Kaine vs. Kasich

[Suburbia]

Who would win in this 2016 matchup? Who would lead in opinion polls in the summer? Who would do better in the debates? Discuss with maps.

[Maxwell]

Kasich would trounce Kaine.

[Never]

Kasich would trounce Kaine.

In short, what Maxy said.

Now, Kaine could lead in the summer, similar to how Dukakis did in 1988, but Kasich would ultimately improve his performance as election day neared. I actually feel it is more likely that Kasich could manage to hold a lead for most of 2016. I think the debates would be a mixed bag, since neither Kasich nor Kaine seem particularly electrifying.

This is what I see as being a likely outcome:

[Vega]

Never, I'm not sure where you came up with that.

Anyway, both aren't exactly exciting candidates, so I picked Brian Sandoval as Kasich's running mate, and Kirsten Gillibrand as Kaine's.

That being said, Kaine narrowly wins.

[Never]

Never, I'm not sure where you came up with that.

Anyway, both aren't exactly exciting candidates, so I picked Brian Sandoval as Kasich's running mate, and Kirsten Gillibrand as Kaine's.

That being said, Kaine narrowly wins.

I just see Kaine as a candidate who would fail; there are several Democrats (including the running mate you chose for Kaine) who would do so much better against Kasich on the electoral map. Kaine seems more like Kerry or Dukakis, the kind of candidate who would be easy to define as ineffective. For the record, I don't really like Kaine at all, so that surely colors my perception, but Kasich seems like a superior candidate. I can actually think of a few Republicans who would lose to Kaine, but Kasich isn't one of them.

I also think that Kasich should manage to do fine in the Midwest and Northeast. Considering states like MN/WI/IA/PA/NH gave roughly the same percentage to Obama in 2012 as Nevada, a state you colored Atlas Blue, I could see Kasich winning them, and thus the national election. Perhaps Kaine could hold on in Virginia during a presidential election, but I have some suspicion that he would not.

[henster]

Kasich would trounce Kaine.

In short, what Maxy said.

Now, Kaine could lead in the summer, similar to how Dukakis did in 1988, but Kasich would ultimately improve his performance as election day neared. I actually feel it is more likely that Kasich could manage to hold a lead for most of 2016. I think the debates would be a mixed bag, since neither Kasich nor Kaine seem particularly electrifying.

This is what I see as being a likely outcome:

I don't see how Kaine loses PA, MN, MI, IA or WI he'd arguably do better among whites than Obama in those states. I think your underestimating Kaine's abilities as a candidate.

[Never]

Kasich would trounce Kaine.

In short, what Maxy said.

Now, Kaine could lead in the summer, similar to how Dukakis did in 1988, but Kasich would ultimately improve his performance as election day neared. I actually feel it is more likely that Kasich could manage to hold a lead for most of 2016. I think the debates would be a mixed bag, since neither Kasich nor Kaine seem particularly electrifying.

This is what I see as being a likely outcome:

I don't see how Kaine loses PA, MN, MI, IA or WI he'd arguably do better among whites than Obama in those states. I think your underestimating Kaine's abilities as a candidate.

I could be underestimating Kaine, but even if he does win (I posted a Kaine ceiling map recently with him winning 300+ EVs), I don't think he will be able to do much better with whites than Obama, because I see him as being uninspiring with all groups. It is also possible that a Republican like Kasich could slightly improve with minorities. The Obama coalition could be difficult for a candidate of Kaine's quality to keep intact.

My map is probably about a 52-53% win for Kasich, something that could happen if the national environment moderately turns against the Democrats in 2016.

[MATTROSE94]

Kasich would trounce Kaine.

In short, what Maxy said.

Now, Kaine could lead in the summer, similar to how Dukakis did in 1988, but Kasich would ultimately improve his performance as election day neared. I actually feel it is more likely that Kasich could manage to hold a lead for most of 2016. I think the debates would be a mixed bag, since neither Kasich nor Kaine seem particularly electrifying.

This is what I see as being a likely outcome:

This is what I was thinking as well, though I do feel that Tim Kaine would end up carrying Virginia, albeit by not a strong margin at all.

