2000: What if the Dems would have nominated...

[Speed of Sound]

Jimmy Carter? LOL What do you think the map would look like?

[Lincoln Republican]

George W          519
Jimmy Carter        19

In 2000, America was looking for new leadership.  Jimmy Carter was, to put it mildly, past his prime.  Carter had a failed presidency.  America would not want a replay of his inept leadership.

To say the least, this would have been an easy win for George W.

[Speed of Sound]

George W          519
Jimmy Carter        19

In 2000, America was looking for new leadership.  Jimmy Carter was, to put it mildly, past his prime.  Carter had a failed presidency.  America would not want a replay of his inept leadership.

To say the least, this would have been an easy win for George W.

you dont think he'd win vermont? or NY? Or Cali?
i think he could've won one of these states

[Lincoln Republican]

George W          519
Jimmy Carter        19

In 2000, America was looking for new leadership.  Jimmy Carter was, to put it mildly, past his prime.  Carter had a failed presidency.  America would not want a replay of his inept leadership.

To say the least, this would have been an easy win for George W.

you dont think he'd win vermont? or NY? Or Cali?
i think he could've won one of these states

That is a possibility, given the liberal bent of those states.  However, my point is, Carter was a spent force at the end of his presidency, let alone in 2000. 
I do not think even normally liberal leaning states would entrust 4 more years to Carter, given his poor record, and completely uninspiring leadership.
Yes, one or two more states may have voted for Carter, but the overall result would still be a Bush landslide of historic proportions. 

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Obviously Carter would win NY  and probably a few other states.

[Speed of Sound]

George W          519
Jimmy Carter        19

In 2000, America was looking for new leadership.  Jimmy Carter was, to put it mildly, past his prime.  Carter had a failed presidency.  America would not want a replay of his inept leadership.

To say the least, this would have been an easy win for George W.

you dont think he'd win vermont? or NY? Or Cali?
i think he could've won one of these states

That is a possibility, given the liberal bent of those states.  However, my point is, Carter was a spent force at the end of his presidency, let alone in 2000. 
I do not think even normally liberal leaning states would entrust 4 more years to Carter, given his poor record, and completely uninspiring leadership.
Yes, one or two more states may have voted for Carter, but the overall result would still be a Bush landslide of historic proportions. 

i think he's liked more now than he was in 1980. Alot of people admire his volunteer work.

[The Dowager Mod]

Being nice to Carter.

[Akno21]

Being nice to Carter.

Georgia would not go for Carter in this day in age.

[The Dowager Mod]

I bet it could.
The man is a legend there.

[Adam Griffin]

George W. Bush: 330 EVs
Jimmy Carter: 208 EVs

Georgia would go to Carter, if not based on anything but his heritage. Georgia had pretty much slipped into its now traditional right-leaning voting style by the mid-1960s, and yet still gave Carter 56% of the vote in 1980 against Reagan's 40%. It would be close, but I believe that Georgia would lean Carter by at least 2 percentages points.

[Banana Republic]

I don't think there's any way California would go Carter.

[Adam Griffin]

I don't know for sure. However, Carter managed to get 47.57% of the vote in California in 1976 (more than any other Democratic candidate between the years of 1968-1988 while being a reliable Republican state; however, Dukakis got 47.56% in '88, being just .01% less ), which was pretty impressive considering California was pretty Republican-leaning at the time.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I don't know for sure. However, Carter managed to get 47.57% of the vote in California in 1976 (more than any other Democratic candidate between the years of 1968-1988 while being a reliable Republican state; however, Dukakis got 47.56% in '88, being just .01% less ), which was pretty impressive considering California was pretty Republican-leaning at the time.

Except that losing CA and VT like Dukakis did in 1988 looks pretty crappy when you look at the 1992- present results for those states.

[Adam Griffin]

True true. I was just trying to show how well Carter did in the state when it was Republican.

[Ronald Reagan]

Carter - 269
Bush/Cheney - 269
I wasn't planning on it being a tie.

[ChrisFromNJ]

So your scenario is based on Jimmy Carter running in 1976, winning that year, running for re-election in 1980, losing that year, and then running again 20 years later?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

[Albus Dumbledore]

they wouldn't

[DownWithTheLeft]

Nothing NJ likes more than incompetent old man