Clinton vs Trump

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

Trump, on the other hand, would have advisors, but he'd know how to challenge them and override them. 

It's this simple:  The greater the concern about the economy, the more traction Donald Trump can muster up. 

How'd that go for Romney?

Not well, but it went poorly for Romney for reasons that don't apply to Trump:

1.  Romney ran on a false narrative as a "job creator".  As the campaign progressed, it became clear that Romney was not a "job creator" or even a "job saver"; he was a leveraged buyout wealth creator who made money for his clients, but who also caused plant closings and job losses.

2.  Romney's true narrative was that of a guy who was able to analyze difficult situations, come up with financial solutions for troubled companies and force people and organizations whose extravagance had brought them to near-ruin to live within their means.  This narrative, laid out in the CHICAGO TRIBUNE's primary endorsement of Romney, was never heard in the campaign.  This competence-based appeal would have been a more proper segue into the issue of entitlements.  Instead, Romney's "job creator" claims were demolished, and his way of addressing entitlement spending was his infamous 47% comments.

3.  People are far more convinced that Donald Trump knows something about the economy others don't, including Mitt Romney.  Regardless of his poll numbers, people know Donald Trump is a billionaire who is an active businessman who knows something about economics.  They know he's done BIG economic things and they have an idea as to what the BIG things he's done are. 

4.  Trump is going to be himself in a campaign.  Romney was a stiff, pandering phony, and people don't like that.  People didn't like Romney.  And when Romney told little white lies, he was caught and he became less likable. 

5.  The nuttiness of the GOP base caused Romney to have to run away from his signature achievement, Romneycare, for political reasons; indeed, it caused him to almost pretend that he never was Governor of Massachusetts.  Think for a minute of what a handicap that is; when you do something rare and special and then can't use it to advance yourself.  Not too many pols have found themselves in the position Romney was on Romneycare.

[Devils30]

Don't spend that much time convincing yourself Trump would win anywhere over 191 electoral votes. It ain't happening. The guy is a complete clown and never will win the nomination, much less the presidency. It's fun to think about but Trump is not serious.

[Simfan34]

No experience in public office -- landslide loss.

What an insult to the Supreme Allied Commander.

[RRProgressive]

[Kingpoleon]

Toss-Up States:

- Georgia
- Missouri
- Indiana
- Montana
- South Carolina

Of these, I expect the first three to lean-Clinton and the last two to lean-Trump.

Hillary Clinton(D-NY)/Cory Booker(D-NJ) - 54.1%
Donald Trump(R-NY)/Rush Limbaugh(R-FL) - 41.1%
Other: 4.8%
Placeholder: 0.1%

[Sir Mohamed]

Why does anyone think Hillary would win Arkansas? I think it's impossible, even against a weak Republican. AK is a deep red state; Mitt carried it by over 60% in 2012.
If Hillary is elected, she will follow Obama's electoral path to the White House, not Bill Clinton's.

[emcee0]

Hillary would win Utah and Wyoming before she wins NE-03 Colorado.

[The Mikado]

Clinton 416-122

...You know, I'd move Kentucky back into the GOP column, but otherwise I'm not sure this map is really all that outlandish in Clinton v. Trump.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

[DS0816]

Why does anyone think Hillary would win Arkansas? I think it's impossible, even against a weak Republican. AK is a deep red state; Mitt carried it by over 60% in 2012.
If Hillary is elected, she will follow Obama's electoral path to the White House, not Bill Clinton's.

A winning party would have to carry around 40 states to win on turf tilting (or even defaulting) to the opposition party.

You know this.

I know this.

But, there are numerous forum posters missing the Old Map of the winning Republicans and the winning Democrats.

Arkansas is one of the ten worst states, historically, for its record of backing presidential winners. Four of the Old Confederacy's eleven states occupy the ten worst-performing slots (which, by the way, includes both Texas and Georgia).

The Republicans, who now have their base in states like Arkansas, are welcome to enjoy their Current Map.