[Senator Cris]

Probably this, with VA, PA and NH that are very close.

[pbrower2a]

Kasich would trounce Kaine.

In short, what Maxy said.

Now, Kaine could lead in the summer, similar to how Dukakis did in 1988, but Kasich would ultimately improve his performance as election day neared. I actually feel it is more likely that Kasich could manage to hold a lead for most of 2016. I think the debates would be a mixed bag, since neither Kasich nor Kaine seem particularly electrifying.

This is what I see as being a likely outcome:

A contest between two pols of similar abilities suggests a close race all the way unless one of the nominees has a complete meltdown and the other plays the election close to the vest by taking no high-risk chances.

Kaine at the least should win his own state due to the Favorite Son effect. I see no reason to believe that the Republicans are making inroads into states that they have not won since 1996. I see no reason for them to win either Nevada or New Mexico. 

Kasich does win Ohio due to the Favorite Son effect.

Colorado, Iowa, and New Hampshire will have people biting their nails into the morning.

[Mister Mets]

This would be close.

I think Kaine is a slightly superior politician. He has won statewide office three times, winning the bigger races by better margins than Kasich in Ohio in 2010. Republicans need to win Ohio, while Democrats can afford to lose Virginia.

Kaine's weakness is that Democrats have held the White House for the last two terms. As a Senator/ former DNC chair, he can't exactly run as an outsider.

I'd give Kasich the edge due to the tendency of parties to do worse in the third term.

Kasich/ Martinez- 282 Electoral Votes
Kaine/ Klobuchar- 256 Electoral Votes

[henster]

This would be close.

I think Kaine is a slightly superior politician. He has won statewide office three times, winning the bigger races by better margins than Kasich in Ohio in 2010. Republicans need to win Ohio, while Democrats can afford to lose Virginia.

Kaine's weakness is that Democrats have held the White House for the last two terms. As a Senator/ former DNC chair, he can't exactly run as an outsider.

I'd give Kasich the edge due to the tendency of parties to do worse in the third term.

Kasich/ Martinez- 282 Electoral Votes
Kaine/ Klobuchar- 256 Electoral Votes

Explain to me how does Kaine lose Pennsylvania I'd argue he's a much better fit for PA than Obama ever was I'd think he improves among whites there and Eastern PA.

[Mister Mets]

This would be close.

I think Kaine is a slightly superior politician. He has won statewide office three times, winning the bigger races by better margins than Kasich in Ohio in 2010. Republicans need to win Ohio, while Democrats can afford to lose Virginia.

Kaine's weakness is that Democrats have held the White House for the last two terms. As a Senator/ former DNC chair, he can't exactly run as an outsider.

I'd give Kasich the edge due to the tendency of parties to do worse in the third term.

Kasich/ Martinez- 282 Electoral Votes
Kaine/ Klobuchar- 256 Electoral Votes

Explain to me how does Kaine lose Pennsylvania I'd argue he's a much better fit for PA than Obama ever was I'd think he improves among whites there and Eastern PA.

Kaine's in a worse position than Obama was. He's  a candidate who lacks the advantage of incumbency running to get his party another term in the White House.

I'd also imagine decreased African American turnout without Obama on the ballot. In 2012, African Americans were 13% of the voters (slightly higher than their share of the population) and 93% went for Obama.

Kasich would also have an advantage in Pennsylvania coming from a neighboring state. Even if Kaine's a better fit for PA than Obama, Kasich's a better fit for the state than Romney, McCain or George W Bush.

[henster]

This would be close.

I think Kaine is a slightly superior politician. He has won statewide office three times, winning the bigger races by better margins than Kasich in Ohio in 2010. Republicans need to win Ohio, while Democrats can afford to lose Virginia.

Kaine's weakness is that Democrats have held the White House for the last two terms. As a Senator/ former DNC chair, he can't exactly run as an outsider.

I'd give Kasich the edge due to the tendency of parties to do worse in the third term.

Kasich/ Martinez- 282 Electoral Votes
Kaine/ Klobuchar- 256 Electoral Votes

Explain to me how does Kaine lose Pennsylvania I'd argue he's a much better fit for PA than Obama ever was I'd think he improves among whites there and Eastern PA.

