2008: Which Republican, if any, could have won the presidency?

[TML]

Were there any Republican candidates who could have won the 2008 election, or were the Republicans doomed regardless of who they nominated?

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

You'd have to avoid the recession or have Kerry win 2004. Otherwise, no.

[Jaguar4life]

Ron Paul or in a longshot Alan Keyes

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Ron Paul or in a longshot Alan Keyes

I'm sure Obama would have been terrified of running against the guy he beat by 43 points 4 years before.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Republicans actually over performed in 2008,as  with conditions as they were the gop should not have gotten over 140 electoral votes, and instead thy got 173. That means the GOP did better electorally in 2008 then they did in 1992 despite the conditions in 2008 being more unfavorable to the gop then in 1992 .

Since 1968 , this is my list on if the losing party over performed over under performed, or did around where they would have expected to(I am not taking to account the candidates here)


1968: Over Performed (No way Humphrey should have been that close to winning)

1972: Under Performed(They should have won around 100 electoral votes this year, seeing that nixon wasnt that popular , and the economy wasnt doing that well)

1976: Around the Same(with mixed conditions in the country , and the president approval being mixed this election always was going to be a close one, and the election was likely going to be won by the dems narrowly due to Ford's Pardon)

1980: Under Performed(Carter got less electoral votes then Hoover did in 1932 and while the country was in terrible shape in 1980 it was no where near as bad of a shape as it was in 1932)

1984: Around the Same(Reagan was super popular , the country was clearly in better shape then it was in 1980, the country wasnt that divided back then as now so this election was always going to result in a massive landslide for Reagan)

1988: Under Performed(After being out of office for 8 years, the party out of power should be able to get more then 112 electoral votes)

1992: Under performed(The country was not in that bad of a shape, the cold war ended under gop rule, and the economy was improving by 1992. While Bush wouldnt have won he should have won at least 210 electoral votes , instead of doing worse then McCain 2008 electorally)

1996: Over Performed( Clinton was popular, and the country was clearly in great shape , there was no reason the GOP should have won more then 140 electoral votes this year)

2000: Under Performed(With the economy being in such good shape, and there being no foreign policy crises , Democrats should have won this election)

2004: Around the Same(With the country being in mixed shape, and being very polarized due to the Iraq War in 2004 this election was always going to be close but since the GOP was in office for  one term this election was likely going to be GOP wins in a close race)

2008:Over Performed (With Bush approval in the 20s, the US being involved in an unpopular war, and the economy crashing two months before the election there was no reason the GOP should have won more then 140 electoral votes)

2012: Under Performed(With the country still being in pretty bad shape economically , this election likely should have been as close as 2000 ,  instead Obama won pretty handily )

2016: Around the Same(With the country conditions still being in mixed shape after 8 years this election was likely going to be won by the GOP and they did)

[UWS]

I think John McCain should have selected Mitt Romney as his running mate, which would have brought economic credibility for the Republican ticket at a time of economic crisis due to Romney's business experience and ability to create jobs.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I think John McCain should have selected Mitt Romney as his running mate, which would have brought economic credibility for the Republican ticket at a time of economic crisis due to Romney's business experience and ability to create jobs.

Democrats would've hammered him on outsourcing.

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

You'd have to avoid the recession or have Kerry win 2004. Otherwise, no.

Bush was still pretty unpopular even before the recession. I say no recession plus Bush gets bin Laden might've given the GOP a fighting chance, but it was never going to be easy.

[Medal506]

If anyone other than Obama was the nominee then yes any Republican other than McCain could have been elected president. I think Huckabee was probably the most electable though

[mvd10]

No Republican could have succeeded Bush in 2008. Whichever party was in office in 2008 was seriously screwed. I don't think anyone would have done better than McCain (McCain probably would have done better with a different VP though).

[Kingpoleon]

Perhaps some weird Gary Johnson/John Huntsman ticket...

[Lord Admirale]

Rudy Giuliani.

[Sir Mohamed]

NOTA.

[SingingAnalyst]

I think John McCain should have selected Mitt Romney as his running mate, which would have brought economic credibility for the Republican ticket at a time of economic crisis due to Romney's business experience and ability to create jobs.

Democrats would've hammered him on outsourcing.

Instead, Tina Fey immediately became a celebrity and a household name. I questioned the choice of Sarah Palin from the start.

[NHI]

Rudy

[RC (a la Frémont)]

I think McCain could have beaten Hillary Clinton, if she was the Democratic nominee. Clinton would've had less experience, though less scandals, running in 2008. Her primary tactics might have caused some Obama supporters to defect. It would be close, perhaps depending on Clinton's VP pick.

Dem: 261
Rep: 257
Ohio decides the race

I believe you're wrong on this one, though I agree that she may have lost Nevada, Colorado, and Arizona. Clinton would probably win Florida, Virginia, and Missouri. Results would vary depending on if she picked Evan Bayh or Tim Kaine.