[Kingpoleon]

Why does anyone think Hillary would win Arkansas? I think it's impossible, even against a weak Republican. AK is a deep red state; Mitt carried it by over 60% in 2012.
If Hillary is elected, she will follow Obama's electoral path to the White House, not Bill Clinton's.

It's AR. AK is Alaska.

[Brittain33]

If somehow Trump won the nomination--and I don't know how that would happen--it would be a 50-state sweep for Clinton with epically low turnout in the safe Republican states.

[dudeabides]

Trump, on the other hand, would have advisors, but he'd know how to challenge them and override them. 

It's this simple:  The greater the concern about the economy, the more traction Donald Trump can muster up. 

How'd that go for Romney?

Not well, but it went poorly for Romney for reasons that don't apply to Trump:

1.  Romney ran on a false narrative as a "job creator".  As the campaign progressed, it became clear that Romney was not a "job creator" or even a "job saver"; he was a leveraged buyout wealth creator who made money for his clients, but who also caused plant closings and job losses.

2.  Romney's true narrative was that of a guy who was able to analyze difficult situations, come up with financial solutions for troubled companies and force people and organizations whose extravagance had brought them to near-ruin to live within their means.  This narrative, laid out in the CHICAGO TRIBUNE's primary endorsement of Romney, was never heard in the campaign.  This competence-based appeal would have been a more proper segue into the issue of entitlements.  Instead, Romney's "job creator" claims were demolished, and his way of addressing entitlement spending was his infamous 47% comments.

3.  People are far more convinced that Donald Trump knows something about the economy others don't, including Mitt Romney.  Regardless of his poll numbers, people know Donald Trump is a billionaire who is an active businessman who knows something about economics.  They know he's done BIG economic things and they have an idea as to what the BIG things he's done are. 

4.  Trump is going to be himself in a campaign.  Romney was a stiff, pandering phony, and people don't like that.  People didn't like Romney.  And when Romney told little white lies, he was caught and he became less likable. 

5.  The nuttiness of the GOP base caused Romney to have to run away from his signature achievement, Romneycare, for political reasons; indeed, it caused him to almost pretend that he never was Governor of Massachusetts.  Think for a minute of what a handicap that is; when you do something rare and special and then can't use it to advance yourself.  Not too many pols have found themselves in the position Romney was on Romneycare.

1. Mitt Romney helped create thousands of jobs because he knew the business world, the economy, and how to succeed. Despite coming from a wealthy family, he didn't go into business using his father's wealth.

By contrast, Donald Trump did use his father's wealth and went into bankruptcy four times. He relied on government subsidies / corporate welfare to succeed. He hired some good advisers, yes. But he is purely a showman, not a real doer.

2. Donald Trump has been even more vague than Mitt Romney. I actually agree with you here that Romney wasn't bold, it was a contributing factor to his loss.

3. No, people are not convinced Donald Trump knows something about the economy, because he doesn't. His support is coming from folks who are upset at the political establishment and illegal immigration.

4. I can't argue with you here. But people dislike Trump far more than Romney.

5. Romneycare > Trump's single payer health care system support

[Higgs]

Realistically I think this is the map

Clinton - 385 EV
Trump - 153 EV

[Panhandle Progressive]

Trump 272
Clinton 266

I see Trump attractive in CO and NV.  NV is a place where Trump wannabes go all the time, and CO is, I believe, on a bit of a rightward swing.  I also see OH and NH going for Trump. 

In truth, I think that the map can be expanded widely either way.  Trump may be a huge bust and put off folks in MO, NC, and even GA, AR, and AZ.  On the other hand, I can see Trump carrying NJ, CT, and PA under certain circumstances, and even IL.  These states are desperate for economic turnaround, and Trump, IMO, has credibility here in ways that other Republicans never have had.  Picking OH for Trump is a bit risky, but they're turning toward the GOP and Trump's a bit of a protectionist.