Kaine's in a worse position than Obama was. He's  a candidate who lacks the advantage of incumbency running to get his party another term in the White House.

I'd also imagine decreased African American turnout without Obama on the ballot. In 2012, African Americans were 13% of the voters (slightly higher than their share of the population) and 93% went for Obama.

Kasich would also have an advantage in Pennsylvania coming from a neighboring state. Even if Kaine's a better fit for PA than Obama, Kasich's a better fit for the state than Romney, McCain or George W Bush.

You could say the exact same thing about Clinton yet most people don't have her losing PA. And Kaine could just improve his numbers among whites to make up for lower black turnout.

[Mister Mets]

This would be close.

I think Kaine is a slightly superior politician. He has won statewide office three times, winning the bigger races by better margins than Kasich in Ohio in 2010. Republicans need to win Ohio, while Democrats can afford to lose Virginia.

Kaine's weakness is that Democrats have held the White House for the last two terms. As a Senator/ former DNC chair, he can't exactly run as an outsider.

I'd give Kasich the edge due to the tendency of parties to do worse in the third term.

Kasich/ Martinez- 282 Electoral Votes
Kaine/ Klobuchar- 256 Electoral Votes

Explain to me how does Kaine lose Pennsylvania I'd argue he's a much better fit for PA than Obama ever was I'd think he improves among whites there and Eastern PA.

Kaine's in a worse position than Obama was. He's  a candidate who lacks the advantage of incumbency running to get his party another term in the White House.

I'd also imagine decreased African American turnout without Obama on the ballot. In 2012, African Americans were 13% of the voters (slightly higher than their share of the population) and 93% went for Obama.

Kasich would also have an advantage in Pennsylvania coming from a neighboring state. Even if Kaine's a better fit for PA than Obama, Kasich's a better fit for the state than Romney, McCain or George W Bush.

You could say the exact same thing about Clinton yet most people don't have her losing PA. And Kaine could just improve his numbers among whites to make up for lower black turnout.

The point's been made that due to her name recognition, Hillary Clinton is essentially an incumbent.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-is-polling-like-an-incumbent-and-that-could-help-her-in-2016/

Kaine doesn't have the same advantage. He would essentially be a generic Democrat.

As for the suggestion that he could just improve his numbers among whites, I'm sure he wants to do that, but whether he can pull it off is a different story. Politicians can't just improve their numbers among large chunks of the electorate.

Kaine did run about two percent better than Obama in Virginia. However, he was running against an inferior political talent in George Allen and he had recently served as Governor.

[henster]

This would be close.

I think Kaine is a slightly superior politician. He has won statewide office three times, winning the bigger races by better margins than Kasich in Ohio in 2010. Republicans need to win Ohio, while Democrats can afford to lose Virginia.

Kaine's weakness is that Democrats have held the White House for the last two terms. As a Senator/ former DNC chair, he can't exactly run as an outsider.

I'd give Kasich the edge due to the tendency of parties to do worse in the third term.

Kasich/ Martinez- 282 Electoral Votes
Kaine/ Klobuchar- 256 Electoral Votes

Explain to me how does Kaine lose Pennsylvania I'd argue he's a much better fit for PA than Obama ever was I'd think he improves among whites there and Eastern PA.

Kaine's in a worse position than Obama was. He's  a candidate who lacks the advantage of incumbency running to get his party another term in the White House.

I'd also imagine decreased African American turnout without Obama on the ballot. In 2012, African Americans were 13% of the voters (slightly higher than their share of the population) and 93% went for Obama.

Kasich would also have an advantage in Pennsylvania coming from a neighboring state. Even if Kaine's a better fit for PA than Obama, Kasich's a better fit for the state than Romney, McCain or George W Bush.

You could say the exact same thing about Clinton yet most people don't have her losing PA. And Kaine could just improve his numbers among whites to make up for lower black turnout.

The point's been made that due to her name recognition, Hillary Clinton is essentially an incumbent.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-is-polling-like-an-incumbent-and-that-could-help-her-in-2016/

Kaine doesn't have the same advantage. He would essentially be a generic Democrat.

