2016=1988

[OSR stands with Israel]

Obama= Reagan(Both created huge advantages in electoral college)
Hillary= Bush( Establishment Candidate)
Bush= Dukakis( Last  candidate from old version of party)
Christie= Gary Hart(Scandalous Front Runners kicked out due to it)
Biden= Bob Dole(My turn candidate)
Walker= Al Gore( New Republican/Democrat which will eventually create a winning coalition four years later)
Warren= Pat Robertson(Fringe Candidate)
Ted Cruz= Jesse Jackson( Fringe Candidate)

[Thunderbird is the word]

What if Tom Cotton ends up running in 2020 then and 2020=1992? That would be an ironic repeat of 92. A young Arkansan running against an incumbent from the previous generation after twelve years of rule from said incumbents party.

[BaconBacon96]

Obama= Reagan(Both created huge advantages in electoral college)

Yes that's right

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Also right.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'd hardly say the last but I get where you're coming from.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The guy hasn't been a front runner for at least six months but I get you.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Biden isn't an idiot, he won't run and get himself curb stomped by Hillary.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I bloody well hope not. Unlikely, thank god

You must be logged in to read this quote.

WARREN AIN'T RUNNING. How many times must this be made clear.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Cruz is a wildcard.

There are comparable candidates but these are not comparable years. Most years aren't exactly.

[whanztastic]

Walker is Dukakis.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

Hillary still needs an Atwater.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Obama= Reagan(Both created huge advantages in electoral college)

Yes that's right

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Also right.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'd hardly say the last but I get where you're coming from.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The guy hasn't been a front runner for at least six months but I get you.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Biden isn't an idiot, he won't run and get himself curb stomped by Hillary.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I bloody well hope not. Unlikely, thank god

You must be logged in to read this quote.

WARREN AIN'T RUNNING. How many times must this be made clear.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Cruz is a wildcard.

There are comparable candidates but these are not comparable years. Most years aren't exactly.

If this is true Dems will have trouble winning in 2020 as when the current economic expansion falls back into recession(Longest expansion is 10 years from 1991-2001) the Dems will get all the blame for it as they have been in power for 12 years and this is not including any foreign policy troubles.

[Vega]

Wow, this is shockingly accurate.

[Oak Hills]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

WARREN AIN'T RUNNING. How many times must this be made clear.

Also, SHE ISN'T FRINGE!  And quite frankly, if it even makes to you to call her that, you are a right-wing fringe nutjob.

[OSR stands with Israel]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

WARREN AIN'T RUNNING. How many times must this be made clear.

Also, SHE ISN'T FRINGE!  And quite frankly, if it even makes to you to call her that, you are a right-wing fringe nutjob.

I am a moderate

Republican Party is too Right Wing for me and Democratic party is too left wing for me

Obama is to left for me and Elizabeth Warren is even more left to that.

My views are similar to what Reagan and Bill Clinton(From 1995-2001) did in their presidencies.

I am social Liberal
         Fiscal Conservative
           Foreign Policy Pragmatist


I also said that I thought Cruz was Fringe

[TomC]

Warren= Coumo
Jindal= Simon (just too cartoonish and nerdy to take seriously)
Biden=Biden

[m4567]

I'm more and more believing this will be like the 1988 election. Much closer, of course.

[dudeabides]

Obama= Reagan(Both created huge advantages in electoral college)
Hillary= Bush( Establishment Candidate)
Bush= Dukakis( Last  candidate from old version of party)
Christie= Gary Hart(Scandalous Front Runners kicked out due to it)
Biden= Bob Dole(My turn candidate)
Walker= Al Gore( New Republican/Democrat which will eventually create a winning coalition four years later)
Warren= Pat Robertson(Fringe Candidate)
Ted Cruz= Jesse Jackson( Fringe Candidate)

Donald Trump = David Duke (racist, low I.Q.)

[Orthogonian Society Treasurer]

This comparison is original and exciting.

[Free Bird]

No. Reagan was stupidly popular. Obama is not.

