Not Even Obama Could Have Defeated Trump in 2016

[Frodo]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/12/no-obama-probably-wouldnt-have-beaten-trump-214557

[AGA]

I don't think so. Clinton came quite close to winning the electoral college as the tipping point state (WI) was decided by less than a percentage point even though she had so many electability issues.

[Nym90]

Obama's favorability ratings were so much higher than Clinton's that it is very difficult to believe that he wouldn't have done at least 1 percent better in PA, MI, and WI.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Obama's favorability ratings were so much higher than Clinton's that it is very difficult to believe that he wouldn't have done at least 1 percent better in PA, MI, and WI.

[MT Treasurer]

Obama's favorability ratings were so much higher than Clinton's that it is very difficult to believe that he wouldn't have done at least 1 percent better in PA, MI, and WI.

This. Stop with the excuses already, she was just a godawful candidate. And Trump was not some unbeatable titan.

[RINO Tom]

Obama's favorability ratings were so much higher than Clinton's that it is very difficult to believe that he wouldn't have done at least 1 percent better in PA, MI, and WI.

This. Stop with the excuses already, she was just a godawful candidate. And Trump was not some unbeatable titan.

First, Trump was a terrible candidate who was an embarrassment to American politics and would lose to Hillary in a landslide ... now he's a juggernaut who mastered fake populism in a way no good-hearted Democrat could ever muster.  Common theme?  Protecting Hillary.

[Xing]

It's well documented that it's much easier to run against Obama when he's not on the ballot. Obama didn't suffer from many of the controversies that Clinton did, and I have no doubt that he would've done at least 1% better than her.

[JohnCA246]

Obama's favorability ratings were so much higher than Clinton's that it is very difficult to believe that he wouldn't have done at least 1 percent better in PA, MI, and WI.

[Nym90]

As badly as Clinton destroyed Trump in the debates, imagine how badly Obama would've beaten him.

[MT Treasurer]

The idea that Trump was the only Republican who would have been able to crack the BIG BAD BLUE WALL is pretty amusing. I don't see someone like Kasich (or even Rubio or Cruz, for that matter) losing Wisconsin either. His victory map probably would have resembled Ron Johnson's victory in the Senate race (with Kasich doing a lot better in the suburbs but maybe slightly worse in the traditionally Democratic rural areas).

People really underestimate how many Republicans and Independents only reluctantly voted for Trump because of the Supreme Court and issues like abortion and gun rights and because they despise Clinton.

[Ljube]

Obama's favorability ratings were so much higher than Clinton's that it is very difficult to believe that he wouldn't have done at least 1 percent better in PA, MI, and WI.

This. Stop with the excuses already, she was just a godawful candidate. And Trump was not some unbeatable titan.

First, Trump was a terrible candidate who was an embarrassment to American politics and would lose to Hillary in a landslide ... now he's a juggernaut who mastered fake populism in a way no good-hearted Democrat could ever muster.  Common theme?  Protecting Hillary.

I always thought Trump was the best candidate the Republican Party had to offer this year.

[krazen1211]

Little Barry would have been thrashed.

[justfollowingtheelections]

Obama would have won easily.  Higher African-American turnout would have meant he wins Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin.  He would have also won Iowa.  He's also the incumbent, which makes people feel safe with him as president.  Landslide.

[Mr. Smith]

He might very well be right (though not for the right reasons).

Obama's approvals were artificially high because he got lame-ducked in 2014 and Hillary became the new chew-toy.

Without her, the focus would've stayed on him, and while I think he would've been far better at actually attacking and keeping Trump down, I also believe Congress would've been more giddy about endorsing Trump. #NeverTrump would've lacked any power of any sort at all. If there's one thing McConnell can do, it's discredit Obama.

And for all people scream, "muh minority turnout would be higher", I'm also certain that white turnout would've been higher too, and the suburbs would've been even more set against him.

So while Michigan and Pennsylvania would've stayed, not improbable for Ohio, Wisconsin [courtesy of Scott Walker], New Hampshire, Iowa, and Maine (except for CD-1) to flip and give a narrower EV win to Trump, while the PV margin likely would've stayed the same.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Obama's favorability ratings were so much higher than Clinton's that it is very difficult to believe that he wouldn't have done at least 1 percent better in PA, MI, and WI.

