2004: Hillary Clinton vs. George W. Bush

[WVdemocrat]

Who would be Clinton's best choice for running mate? Who would win? Discuss with maps.

[IceSpear]

Bush would win. Hillary would look too brazen for seeking the White House <4 years after she left it and became a Senator. And as much as Kerry gets bashed, a bland inoffensive white guy was probably the best option in a year like 2004. She performs around the same as him or slightly worse.

[NewYorkExpress]

Bush would win. Hillary would look too brazen for seeking the White House <4 years after she left it and became a Senator. And as much as Kerry gets bashed, a bland inoffensive white guy was probably the best option in a year like 2004. She performs around the same as him or slightly worse.

.
And four years later Barack Obama won with roughly the same level of experience...Give me a break.

As for the election itself, Hillary picks up Ohio and New Hampshire, While Bush gains New Mexico and Iowa.

Hillary would probably pick one of her Senatorial colleagues (Bob Graham, Blanche Lincoln or Bien Nelson come to mind) and Bush would at least have to consider replacing Cheney (though I doubt he would).

[Suburbia]

Bush/Cheney would win over Clinton/Vilsack. Hillary would lose Ohio 51%-48%, and the polls would have been more tighter than Kerry vs. Bush.

[Jerseyrules]

Bush would win. Hillary would look too brazen for seeking the White House <4 years after she left it and became a Senator. And as much as Kerry gets bashed, a bland inoffensive white guy was probably the best option in a year like 2004. She performs around the same as him or slightly worse.

.
And four years later Barack Obama won with roughly the same level of experience...Give me a break.

As for the election itself, Hillary picks up Ohio and New Hampshire, While Bush gains New Mexico and Iowa.

Hillary would probably pick one of her Senatorial colleagues (Bob Graham, Blanche Lincoln or Bien Nelson come to mind) and Bush would at least have to consider replacing Cheney (though I doubt he would).

2008 was very different than 2004; in 2008 we had the stock market crash, prior to which McCain was actually leading in some polls as late as September.  McCain ran an awful campaign but 2008 was about domestic issues, namely the economy.  In 2004 public opinion hadn't turned against the Iraq War the same way it had by 2008.  Plus Hillary gets the same flip-flopper attacks thrown at her that Kerry got, and in 04 the election was fought on foreign policy.  There was still a lot of rally-round-the-flag leftover from 9/11, and for all his flaws, Kerry was an extremely good challenger to take on Bush: his decades in the Senate and war record demonstrated foreign policy experience, which was essential in the first post-9/11 election.  Not only that, but by seeking the Presidency after only 4 years in office, she would have confirmed everyone's suspicions that the Senate was just a stepping-stone to the Presidency.  She'd be labeled an inexperienced opportunist, which would be far more detrimental in 2004 than it was in 2008.

[Suburbia]

New York Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY)/Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack (D-IA)-265 EV
President George W. Bush (R-TX)/Vice President Dick Cheney (R-WY)-273 EV

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Clinton/Clark 277
Dubya/Cheney 261

[SingingAnalyst]

Clinton picks Joe Manchin in a failed attempt to win back WV and Appalachia. It doesn't work, as the nation is still focused on the war on terror. Even neighboring NJ rejects Clinton.

Clinton 185 EV / 44%
Bush 353 EV / 55%

[Breton Racer]

Clinton/Vilsack- 282 Electoral Votes (50.3%)

Bush/Cheney- 256 Electoral Votes (48.4%)

[Sir Mohamed]

Probably the same as in real life against Kerry. W would have won.

[Kingpoleon]

291: President George W. Bush/Ambassador John Danforth - 50.7%
247: Senator Hillary Clinton/Senator John "Jay" Rockefeller - 46.3%
Others - 3.0%