Clinton/Gore vs. Bush/Cheney in 2000

[A18]

Bush landslide, of course.

[A18]

We have some really delusional people on this board.

http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/poll000127.html

If Clinton could run for a third term in November, and he were matched against George W. Bush, the current front-runner for the Republican nomination, 42 percent of Americans say they’d vote for Clinton — 51 percent for Bush.

[A18]

None of that polling data is relevant. The question was who would have won if Clinton ran for a third term, and the obvious answer is Bush.

[A18]

To the voters in this poll: someone explain to me how Clinton could have won while losing the popular vote in that big of a landslide?

[A18]

Why are Clinton's other numbers so good if it's an outlier?

The Bush-Gore numbers included tons of Nader voters who switched to Gore at the end of the election cycle. That's not an issue here. Even if Clinton won all the undecided, he still would only be on par with Gore.

No, skybridge, you're a partisan hack. It's every Democratic map in this thread that is ridiculous, and shows how delusional the average poster on this board is.

[A18]

So you're willing to look at polls for approval ratings but not polls for the actual subject we're talking about, which is who would win  in an election between GWB and Clinton?

http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/poll000127.html
As he enters the last year of his presidency, most Americans say Bill Clinton’s done a fine job in office — and they’ll be glad to see him go.

A year from now:
Sorry to see him go: 39%
Glad to see him go: 54%

Approval ratings don't win elections. If 54% of the population wants to see you go, that doesn't speak to well for your re-election chances.

As for why the American people would elect Bush over Clinton, well, that's irrelevant to the simple fact that the poll shows they would.

Whatever his legacy, enough looks to be enough. If Clinton could run for a third term in November, and he were matched against George W. Bush, the current front-runner for the Republican nomination, 42 percent of Americans say they’d vote for Clinton — 51 percent for Bush.

Bush would probably get 54% of the vote or more.

[A18]

If in the unlikely even of Bush winning in 2000, 2004 will have seen Clinton defeat him handidly. It would be a straight battle between a competent former president and an incompetent incumbent. Simple

Unlikely event? A 10 point lead for Bush makes his election an unlikely event? A poll that says 54% of Americans will be happy to see Clinton go makes Bush's election an unlikely event? Uh, no.

Clinton would have been drilled on terrorism, and his integrity would immediately become an issue. He would have lost worse than Kerry, though perhaps not as bad as in 2000.

[A18]

No, skybridge, you're a partisan hack. It's every Democratic map in this thread that is ridiculous, and shows how delusional the average poster on this board is.

Bush wins Maryland and California?  You're on drugs.

Undecideds would likely break against the attempted three term incumbent, which gives Bush a greater than 10 point margin of victory.

[A18]

Hey pal, in case you didn't notice, I'm the one posting the relevant polling data. If 54% of the country wants to see Clinton go, that gives Bush an excellent shot at 54% of the vote or more (since only 39% will be sad). And I posted the actual head to head numbers as well, which give Bush an absolute majority and 9 point lead.

[A18]

The Bush-Gore numbers included tons of Nader voters who switched to Gore at the end of the election cycle. That's not an issue here. Even if Clinton won all the undecided, he still would only be on par with Gore.

On 2004, you're correct. Bush would absolutely defeat Clinton, no contest.

[A18]

Why would Clinton be the incumbent?

[A18]

On 2004, you're correct. Bush would absolutely defeat Clinton, no contest.

If freaking John Kerry came within striking distance of winning the election, why would Clinton have no chance?

Did you see the poll numbers I posted? Clinton would not have a chance because he's running for a third term. Kerry and Gore did not have that problem. Gore beat Bush in the popular vote, yet Clinton would have been crushed, according to the poll. That doesn't mean Gore is a better candidate in a generic race.

Actually, Jimmy Carter has a higher approval rating than Bill Clinton in the most recent Gallup poll. Granted, that was a couple years ago.