1996 with Alexander/McCain as Republican ticket
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:08:06 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs?
  Alternative Elections (Moderator: Dereich)
  1996 with Alexander/McCain as Republican ticket
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Who do you vote for / Who Wins?
#1
Alexander/Alexander
 
#2
Alexander/Clinton
 
#3
Alexander/Perot
 
#4
Clinton/Alexander
 
#5
Clinton/Clinton
 
#6
Clinton/Perot
 
#7
Perot/Alexander
 
#8
Perot/Clinton
 
#9
Perot/Perot
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 40

Author Topic: 1996 with Alexander/McCain as Republican ticket  (Read 6391 times)
DanielX
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,126
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 17, 2005, 11:33:09 AM »

What happens? Bob Dole, for whatever reason, does not run for the 1996 Republican party nomination. After a contested primary,  Lamar Alexander, former Tennessee Governor and Secretary of Education, wins. He picks Sen. John McCain of Arizona as his runningmate.

I figure that this is a very good ticket for the Republicans to run. Alexander is a fairly popular Southerner who did rather well as Governor of Tennessee - and would be thus vastly better at winning the South then Dole or the elder Bush. McCain's a charismatic war veteran and a perceived moderate. Both Tennessee and Arizona went for Clinton in the real 1996.

Now, with Perot still in the race, Clinton is still most likely the victor, but it'll be much, much more competitive.
Logged
George W. Hobbes
Mr. Hobbes
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 962


Political Matrix
E: -0.38, S: 1.03

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 17, 2005, 10:45:56 PM »

Perot/Clinton.  However, with this match-up I'd say it's a fair assessment that Ross only wins 5% instead of 8%.
Logged
Smash255
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,445


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 17, 2005, 11:29:14 PM »

A little closer, but Clinton still wins with ease.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,612


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 17, 2005, 11:41:12 PM »

Logged
Ben Meyers
BenMeyers
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 933
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 5.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: June 18, 2005, 09:07:59 AM »


Give Nevada to the GOP and then I think it's pretty much accurate
Logged
Ronald Reagan
Spl2
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 292
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: June 20, 2005, 07:10:19 PM »

Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: July 11, 2005, 12:52:43 PM »

Alexander loses.  The End.  Smiley)
Logged
Lincoln Republican
Winfield
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,348


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: July 13, 2005, 10:31:16 PM »



Alexander/McCain          272
Clinton/Gore                  266
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: July 14, 2005, 04:25:33 PM »

Nobody could have beaten Clinton in 1996
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: July 17, 2005, 05:55:55 PM »

Nobody could have beaten Clinton in 1996

Didn't you use to say Specter could have beat Clinton?
Logged
WalterMitty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,572


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: July 17, 2005, 11:57:53 PM »

it would have been a close election.  alexander/mccain would have lost narrowly.

Logged
Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon
htmldon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,983
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.03, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: July 18, 2005, 01:35:28 AM »


Grrrrrrrrrr
Logged
Ebowed
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,597


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: 2.09

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: July 18, 2005, 01:54:07 AM »

Same results, just switch Kentucky, Tennessee, and Arizona.  These maps the Republicans have posted are laughably optimistic.
Logged
DanielX
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,126
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: July 18, 2005, 07:16:40 AM »

Same results, just switch Kentucky, Tennessee, and Arizona.  These maps the Republicans have posted are laughably optimistic.

On the contrary, I think Plummyman's result is the most realistic one so far. Winfield's, on the other hand, would require Perot not to run.
Logged
George W. Hobbes
Mr. Hobbes
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 962


Political Matrix
E: -0.38, S: 1.03

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: July 18, 2005, 07:36:27 PM »

Frankly, I think if Newt doesn't shut down the government because he's a crybaby, then I think the Republicans had a decent shot at winning back the White House in 1996.

(Also, if Clinton doesn't take Dick Morris' advice and sign the welfare reform bill, then the GOP certainly could win.)

Hmm...I'll have to work on a timeline for that.
Logged
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: July 27, 2005, 11:34:09 PM »

Had the Republicans not passe dwelfare a third time, and thus not allowed Clinton to sign it, he'd have lost by 10 points, and he signed it because Dick Morris' polls showed exactly that happenning.

Lamar is a bad candidate which is why he didn't win a primary.  He could not have won the White House in 1996.

Congratulations on picking a realistic running mate for Alexander, they both have strong ties to Mike Murphy (manager of Lamar '96 and McCain '00).  If you want to lose the GOP nomination, pick Mike Murphy to run your campaign.  McCain is a very realistic Lamar pick for VP though because of that tie.
Logged
Ben.
Ben
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,249


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: July 28, 2005, 07:08:42 AM »

it would have been a close election.  alexander/mccain would have lost narrowly.



I'd probably agree... Clinton would probably beat Alexander by 3-4 points, more than Bush beat Kerry by but less than Clinton beat Dole by in reality. I seem to remember that in “The Clinton Wars” Sidney Blumenthal said that after Colin Powel, Alexander was the candidate that the Clinton team where most worried about, and I think they where right to be worried, Alexander would have squeezed Perot’s vote significantly (down to bellow 5% I would expect), however the closer race would be picked up upon by apathetic Democratic voters and might well have allowed Clinton to push his vote share up by the 0.7% he needed to break 50% of the vote.

Facing a strong Alexander/ McCain GOP ticket would mean an improved republican performance and a disastrous result for Perot’s Reform Party ticket, but ultimately it would not have prevented Clinton from winning re-election by a respectable margin.



Bill Clinton/ Al Gore (Democrat): 348EV, 50%PV.             
Lamar Alexander/ John McCain (Republican): 190EV, 44%PV.
Ross Perot/ Pat Choate (Reform): 0EV, 4%PV.   
Logged
😥
andjey
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,510
Ukraine
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: June 18, 2018, 10:51:34 AM »

Clinton would have won those elections due to the presence of Perot's candidacy. As Perot had nominated and the elections were between Clinton / Gore and Alexander / McCain, Clinton would have lost in the close race
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.065 seconds with 15 queries.