How would have Elizabeth Warren fared in the primary and general elections?

[The Arizonan]

Let's say that Elizabeth Warren decided that this was year to run for president, how would she have done?

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

I could have seen her winning.

[indysaff]

She would have killed it, because she's not Hillary Clinton.

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

If she won the primary, she could have overridden Trump's populist pandering.

[DrScholl]

You think white working class men would have voted for a woman? That's one of the reasons why Trump won, because he was seen as putting women in their place. I'm convinced that the Access Hollywood tape helped him, because it was pretty much a rallying call for white working class men. Besides, Warren is educated and that is even more of a threat to Trump's top demographic.

[Mr. Morden]

Narrow Dem Primary win, just barely enough to overcome Clinton's landslide in the South:

To me, the more interesting scenario would be if Clinton decided not to run at all, opening the field up for other candidates.  If Warren had run in that scenario, does she win the nomination easily?

[Mister Mets]

She probably would have won the primary, outperforming Sanders.

It's hard to say how she'd do in the General Election, partly because it might have altered the Republican race.

[ReaganLimbaugh]

Trump would have carved her up like a Christmas Turkey.  Next to Hillary, she is the poster child for the out of touch hypocrite elitist.  Take Hillary's outcome and add Virginia, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Maine, Colorado, Nevada & New Mexico.  Add 7 to 10% overall in the southern states.

[Beet]

She would have lost the primary. Even with Skill and Chance's map, it's a delegate loss given the margins. The party rally around Hillary in '13/'14 really blacked out the sun.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Trump would have carved her up like a Christmas Turkey.  Next to Hillary, she is the poster child for the out of touch hypocrite elitist.  Take Hillary's outcome and add Virginia, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Maine, Colorado, Nevada & New Mexico.  Add 7 to 10% overall in the southern states.

Trump would have called her "Pocahontas" all the way to November.  And it would have resonated.  She'd get tagged as a phony and a poser and Trump wouldn't let folks forget.

She'd not have Clinton's baggage, but she's too much the elitist academic to pull off Mary Elizabeth Lease.

[Mr. Morden]

She would have lost the primary. Even with Skill and Chance's map, it's a delegate loss given the margins. The party rally around Hillary in '13/'14 really blacked out the sun.

Again, the more realistic scenario would be if Clinton had declined to run, which opens the door to Warren and other Democratic candidates entering the race.

[rbt48]

I think she would have prevailed.  Yes, she is totally elitist, but without the history of wrongdoing that undid Clinton's walk to the White House.

[Figueira]

I don't know. She could have done a lot better or a lot worse than Clinton.

[PeteB]

Hard to say - I lean towards her losing to Trump.

She would have the advantage of having less skeletons in her closet, than Clinton, and of being a more motivational figure for the Democratic base. But she would appeal even less to middle class voters and Trump would have had a field day, painting her as a communist, Pocahontas, out of touch, etc. Still, if she was able to hold the blue collar vote in the Midwest, she may have done slightly better than Clinton, but I really do not think she could have won.

[Virginiá]

Hard to say - I lean towards her losing to Trump.

She would have the advantage of having less skeletons in her closet, than Clinton, and of being a more motivational figure for the Democratic base. But she would appeal even less to middle class voters and Trump would have had a field day, painting her as a communist, Pocahontas, out of touch, etc. Still, if she was able to hold the blue collar vote in the Midwest, she may have done slightly better than Clinton, but I really do not think she could have won.

The commie & 'Pocahontas' angle is a testament to how little there is to attack her with in comparison to the massive number of problems Trump created for himself. She is pretty well-liked, and would have commanded large margins among young voters/Millennials.

In terms of baggage, she is like the mirror opposite of Clinton. Without fbi investigations, emails, shady foundation reports and other baggage from 3 decades in the public eye, there would have been little for the media to focus on that would have been damaging on a scale to balance out Trump's never-ending issues. So all that is left is Trump self-immolating in a corner somewhere.

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

She's a little more appealing than Clinton but still kind of a nutjob. She probably would've won but by probably just those couple states that flipped (MI, WI, PA)

[‼realJohnEwards‼]

Hard to say - I lean towards her losing to Trump.

She would have the advantage of having less skeletons in her closet, than Clinton, and of being a more motivational figure for the Democratic base. But she would appeal even less to middle class voters and Trump would have had a field day, painting her as a communist, Pocahontas, out of touch, etc. Still, if she was able to hold the blue collar vote in the Midwest, she may have done slightly better than Clinton, but I really do not think she could have won.

The commie & 'Pocahontas' angle is a testament to how little there is to attack her with in comparison to the massive number of problems Trump created for himself. She is pretty well-liked, and would have commanded large margins among young voters/Millennials.

In terms of baggage, she is like the mirror opposite of Clinton. Without fbi investigations, emails, shady foundation reports and other baggage from 3 decades in the public eye, there would have been little for the media to focus on that would have been damaging on a scale to balance out Trump's never-ending issues. So all that is left is Trump self-immolating in a corner somewhere.

Yeah... people tend to forget that, though it doesn't matter now, if the election had been anywhere from the first debate to the FBI email, she would've won handily. If you don't believe me, look at all the poll numbers which she never recovered.

[fhtagn]

She would have probably won the primary, maybe won the general by a slim margin.

I would have loved to see the "Fauxcahontas" campaign ads though.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

She'd have gotten destroyed; let's be realistic.

Warren epitomizes the image of the self-righteous, stuck-up, holier-than-thou academic left that has pushed a ton of rural, white Americans away (even those who agree with Warren's principles). She always sounds like she's talking down to someone. Hillary Clinton, for all her faults, is infinitely more likeable than Warren. Read Lyin' Steve's long "autopsy" post for a better explanation.

Trump probably flips at least one additional blue state (Maine and maybe Minnesota) and wins the popular vote as well against Warren. I'd guess he also stands a good chance of being the first Republican in at least half a century to post a majority in Minnesota's Iron Range (where he improved dramatically upon Mitt Romney's performance) including winning St. Louis County, MN, where Obama was over 80% in 2012.

I also don't see a lot of the wealthy suburb areas that broke for Clinton (Kane, DuPage, Lake counties in Illinois come to mind) voting for someone as far left as Warren, so the county maps would change quite a bit, and states with large suburban populations would swing right (so Georgia would likely be called much earlier than it was this year since there's no way Cobb and Gwinnett Counties would vote Warren).