As for the suggestion that he could just improve his numbers among whites, I'm sure he wants to do that, but whether he can pull it off is a different story. Politicians can't just improve their numbers among large chunks of the electorate.

Kaine did run about two percent better than Obama in Virginia. However, he was running against an inferior political talent in George Allen and he had recently served as Governor.

It's not like Kasich has stellar name recognition he'd basically be a generic R or worse since he's unlikely to be unscathed form a brutal primary.

[Potus]

Doesn't Kaine waffle on abortion? He has some vaguely, not-party line viewpoint on it.

[henster]

Doesn't Kaine waffle on abortion? He has some vaguely, not-party line viewpoint on it.

He's basically on the same page as Joe Biden personally disagrees with abortion but is pro-choice.

[Suburbia]

I think Kaine could do well in Missouri. He was raised there for a while and his roots could do well there.

[Rockefeller GOP]

Doesn't Kaine waffle on abortion? He has some vaguely, not-party line viewpoint on it.

He's basically on the same page as Joe Biden personally disagrees with abortion but is pro-choice.

I mean does anybody not "personally disagree" with abortion?  I feel like everyone agrees it's terrible, some just think it has to be a choice made by the woman.

[pbrower2a]

Doesn't Kaine waffle on abortion? He has some vaguely, not-party line viewpoint on it.

He's basically on the same page as Joe Biden personally disagrees with abortion but is pro-choice.

I mean does anybody not "personally disagree" with abortion?  I feel like everyone agrees it's terrible, some just think it has to be a choice made by the woman.

That is in roughly the same position as disliking amputations but occasionally finding them necessary at times.

[Mr. Smith]

Kaine could probably take North Carolina, Kentucky (if Grimes beats McConnell), and Missouri as well as the other states Obama won in 2012.

Kasich is just a little bit too far right, and Kaine takes a lot of Clinton-esque positions as is.

He'd do better among white voters,which is the reason Obama didn't take North Carolina nor Missouri.

[pbrower2a]

This would be close.

I think Kaine is a slightly superior politician. He has won statewide office three times, winning the bigger races by better margins than Kasich in Ohio in 2010. Republicans need to win Ohio, while Democrats can afford to lose Virginia.

Kaine's weakness is that Democrats have held the White House for the last two terms. As a Senator/ former DNC chair, he can't exactly run as an outsider.

I'd give Kasich the edge due to the tendency of parties to do worse in the third term.

Kasich/ Martinez- 282 Electoral Votes
Kaine/ Klobuchar- 256 Electoral Votes

Explain to me how does Kaine lose Pennsylvania I'd argue he's a much better fit for PA than Obama ever was I'd think he improves among whites there and Eastern PA.

Kaine's in a worse position than Obama was. He's  a candidate who lacks the advantage of incumbency running to get his party another term in the White House.

I'd also imagine decreased African American turnout without Obama on the ballot. In 2012, African Americans were 13% of the voters (slightly higher than their share of the population) and 93% went for Obama.

Kasich would also have an advantage in Pennsylvania coming from a neighboring state. Even if Kaine's a better fit for PA than Obama, Kasich's a better fit for the state than Romney, McCain or George W Bush.

Neighboring state?

In 2008 Barack Obama of course won Illinois by an overwhelming majority, Iowa and Wisconsin by decisive majorities, barely won Indiana, barely lost Missouri, and lost Kentucky by a huge margin. Arkansas and Tennessee come close to Illinois on their extremes, and Obama lost both handily. Technically, Michigan has a water boundary with Illinois, and Obama won it by a margin in the high teens. 

John McCain won Arizona decisively, won Utah by a huge margin, but lost Colorado (at a point)  decisively and lost California, Nevada, and New Mexico by huge margins.

Bill Clinton never won Mississippi, Oklahoma, or Texas. He should have been a good cultural match for Texas.

[Flake]

Both are boring old white men, exactly what we need again , but I think Kasich would win pretty narrowly, or it would be a tied map.

Colorado, Wisconsin, and Florida would probably be the three closest states, respectively.

[Bigby]

Kasich would win in a close race, I believe.