Trump's a wild card; his nomination would do the most to jar the electoral map.  Which way he'd jar it is not clear.  But he would stand out in ways that no other candidate would.  I think folks here are underrating Trump's upside.

You can't be serious. I'm sure Trump would lose both CO and NV. If Trump was nominated he would be destroyed in the general. This would be similar to the states Trump could expect to win.
https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1964&off=0&f=1

[cwt]

Bump

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

GJ, Fuzzy Bear.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Don't spend that much time convincing yourself Trump would win anywhere over 191 electoral votes. It ain't happening. The guy is a complete clown and never will win the nomination, much less the presidency. It's fun to think about but Trump is not serious.

If somehow Trump won the nomination--and I don't know how that would happen--it would be a 50-state sweep for Clinton with epically low turnout in the safe Republican states.

"Delete your accounts" @ Hillary Rodham Clinton

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Updated version:

Clinton/Kaine: 407 EV
Trump/Some idiot: 133 EV

Trump 272
Clinton 266

Lololololol

You, too!

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

Trump, on the other hand, would have advisors, but he'd know how to challenge them and override them. 

It's this simple:  The greater the concern about the economy, the more traction Donald Trump can muster up. 

How'd that go for Romney?

Not well, but it went poorly for Romney for reasons that don't apply to Trump:

1.  Romney ran on a false narrative as a "job creator".  As the campaign progressed, it became clear that Romney was not a "job creator" or even a "job saver"; he was a leveraged buyout wealth creator who made money for his clients, but who also caused plant closings and job losses.

2.  Romney's true narrative was that of a guy who was able to analyze difficult situations, come up with financial solutions for troubled companies and force people and organizations whose extravagance had brought them to near-ruin to live within their means.  This narrative, laid out in the CHICAGO TRIBUNE's primary endorsement of Romney, was never heard in the campaign.  This competence-based appeal would have been a more proper segue into the issue of entitlements.  Instead, Romney's "job creator" claims were demolished, and his way of addressing entitlement spending was his infamous 47% comments.

3.  People are far more convinced that Donald Trump knows something about the economy others don't, including Mitt Romney.  Regardless of his poll numbers, people know Donald Trump is a billionaire who is an active businessman who knows something about economics.  They know he's done BIG economic things and they have an idea as to what the BIG things he's done are. 

4.  Trump is going to be himself in a campaign.  Romney was a stiff, pandering phony, and people don't like that.  People didn't like Romney.  And when Romney told little white lies, he was caught and he became less likable. 

5.  The nuttiness of the GOP base caused Romney to have to run away from his signature achievement, Romneycare, for political reasons; indeed, it caused him to almost pretend that he never was Governor of Massachusetts.  Think for a minute of what a handicap that is; when you do something rare and special and then can't use it to advance yourself.  Not too many pols have found themselves in the position Romney was on Romneycare.

1. Mitt Romney helped create thousands of jobs because he knew the business world, the economy, and how to succeed. Despite coming from a wealthy family, he didn't go into business using his father's wealth.

By contrast, Donald Trump did use his father's wealth and went into bankruptcy four times. He relied on government subsidies / corporate welfare to succeed. He hired some good advisers, yes. But he is purely a showman, not a real doer.

2. Donald Trump has been even more vague than Mitt Romney. I actually agree with you here that Romney wasn't bold, it was a contributing factor to his loss.

3. No, people are not convinced Donald Trump knows something about the economy, because he doesn't. His support is coming from folks who are upset at the political establishment and illegal immigration.

4. I can't argue with you here. But people dislike Trump far more than Romney.

5. Romneycare > Trump's single payer health care system support

I can't sleep. so I chose to bump a thread where dudeabides posted in.

This thread really is kind of hilarious, given what has transpired.  I'm amazed as to how so many didn't see Trump coming and are still in Trump Denial.

[Cold War Liberal]

Clinton 503 61%
Trump 35 38%

Oops