[dudeabides]

Obama= Reagan(Both created huge advantages in electoral college)
Hillary= Bush( Establishment Candidate)
Bush= Dukakis( Last  candidate from old version of party)
Christie= Gary Hart(Scandalous Front Runners kicked out due to it)
Biden= Bob Dole(My turn candidate)
Walker= Al Gore( New Republican/Democrat which will eventually create a winning coalition four years later)
Warren= Pat Robertson(Fringe Candidate)
Ted Cruz= Jesse Jackson( Fringe Candidate)

I thought about it, I see 2016 as 1968

Jeb Bush = Richard Nixon (the establishment candidate who is running to the center-right)
Marco Rubio = Ronald Reagan (well-spoken, but not ready for prime time yet)
Scott Walker = Jim Rhodes (controversial mid-western Governor)
Chris Christie = Nelson Rockefeller (centrist northeastern Governor)
Donald Trump = George Wallace (delusional racist, third party candidate?)
Hillary Clinton = Humphrey (In the incumbent President's administration but trying to put distance)
Bernie Sanders = Eugene McCarthy (running to the left of the establishment candidate)  

[Clark Kent]

Obama= Reagan(Both created huge advantages in electoral college)
Hillary= Bush( Establishment Candidate)
Bush= Dukakis( Last  candidate from old version of party)
Christie= Gary Hart(Scandalous Front Runners kicked out due to it)
Biden= Bob Dole(My turn candidate)
Walker= Al Gore( New Republican/Democrat which will eventually create a winning coalition four years later)
Warren= Pat Robertson(Fringe Candidate)
Ted Cruz= Jesse Jackson( Fringe Candidate)

I thought about it, I see 2016 as 1968

Jeb Bush = Richard Nixon (the establishment candidate who is running to the center-right)
Marco Rubio = Ronald Reagan (well-spoken, but not ready for prime time yet)
Scott Walker = Jim Rhodes (controversial mid-western Governor)
Chris Christie = Nelson Rockefeller (centrist northeastern Governor)
Donald Trump = George Wallace (delusional racist, third party candidate?)
Hillary Clinton = Humphrey (In the incumbent President's administration but trying to put distance)
Bernie Sanders = Eugene McCarthy (running to the left of the establishment candidate)  

Do you think Bush could win, though?

[dudeabides]

Obama= Reagan(Both created huge advantages in electoral college)
Hillary= Bush( Establishment Candidate)
Bush= Dukakis( Last  candidate from old version of party)
Christie= Gary Hart(Scandalous Front Runners kicked out due to it)
Biden= Bob Dole(My turn candidate)
Walker= Al Gore( New Republican/Democrat which will eventually create a winning coalition four years later)
Warren= Pat Robertson(Fringe Candidate)
Ted Cruz= Jesse Jackson( Fringe Candidate)

I thought about it, I see 2016 as 1968

Jeb Bush = Richard Nixon (the establishment candidate who is running to the center-right)
Marco Rubio = Ronald Reagan (well-spoken, but not ready for prime time yet)
Scott Walker = Jim Rhodes (controversial mid-western Governor)
Chris Christie = Nelson Rockefeller (centrist northeastern Governor)
Donald Trump = George Wallace (delusional racist, third party candidate?)
Hillary Clinton = Humphrey (In the incumbent President's administration but trying to put distance)
Bernie Sanders = Eugene McCarthy (running to the left of the establishment candidate)  

Do you think Bush could win, though?

I think it will be very close (like 1968), but I do believe Governor Bush has a good chance of winning. President Obama's approval ratings are unlikely to go above 50% - they will either stay at 50% or decline believe where they are now, at 46%. If the economy continues to stagnate, that also helps Governor Bush.

The main advantage Secretary Clinton has is demographic. She will win the female vote. But, Governor Bush has a very good chance of making inroads with hispanic/latino voters. The black vote won't be as strong for the Democrats and moderate voters, not to be confused with independents, who went for Obama last time are likely to go for Bush this time - Romney's pandering during the primaries hurt him in this regard. I also think Bush will do better than Romney with white working-class voters who helped re-elect his brother in 2004.

