2016 if Hillary were male

[cvparty]

well her background would probably be a whole lot different, idk if "he" would've married Bill

[Rookie Yinzer]

Hilliard Rodham would be boring and lifeless and wouldn't have had a popular former President to coat tail.

[Kingpoleon]

Lower female turnout causes Sanders to win Iowa and Nevada, allowing for much more early momentum.

Roger Rodham, former First Gentleman of Governor and later President Sally Clinton Rodham, Senator of New York, and Secretary of State, easily loses to the more inspiring Bernie Sanders.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

So much about how we respond to Hillary Clinton would be different, and so many of her big life choices would have been different too, that it's really just impossible to switch her gender on a dime for some sort of hypothetical. Goes without saying that she would have faced fewer obstacles. She benefits in some ways by being a woman, sure. But net-net, the obstacles trump the benefits.

Does that mean that this hypothetical person wins in 2016? Maybe not. On the flipside, it's also possible this person would have become the governor of Arkansas and been elected president in 1992, because he would have been less guarded and more at ease talking to people and showing his personality to press.

So...

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I still think being a woman was an actual advantage. Otherwise it would be just another white guy running.

[Co-Chair Bagel23]

Clinton would have won, and flipped PA, WI, MI, and FL, while fattening the margin nearly everywhere else that she won, and making her loss margins in Trump states skinnier. All unsubstantiated of course.

[super6646]

It would've probably made her chances even worse. Being a woman probably helped her in suburban counties in Virginia and Colorado with college educated white women. Take that out, and those two states could've been red.

[Dr. MB]

Zero change. Maybe a few counties. But the electoral map wouldn't change. If anything "he" would've had a greater chance of being beaten by Bernie in the primaries.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Probably loses the nomination. If he somehow makes it to the general, does worse.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

^^^jfern is absolutely right.

If it was so much easier being a male, why didn't she just un-trans-gender herself?

[Fuzzy Bear]

>implying Hillary's gender caused her downfall

I concur with the other posts comparing Mr. Hillary as another Michael Dukakis. Without being a woman, she's just an un-motivating and dull prepackaged politician with a dark record and a dirty past.

If she were male, Hilliard Rodham would likely not be the ex-spouse of a Governor and President.  If that were the case, such a person would likely not have had the Bill Clinton baggage to deal with, and likely would not have had a mysterious "foundation" that turned out to be a huge negative.

All of that is negated by the fact that being a female is what made her candidacy viable.  Let's say that the male Hillary's Health Care role in the Bill Clinton organization got her/him elected to the Senate from NY State in 2000.  And let's say that this Senator, Hilliard Rodham, was actually named Secretary of State.  What then?

Here, you MIGHT have a John Kerry.  Except that Kerry is a Forbes, married to the widow Heinz.  John Kerry MIGHT have won over Trump in 2016, but Kerry is another guy who can't help appearing elitist and making an untimely gaffe.  Hilliard Rodham also would be coming from a demographic that was already in the bag for the Democrats (being from New York).  I doubt such a candidate could be nominated, and I'm far from convinced that such a candidate would have held MI, WI, and PA in 2016. 

[Xing]

If Hillary's life had gone exactly the same way up to November 8th, 2016, it's likely that the election would've gone the same way. However, I do think that some of her "scandals" wouldn't have been as big of a deal to the media if she had been a man. They would've been par for the course, and she'd basically be seen as a pretty generic mainstream politician, rather than a horrible harpy that has to be "locked up."

[Lord Admirale]

Businessman Donald J. Trump (R-NY)/Governor Mike Pence (R-IN) - 380 EV, 52.6%
Mr. Hillary (D-NY)/Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA) - 158 EV, 44.9%

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Sexism was a factor last year, but there's the second side of a coin. The "first female nominee"/"breaking the glass celling" was a significant part of Hillary's victorious bid for a nomination.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Would Hilliard Rodham have even won the primaries? Thinking about it, her massive support among black voters was solely because of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. I think Bernie would have given him a run for his money if Sanders hadn't been so tone deaf in appealing to Southern African-Americans.

[Fuzzy Bear]

The votes of Southern African-Americans were delivered to Clinton by an incredibly effective political network of local leaders, church leaders, civil rights figures, who repeatedly emphasize the need for black voters to vote as a bloc and maintain solidarity in order to maximize their influence.  In this game, Hillary (and Bill) Clinton had all the power relationships, all the chips and IOUs, and a history of helping a lot of folks downballot over the years.

That's one thing I'll give Hillary; she cared about the condition of the Democratic Party, and did her share to try to keep it viable.  If only she got the message that her stepping aside was what the Democrats needed to win in 2016, we'd be talking about President Biden right now.

[West_Midlander]

I don't think a male Hillary would've won the primaries. And the 2008 primary would've been a way wider margin for Obama.