-digit Clinton win probably looks like. Assuming that the Q polls for Florida which show her with double-digit leads are nearly valid (historically, the Democratic ceiling for Florida is 52%l LBJ barely won the state in 1964), so far as I can tell. It would look much like an Eisenhower win in the 1950s:

She picks up everything along and east of the Mississippi River except for Alabama. Texas is the closest state, and it makes the difference between the Republican winning 36 and 74 electoral votes. By 9PM east coast time, Republicans start spiking the ratings for hockey and basketball games... or old movies.

Pale colors are for wins under 4%, middle colors are for wins by 4% to 9.999%;  dark colors are for wins by margins over 10%.   

This is definitely a map that I wouldn't rule out. Maybe ND would be pale blue or pale pink and MS pale blue, but I'm guessing that you were working off of polling for this, so it's just a tiny quibble on my part.

[Never]

GenXers sure don't like Hilldog

It is an interesting question as to why Hillary does so much better than Obama with the olds but poorer with the GenXers. Could it simply be identity politics. Obama is seen as a Gen Xer and Hillary is a fellow old?

If one goes with the generational theory of Howe and Strauss, then Barack Obama (born 1961) is from the first year of births of Generation X. He is not going to formulate great new pronouncements of morality. People slightly older than he can do that quite well. He is more a pragmatist than a moralizer. Dispatching Osama bin Laden with a gangland-style hit establishes that he is no Boomer. The style suggests Al Capone, who did things that way to his rivals and those who crossed him.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Boomers spoke often of 'doing your own thing' when they were young. They clamped down on that once Generation X tried that and did what Boomers would have never done. Boomers generally pretended to great moral objectives; Generation X did what they did out of unabashed hedonism. Generation X can be counted on to do what it does out of self-interest or the interest of loved ones younger than themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is definitely a map that I wouldn't rule out. Maybe ND would be pale blue or pale pink and MS pale blue, but I'm guessing that you were working off of polling for this, so it's just a tiny quibble on my part.

Remember: we haven't seen a Democrat win the Presidency by a margin of 10% to 15% in a two-way race or so since FDR beat Willkie in 1940. That does not count the LBJ blowout. Clinton won by about 10% in 1996, but probably because Perot siphoned off several million votes that ordinarily went Republican. FDR won by 7.5% in 1944 and Obama won by 7.2% in 2008.  If anyone agrees with my model for a 10%-12% win for Hillary Clinton, then I am amazed. Tiny quibbles are effective concurrence.

I didn't say that it was going to happen. Barack Obama won by Reagan-like landslide margins in about 20 states and lost by Mondale-like landslide margins in about 15 states in 2008. That is unlikely to ever be repeated for decades.  But if it does happen, the electoral map is more likely to resemble my proposition than just about anything else. To get such results, Hillary Clinton must keep the Obama 2008 coalition intact -- and recover the sorts of voters that Carter convinced in 1976 that haven't gone for a Democratic nominee for President since 2000. That is asking for a lot. It could happen. I just don't see it happening yet.

   

 

Well, I feel that anything could happen this far out, so I wouldn't write off a double-digit for Clinton. Maybe I'm pessimistic about Republican chances in 2016, but I just feel that Clinton will win decisively if she runs. While a win of the magnitude that your map displayed might not happen, I see Hillary as a unique candidate with potential electoral advantages that Obama did not necessarily possess. For one, being a credible female politician who would become the first female president if elected probably gives her room to build significantly on Obama's numbers with women. The scenario envisioned through your map probably is asking for a lot, but a great deal can happen in a very short time frame. Of course, that line of thought could be used to argue against your map, but Clinton does seem quite formidable.

I thought that your map was a realistic interpretation of Clinton's current position, so I don't want to rule it out.