Part of this isn't Governor Bush's strength with hispanic voters and political moderates. It's also how Hillary Clinton campaigns. She is not particularly disciplined on the campaign trail, and she comes across as out of touch. Barack Obama was able to defeat her in the 2008 primary in part because of this. While both Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush are multi-millionaires from political families, Hillary comes across as more elite, especially when she makes statements about having not driven an automobile in two decades.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I think we can replace Warren with Bernie  now but other then that I stand with 2016=1988

[NeverAgain]

No. Reagan was popular and considered a great president. Obama is neither. Reagan could win any election at that time. Obama can't

Reagan's popularity was about 46-48% at this time in the '88 election cycle, Obama's is 46. I will admit that Reagan will be looked at as probably a better president than Obama's, but current popularity-wise they are similar. But I disagree, I think that both Obama and Reagan could win a third term if possible. So I'd say they are pretty similar.

Sources: http://www.gallup.com/poll/116479/barack-obama-presidential-job-approval.aspx
http://www.gallup.com/poll/11887/ronald-reagan-from-peoples-perspective-gallup-poll-review.aspx
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_approval_rating#/media/File:Gallup_Poll-Approval_Rating-Ronald_Reagan.png

[OSR stands with Israel]

No. Reagan was popular and considered a great president. Obama is neither. Reagan could win any election at that time. Obama can't

Reagan's popularity was about 46-48% at this time in the '88 election cycle, Obama's is 46. I will admit that Reagan will be looked at as probably a better president than Obama's, but current popularity-wise they are similar. But I disagree, I think that both Obama and Reagan could win a third term if possible. So I'd say they are pretty similar.

Sources: http://www.gallup.com/poll/116479/barack-obama-presidential-job-approval.aspx
http://www.gallup.com/poll/11887/ronald-reagan-from-peoples-perspective-gallup-poll-review.aspx
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_approval_rating#/media/File:Gallup_Poll-Approval_Rating-Ronald_Reagan.png

Reagan left the White house with 63% approval

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Clinton and Reagan left office with relatively high approvals and Obama is a 50 percent. Al Gore tied Dubya and GH Bush won a landslide.

I think things are relatively looking up for a 3rd Dem term

[Bojack Horseman]

It's too bad Ann Richards isn't alive to say it herself.

"Poor Jeb. He can't help it! He was born with a silver foot in his mouth!"

[dudeabides]

Clinton and Reagan left office with relatively high approvals and Obama is a 50 percent. Al Gore tied Dubya and GH Bush won a landslide.

I think things are relatively looking up for a 3rd Dem term

38% of Americans disapproved of President Clinton's job performance prior to the 2000 election.

37% of Americans disapproved of President Reagan's job performance prior to the 1988 election.

51% of Americans disapprove of President Obama's job performance as of 7/1/15.

If the economy improves drastically, it is likely the President will see better poll numbers. If it stays the same or gets worse, he is either going to be around the 50% mark or go down. Hillary Clinton will have difficulty explaining why she's best for the economy when she's running on the status-quo essentially. She is recycling Obama's policies which has led to a greater wealth gap.

Did the economy change drastically between 1987 and 1988? 1999 and 2000? 2007 and 2008? It did get worse between 2007 and '08, but officially we were in recession by December 2007.

[Panhandle Progressive]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You better hope the economy changes significantly for the worse between now and Election Day 2016 otherwise Republicans won't have a chance in hell if it either stays roughly the same or continues to improve due to job gains. Hillary is a huge favorite in the electoral college. 2016=1988 is spot-on.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI6vBQ6VEAQz-hw.jpg

https://twitter.com/VP/status/616622637054230528

[dudeabides]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You better hope the economy changes significantly for the worse between now and Election Day 2016 otherwise Republicans won't have a chance in hell if it either stays roughly the same or continues to improve due to job gains. Hillary is a huge favorite in the electoral college. 2016=1988 is spot-on.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CI6vBQ6VEAQz-hw.jpg

https://twitter.com/VP/status/616622637054230528

I don't hope the economy will become worse because I want America to succeed. The President doesn't control the economy, but there is no question policies from Washington do have a great impact. My guess is the economy will continue to stagnate between now and the election.

In 1996, President Clinton won 379 electoral votes. He won Ohio, Florida, and Nevada. Virginia has changed since then, but he only lost it by 2 points.
 
Four years later, the economy was in better shape than it was in '96, yet George W. Bush won the election.

Jeb Bush has a good chance at winning this election. Hillary Clinton is opposite of Al Gore on the campaign trail - she's undisciplined.