This. Stop with the excuses already, she was just a godawful candidate. And Trump was not some unbeatable titan.

First, Trump was a terrible candidate who was an embarrassment to American politics and would lose to Hillary in a landslide ... now he's a juggernaut who mastered fake populism in a way no good-hearted Democrat could ever muster.  Common theme?  Protecting Hillary.

[Pericles]

As badly as Clinton destroyed Trump in the debates, imagine how badly Obama would've beaten him.

Obama was crushed in the first debate of 2012.

[Wells]

As badly as Clinton destroyed Trump in the debates, imagine how badly Obama would've beaten him.

Obama was crushed in the first debate of 2012.

That's a good point, considering how he also badly lost the next two debates and Trump is just as good at debating as Romney.

[Santander]

If Hillary beat Obama in 2008, we wouldn't even have President Trump. She was not a terrible candidate, he was a terrible president who nobody should have hitched their political careers to.

[Pericles]

As badly as Clinton destroyed Trump in the debates, imagine how badly Obama would've beaten him.

Obama was crushed in the first debate of 2012.

That's a good point, considering how he also badly lost the next two debates and Trump is just as good at debating as Romney.

I wouldn't say that given Obama did OK in the second debate and won the third one. Trump was crushed in all 3 debates. He lacked the mental capacity to stay focused and on-message for 90 minutes.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Can we dispel with this fiction Trump was somehow inevitable?

[WMS]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Pointing out something important: from the perspective of the working class, the Affordable Care Act has been anything but. From personal experience, in the years since it was passed I've experienced nothing but unending price increases for both insurance and medical costs while at the same time experiencing nothing but unending cuts in medical benefits. And I'm one of the lucky ones, with a government job. Imagine what it's like for those in the private sector, squeezed between mandatory insurance costs but without any government support at all.

Perhaps, just perhaps, Vox and Company, working class anger might have had something to do with what a sh!tty deal the ACA was for them instead of just MUH RACIST WHITES!?

[The Mikado]

At the very least, Obama wouldn't have lost Michigan.

I tend to suspect he'd get 2012 minus Ohio and Iowa (possibly minus Florida as well, given that Florida might be the rare state that Clinton was a better fit for than him).

I think Obama-Trump would've ended up something like this:

An admittedly tight race, but increased black turnout in Detroit and Milwaukee and not losing rural WI and MI as badly, and parking Joe Biden in Scranton and Wilkes-Barre, produces a small but real Obama win.

[Beet]

Obama's favorability ratings were so much higher than Clinton's that it is very difficult to believe that he wouldn't have done at least 1 percent better in PA, MI, and WI.

Obama's favorability ratings only became high once the focus of partisanship shifted away from Obama towards Clinton. Prior to that, her favorability ratings (69% in early 2013) were higher than his (41% in 2013). If he were running for office this shift would never have happened.

[SCNCmod]

I think Obama/Biden would definitely have beat Trump.  Obama campaigns and motivates better than Hillary... which would've made the small difference in WI, MI, PA.  I also think there is an element of a very small percent of rural voters who are (maybe even subconsciously) not ready for a Female President (but would've voted for Obama)- even if they think she is qualified... this is granted a very small % ... but she lost PA,WI,MI by very small #'s.

I think the overall "most like-able" (not in actions, but general demeanor) candidate tends to win the President... Trump is considered generally "more likeable" than Hillary... But Obama is considered "more likeable" than Trump.

"generally most likable"...
HW Bush> Dukakis
Clinton> HW Bush
Clinton> Dole
Bush> Gore
Bush> Kerry
Obama> McCain
Obama> Romney
Trump> Hillary  (Obama> Trump)

[JustinTimeCuber]

Democrats are making excuses for Hillary. Even f***ing Martin O'Malley, who gathers approximately -3 people per rally, isn't covered in baggage and would have beaten Trump by a fair amount (probably 4 points or so nationally).