Clinton vs Palin
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 26, 2024, 03:56:34 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Clinton vs Palin		 « previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Clinton vs Palin  (Read 823 times)
Da2017
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,475
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.00, S: -5.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 18, 2017, 12:52:14 AM »
« edited: February 18, 2017, 01:04:57 AM by Da2017 »
Who would win had the election been between Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin? How would Sarah Palin fare in the midwest? Posted twice by mistake.
Logged
Ronnie
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,993
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2017, 01:10:49 AM »
« Edited: February 18, 2017, 01:17:37 AM by Ronnie »
Clinton would have won because Palin would not have been able to harness white male rage as well as Trump did.  And I don't think she would have done any better with women.
Logged
AGA
Atlas Politician
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,289
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -5.39

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2017, 01:28:31 AM »
Clinton landslide.
Logged
Liberalrocks
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,931
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -4.35

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 19, 2017, 02:41:55 PM »
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,934


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 19, 2017, 02:49:45 PM »
Palin would win Ohio, Florida, Iowa, and possibly MN, PA, and WI.
Logged
The_Doctor
SilentCal1924
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,272


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 19, 2017, 02:53:24 PM »
She would beat Hillary in 2016. With a national campaign under her belt and the governorship of Alaska behind her, she would've probably won New Hampshire plus the Trump States and possibly Minnesota.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,934


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 19, 2017, 03:17:19 PM »
Quote from: TD on February 19, 2017, 02:53:24 PM
She would beat Hillary in 2016. With a national campaign under her belt and the governorship of Alaska behind her, she would've probably won New Hampshire plus the Trump States and possibly Minnesota.

-She'd be a terrible fit for NH (worse than Trump), but an OK fit for Minnesota.
Logged
Pericles
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,114


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2017, 03:18:40 PM »
She's got all of the crazy and without Trump's strengths and is too extreme, plus she's a has-been.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,934


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: February 19, 2017, 03:27:13 PM »
Quote from: Pericles on February 19, 2017, 03:18:40 PM
She's got all of the crazy and without Trump's strengths and is too extreme, plus she's a has-been.

-2008 GOP candidates get a mulligan. Palin really isn't "too extreme" -she's nowhere near as conservative as Cruz.
Logged
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,721
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: February 21, 2017, 09:56:31 PM »
Palin's problem is that she's nothing more than a local politician who spent 1/2 a term as Governor of Alaska.  That's pretty skimpy experience, much less than Obama had, and without the education credentials or obvious intellect.  This sort of led me to think Hillary would win.  But 2016 was what it was, and in the words of my wonderful wife, who voted for Obama twice, when asked about Hillary:  "I think I even like Palin more than her (Clinton)."

I don't know that I could have brought myself to vote for Palin.  In THAT context, a Johnson/Weld vote would have been far more defensible.
Logged
Lachi
lok1999
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,351
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -1.06, S: -3.02

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: February 21, 2017, 09:59:03 PM »
Quote from: Eharding on February 19, 2017, 02:49:45 PM
Palin would win Ohio, Florida, Iowa, and possibly MN, PA, and WI.

LOL
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,864
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: February 21, 2017, 10:08:24 PM »
She would have performed about the same as Cruz would have.  It would be hard for Palin to tap into the voting base that made Trump competitive in OH, WI, MI, PA, MN, etc.
Logged
iratemoderate
Rookie
**
Posts: 84
United States


P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: February 28, 2017, 07:04:00 PM »

I apologize sincerely if I am in violation of the rules here, but how do you generate a mock map like this? I would love to know. Thanks! : )
Logged
iratemoderate
Rookie
**
Posts: 84
United States


P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: February 28, 2017, 07:26:35 PM »
Quote from: Del Tachi on February 21, 2017, 10:08:24 PM
She would have performed about the same as Cruz would have.  It would be hard for Palin to tap into the voting base that made Trump competitive in OH, WI, MI, PA, MN, etc.

Agreed. What Trump did so brilliantly—if perhaps unwittingly—was to convey a broad cultural conservatism as opposed to the more narrow social and religious conservatism represented by the likes of Santorum, Huckabee, and Cruz.

It was what allowed him to win by double-digits in both Alabama (42%, +19.9 lead) and Massachusetts (49%, +31.1) on the same day.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,934


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: March 01, 2017, 12:07:31 AM »
Fine.
Logged
Lachi
lok1999
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,351
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -1.06, S: -3.02

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: March 01, 2017, 02:17:51 AM »
You're deluded if you think Palin would come anywhere near. Clinton would win in a landslide. Sorry, the Tea Party faction just aren't popular anymore.
Logged
Santander
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,936
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: 4.00, S: 2.61


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: March 01, 2017, 02:59:12 PM »
Quote from: Ronnie on February 18, 2017, 01:10:49 AM
Clinton would have won because Palin would not have been able to harness white male rage as well as Trump did.  And I don't think she would have done any better with women.
I love Sarah Palin.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,934


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: March 01, 2017, 03:25:39 PM »
« Edited: March 01, 2017, 03:28:27 PM by Eharding »
Quote from: Lok1999 on March 01, 2017, 02:17:51 AM
You're deluded if you think Palin would come anywhere near. Clinton would win in a landslide. Sorry, the Tea Party faction just aren't popular anymore.

-Who was the runner-up in the GOP primaries? And are you seriously suggesting Trump wasn't the Tea Party favorite in the primaries?
Also, stop trying:
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=251207.msg5374823#msg5374823
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=239342.msg5126985#msg5126985
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=251200.msg5372572#msg5372572
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=251408.msg5376984#msg5376984
Just admit you don't know a thing about public opinion in America.
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 0.049 seconds with 12 queries.