Who would be weakest against Clinton?

[Maxwell]

Between Walker and Bush. Rubio is a lightweight, but people love vague messages, and he is the most attractive outlet for a vague, American message.

[Torie]

There is always the "Nixon to China" effect with these things.  Walker has built up more goodwill with the GOP base, therefore he can more easily afford to move more to center in the general election without constantly worrying about his right flank.

Not sure he's politically skilled enough to pull that off though.

That's an understatement. He's good at giving speeches stating things in broad brush strokes. When nailed down to specifics, where he needs to demonstrate some depth of knowledge of an issue, and the competing considerations, he just falls apart. That at least is my perception so far.

[King]

I'm predicting a nice amount of sexist gaffes from Walker if he's the nominee.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I'm in the minority by saying Rubio. I just think he's a paper tiger.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Walker, due to the fact he doesnt have Latino roots. Jeb and Rubio will win FL and make a play for CO, due to this. But Latin community in CO and NV as well as Catholics in Pa, are a power play in this election.

[RFayette]

Jeb.  Walker's team can make him study policy issues in depth and he can appear more knowledgable, but Jeb can't change his last name ever.

[Orthogonian Society Treasurer]

Walker and Rubio can at least be counted on to carry the Romney 2012 states. The same can't be said about Jeb.

[dudeabides]

Hillary Clinton would be a strong general election candidate because she has her husband's last name, enthusiasm from the majority of the Democratic Party, and she'd be able to win a larger majority of the female vote, for obvious reasons. While she will win the black vote overwhelming, Republicans could gain a few points with black voters. The moderate vote (not to be confused with independents), the catholic vote, and the white working class vote will be up for grabs. Additionally, Clinton is often undisciplined on the campaign trail, and voters are not happy with the direction of the country under President Obama and the current congress.

So, how do I think she would do against the Republicans?

Jeb Bush has the very best chance of beating Hillary Clinton. His message, which so far has been about reform and stronger economic growth, resonates with a nation that has fallen on hard times for the last 7 years. His message on immigration reform resonates with hispanic voters and coupled with his economic message, hispanic outreach, and love for the hispanic commuynity, Jeb Bush would win over a number of hispanics who supported President Bush in 2000 & 2004, but then backed President Obama in 2008 & 2012. As a devout catholic, talking about compassion for the vulnerable, and as a defender of the pro-life position, Bush can win the catholic vote. He also can close the gap amongst white working class voters, and Bush probably would do the least bad, with the exception of Carly Fiorinia, with female voters. I would say Bush has about a 52% chance of victory in 2016 should he be nominated.

Scott Walker has appeal to white working class voters, especially in the midwest where he has been Governor. He also won in a blue state three times, but not a diverse blue state like New Jersey or California. He will face the same challenge Mitt Romney faced in 2012: he takes a hard line position on immigration reform, he has flip-flopped on some issues, and the Democrats will paint him as out of touch for his history with the unions. I'd give Walker a 35% chance of winning in 2016 if he's nominated.

Marco Rubio, on paper, has the same advantages in a general election as Jeb Bush. The problem, however, is Rubio has some skeletons in his closet, and he will be attacked as inexperienced. Additionally, Rubio is serving in Washington, a major weakness for him. But, given that he has many of the same advantages as Bush, I'd say Rubio's odds are 50/50 in a general election.

[JonathanSwift]

Hillary Clinton would be a strong general election candidate because she has her husband's last name, enthusiasm from the majority of the Democratic Party, and she'd be able to win a larger majority of the female vote, for obvious reasons. While she will win the black vote overwhelming, Republicans could gain a few points with black voters. The moderate vote (not to be confused with independents), the catholic vote, and the white working class vote will be up for grabs. Additionally, Clinton is often undisciplined on the campaign trail, and voters are not happy with the direction of the country under President Obama and the current congress.

So, how do I think she would do against the Republicans?

Jeb Bush has the very best chance of beating Hillary Clinton. His message, which so far has been about reform and stronger economic growth, resonates with a nation that has fallen on hard times for the last 7 years. His message on immigration reform resonates with hispanic voters and coupled with his economic message, hispanic outreach, and love for the hispanic commuynity, Jeb Bush would win over a number of hispanics who supported President Bush in 2000 & 2004, but then backed President Obama in 2008 & 2012. As a devout catholic, talking about compassion for the vulnerable, and as a defender of the pro-life position, Bush can win the catholic vote. He also can close the gap amongst white working class voters, and Bush probably would do the least bad, with the exception of Carly Fiorinia, with female voters. I would say Bush has about a 52% chance of victory in 2016 should he be nominated.

Scott Walker has appeal to white working class voters, especially in the midwest where he has been Governor. He also won in a blue state three times, but not a diverse blue state like New Jersey or California. He will face the same challenge Mitt Romney faced in 2012: he takes a hard line position on immigration reform, he has flip-flopped on some issues, and the Democrats will paint him as out of touch for his history with the unions. I'd give Walker a 35% chance of winning in 2016 if he's nominated.

Marco Rubio, on paper, has the same advantages in a general election as Jeb Bush. The problem, however, is Rubio has some skeletons in his closet, and he will be attacked as inexperienced. Additionally, Rubio is serving in Washington, a major weakness for him. But, given that he has many of the same advantages as Bush, I'd say Rubio's odds are 50/50 in a general election.

Intriguing. Please tell us about these skeletons.

[cinyc]

Walker, due to the fact he doesnt have Latino roots. Jeb and Rubio will win FL and make a play for CO, due to this. But Latin community in CO and NV as well as Catholics in Pa, are a power play in this election.

Contrary to popular beliefs, Latinos are not monolithic.  A Florida Cuban-American doesn't really share much except for language with a Colorado Mexican-American or New York Puerto Rican.  To think that Hispanics will reflexively vote for someone because they or their wife have some Hispanic heritage is a bit of a stretch.

I think Jeb Bush would be weakest against Clinton.  His last name is an albatross around his neck and he would not excite the conservative base to get out and vote the way Walker or Rubio might.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I think for so-called front-runners ... they're all pretty damn weak.

[PresidentTRUMP]

Walker would be the weakest.

Followed by Bush.

Rubio for so many reasons is the one and only candidate I believe the Clinton machine wants no part of in a general election.

[HAnnA MArin County]

Bush. Because he's a male version of her.

LOL

I choose D) all of the above.