How would Scott Walker have done against Hillary Clinton

[OSR stands with Israel]

I think Walker/Rubio would be ticket vs Hillay so I think this is the map

Walker/Rubio 306
Hillary/Kaine 232

[LLR]

Walker/Rubio is a terrible ticket for taking on Hillary, much worse than Trump. She'd easily win NV and PA, take ME-2, and likely win MN.

[Phony Moderate]

Would have given Hillary a chance to go more populist and hold onto PA, WI and MI, possibly OH and IA too.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Walker/Rubio is a terrible ticket for taking on Hillary, much worse than Trump. She'd easily win NV and PA, take ME-2, and likely win MN.

Revisionist history at its finest.

[Kringla Heimsins]

Walker/Rubio is a terrible ticket for taking on Hillary, much worse than Trump. She'd easily win NV and PA, take ME-2, and likely win MN.

Revisionist history at its finest.

I mean, that's what we all do here.

Imho, this would have been an extremely close election, both PV and EC-wise. Maybe on par with 2000, and everything would be decided by either FL or WI. Bonus if we get a SCOTUS decision to end the election.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Man, Walker would rally fire up the union votes for Hillary.

[MT Treasurer]

I think he would have won NC, IA, OH and WI for sure. But FL would have been very tough for him.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I think he would have won NC, IA, OH and WI for sure. But FL would have been very tough for him.

Even with Marco on the ticket

[Xing]

Obviously he would've won in a 400 EV landslide, and would've won Wisconsin by over 30, since he's beloved there. Trump's performance in this election is the new Republican floor, and muh THREE TIMES IN FOUR YEARS!

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Scott Walker would've been throttled in the Midwest big league.

I didn't know being a cuckservative had a direct correlation with lower intelligence!

[Figueira]

Probably one of the worst possible candidates along with Cruz. If Walker can win, anyone can.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Let's dispel with this fiction that Trump was a strong candidate.  He was the weakest we could have nominated (other than Christie, with his baggage).  It just so happened that Hillary was even weaker and that 2016 was always going to be a good Republican year.  Someone like Walker or Rubio would have won 350+ electoral votes and the popular vote by 5-7 points.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

Let's dispel with this fiction that Trump was a strong candidate.  He was the weakest we could have nominated (other than Christie, with his baggage).  It just so happened that Hillary was even weaker and that 2016 was always going to be a good Republican year.  Someone like Walker or Rubio would have won 350+ electoral votes and the popular vote by 5-7 points.

-No.

A Walker/Rubio ticket might have even lost Ohio (just like Romney did). However, it would probably have won Wisconsin.

[(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31]

Scott Walker would also have likely performed much worse than Donald Trump in Iowa (the state would have been very close had he been the nominee). He would have won Iowa by three points or so judging from his 2014 gubernatorial performance in rural Southwest Wisconsin, but the 2016 electorate is not the 2014 electorate.

[7,052,770]

Let's dispel with this fiction that Trump was a strong candidate.  He was the weakest we could have nominated (other than Christie, with his baggage).  It just so happened that Hillary was even weaker and that 2016 was always going to be a good Republican year.  Someone like Walker or Rubio would have won 350+ electoral votes and the popular vote by 5-7 points.

He was a strong candidate. He brought in several million people who wouldn't have voted if anyone else was the nominee, and even though the "establishment" Republicans and Christian Right didn't like him, the vast majority wound up voting for him anyway.

[GoTfan]

Scott Walker would also have likely performed much worse than Donald Trump in Iowa (the state would have been very close had he been the nominee). He would have won Iowa by three points or so judging from his 2014 gubernatorial performance in rural Southwest Wisconsin, but the 2016 electorate is not the 2014 electorate.

Thing is, it would've been very, very easy for Clinton to paint him as anti-labour. That alone would've locked up Michigan and Pennsylvania, as well as possibly Ohio.

[Nyvin]

Walker was a terrible candidate,  he flopped before the primaries even began!

WTF, how can anyone possibly think he'd win the general?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Let's dispel with this fiction that Trump was a strong candidate.  He was the weakest we could have nominated (other than Christie, with his baggage).  It just so happened that Hillary was even weaker and that 2016 was always going to be a good Republican year.  Someone like Walker or Rubio would have won 350+ electoral votes and the popular vote by 5-7 points.

No. Unlike other leading Republican candidates Trump was the one who capitalized on anti-establishment mood last year. Kasich, Cruz, Rubio, Walker would be just "another politicians". What normally would've been Trump's weakness was his strenght.

[ApatheticAustrian]

trump was weaker in total votes but stronger re: transformational votes.

stop kidding yourselves: scott walker could have earned more votes (possible) and still lose the election.

[Vosem]

Scott Walker would've been throttled in the Midwest big league.

I didn't know being a cuckservative had a direct correlation with lower intelligence!

...you know that Walker has run way ahead of Trump in the Midwest in every race he's ran, right? In fact in the more unionized part thereof, not less?

Anyway, Walker/Rubio would flip IA, OH, and FL comfortably, and WI almost certainly. That gets you to 269-269 right there. Depending on how Trump-specific the ME-2 swing was, maybe Walker carries that; otherwise, his best bet for a clean victory is probably an additional victory in NH, which I think would've been quite possible for him. Anyway, if he wins 269-269, he essentially becomes President anyway after a perfunctory January vote in the HoR. Faithless votes would probably have been cast but they wouldn't've affected the election seriously.

Guys. IA/WI trended Republican in 2014, with results very similar to those of 2016's, for regular Republican politicians. What happened in ME-2, perhaps, is Trump-specific. IA and OH would've voted for any Republican in 2016. MI was Trump-specific, and PA almost so, but neither of them were actually necessary to the victory.

EDIT: Incidentally, Walker could well have been stronger than Trump in MN, but that's questionable and also not really necessary to his win.

[ApatheticAustrian]

let's say there is a trend line.

there are politicans who can harm a trend...and politicans who can accelerate it.

HRC and trump both are accelerating figures and both pushed the trends which are existing inside of their parties.

you can say that HRC was weak in many ways...easily true....but the combination of her and trump kickstarted the southern urban democrat trend even more, which was also the first step of the weakening of the solid south in the 1950ies.

trump is a strong candidate in SOME ways....and a really weak one in others.

which means:

could easily have been that the trendline would have given ME-2 to a candidate Jeb too...and still let PA/WI/MI stay untouched.

[Mr. Smith]

Let's dispel with this fiction that Trump was a strong candidate.  He was the weakest we could have nominated (other than Christie, with his baggage).  It just so happened that Hillary was even weaker and that 2016 was always going to be a good Republican year.  Someone like Walker or Rubio would have won 350+ electoral votes and the popular vote by 5-7 points.

No one wanted strong candidates this cycle, they wanted attack dogs with strong messages to destroy the other.

Trump delivered, Clinton was the closest.

Walker could've been, I had him pegged originally because of this...then all he could come up with for Trump is saying he's The Apprentice like Obama...and that was it. So went the charisma factor.

[White Trash]

276-262

[Santander]

A college dropout career politician has no chance of becoming President. Hillary would've destroyed him.

[President Johnson]

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D-NY)/Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA): 297 EV. (49.04%)
Governor Scott Walker (R-WI)/Governor Nikki Haley (R-SC): 241 EV. (45.77%)