Which Hillary states would Rubio have won?

[Arbitrage1980]

If he had been the GOP nominee, Rubio would have outperformed Trump with college whites but underperformed with working class whites. Rubio could have won NH, VA, MN, CO, NV. He would have kept OH and IA, albeit his margin would have been smaller than Trump's. PA is a wild card; Rubio would have crushed it in the philly suburbs by winning Bucks and Chester counties but would have fallen behind Trump in the working class areas. He almost certainly would have lost MI and WI.

[Rookie Yinzer]

This is how I imagine a Rubio victory:

New Hampshire and Virginia are the only ones he would have flipped. I think stuff like the Access Hollywood tape cost Trump NH. Rubio clearly would have been disciplined enough to win there. Virginia would have been the tipping point state with a thin MOV for Rubio. A lot of the NOVA transients are Lean D but I think he could have done exceedingly well to overcome this. Since NOVA is usually the last part of the state to dump votes this (and Pennsylvania) keeps America up all night.

Colorado and Nevada would have been possible but I don't think he would have flipped it.

Hillary got the margins she needed in Philadelphia. Rubio would have undoubtedly did better than Trump in the suburbs but I don't think Hillary would have bled as much support as she did in Western PA, Luzerne, and Lackawanna with Rubio as her opponent. She wins PA by the same margin Trump did.

Hillary would have still had depressed turnout in Milwaukee and Detroit, but Rubio would not have mobilized the rural whites here like Trump did. Obama fatigue, Clinton scandals, and the state's shift to the right still keeps it too close for comfort. She wins Wisconsin by less than 1 percent and Michigan by 1.5.

[The Govanah Jake]

I doubt he wins Virginia though he could very likely win back New Hampshire.

[Mr. Smith]

Nevada and Colorado

He'd have lost Pennsylvania and Michigan though.

[twenty42]

Nevada, Colorado, and Wisconsin.

He'd have lost Pennsylvania and Michigan though.

Trump won WI.

[Mr. Smith]

Nevada, Colorado, and Wisconsin.

He'd have lost Pennsylvania and Michigan though.

Trump won WI.

...Whoops, brain fart.

I keep looking at the map like it's all still going on sometimes.

Anyway, Rubio gains in the West, keeps Trump's Wisconsin, but wins more on a Pat Tumor or Ron Johnson esque strategy.

He does worse in New Hampshire, and barely loses Virginia

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Loses WI, and ME-02; gains VA, NH, CO, NV, and NPV.

[bagelman]

Loses WI, and ME-02; gains VA, NH, CO, NV, and NPV.

Rubio is not flipping MI. I say he flips both WI and MN.

In fact, I see MI voting to the left of NM.

[JonHawk]

Honestly i don't see him winning any Hilary states, although maybe a coin toss with NH.

[bagelman]

[Pericles]

MN was only close because of Trump. Trump actually did quite well in Nevada, OTOH Rubio will do better with Hispanics. NH maybe, though he could lose it with less WWC support than Trump. VA is possible, a very winnable state for Rubio, though it partially depends on Hillary's VP pick. CO was the tipping-point state in 2012 and Rubio will do well with college-educated whites and Hispanics so he would win it. PA was tied for the tipping-point state, if Rubio does well enough in the suburbs he can win it. MI is lost. WI is tough but perhaps if Hillary goes down in a bigger loss he can take it.

[Anzeigenhauptmeister]

[Jeppe]

If Romney couldn't win Virginia in 2012, I don't think Rubio would've been able to either. NoVa was probably going to trend Democratic regardless of who the Republican nominee was.

[Strudelcutie4427]

Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Virginia.

[Matty]

Rubio would have won every state trump won.


Why would a white rural person vote for trump vs hillary, but vote for hillary vs rubio?

[mgop]

Rubio would have won every state trump won.


Why would a white rural person vote for trump vs hillary, but vote for hillary vs rubio?

they would not vote for hillary but many would stay at home rather than vote for rubio

[Arbitrage1980]

If Romney couldn't win Virginia in 2012, I don't think Rubio would've been able to either. NoVa was probably going to trend Democratic regardless of who the Republican nominee was.

Romney lost VA by 3.9% to a very popular incumbent President. Romney's social conservatism didn't play too well in NOVA either. He lost Fairfax County by 20.5% and traditional GOP stronghold Loudoun County by 5.5%. Rubio would have won Loudoun outright and lost Fairfax by 10-15%, which should be enough to carry the state. Keep in mind that in 2004 Bush won VA by 8.2% despite losing Fairfax by 7.2%.

Rubio resonates well in NOVA. He won that region handily against Trump in the GOP primary and his latino background, life story, youth, charisma, and pro-business policies are very much in line with NOVA.

[Arbitrage1980]

Rubio would have won every state trump won.


Why would a white rural person vote for trump vs hillary, but vote for hillary vs rubio?

It's about turnout and margin. The white working class had a massive turnout, and Trump won them by a whopping 39 points, a bigger margin than even Reagan 1984.

[Arbitrage1980]

Rubio would have easily won the national popular vote as well by losing CA by 15-20% instead of Trump's 30, losing IL by 10-15%, and winning TX by around 15%, GA by 8-10%, FL by 4-6%.

[TDAS04]

Maybe NH, MN, NV.

CO or VA? No.

[Pericles]

I'm doubtful Rubio would have won ME-2 or at least done as well there as it was the kind of district Romney lost by a  little ND Trump picked up with the Obama-Trump voters.

[uti2]

Rubio would have easily won the national popular vote as well by losing CA by 15-20% instead of Trump's 30, losing IL by 10-15%, and winning TX by around 15%, GA by 8-10%, FL by 4-6%.

Rubio was consistently tied in FL polling from day 1 vs. Hillary, while he was always up ~7 on murphy:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/fl/florida_rubio_vs_clinton-3553.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/senate/fl/florida_senate_rubio_vs_murphy-5222.html

Senate race =/ presidential.

[uti2]

If Romney couldn't win Virginia in 2012, I don't think Rubio would've been able to either. NoVa was probably going to trend Democratic regardless of who the Republican nominee was.

Romney lost VA by 3.9% to a very popular incumbent President. Romney's social conservatism didn't play too well in NOVA either. He lost Fairfax County by 20.5% and traditional GOP stronghold Loudoun County by 5.5%. Rubio would have won Loudoun outright and lost Fairfax by 10-15%, which should be enough to carry the state. Keep in mind that in 2004 Bush won VA by 8.2% despite losing Fairfax by 7.2%.

Rubio resonates well in NOVA. He won that region handily against Trump in the GOP primary and his latino background, life story, youth, charisma, and pro-business policies are very much in line with NOVA.

Rubio is more socially conservative than romney & the only reason why rubio did better than expected in VA primary was due to government worker Dem voters in Fairfax crossing over to vote for him to 'stop Trump', he doesn't necessarily have appeal in that region, they just wanted to 'Stop Trump'. This was widely reported in contemporary news stories.

Trump won every other VA county by 10%+ meeting the polling average, only reason Fairfax numbers were off was due to the dem crossovers. There were articles like this in the atlantic:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/02/why-liberals-should-vote-for-marco-rubio/471444/

+
http://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/clinton-trump-win-virginia-overall-rubio-wins-in-fairfax-county/article_4412522c-e031-11e5-88c2-6bdb7adf8580.html

Dukakis also was an immigrant with a life story, youth and 'charisma', how did he do?

[uti2]

More links on the D government workers in Fairfax and their strategic voting pattern:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/03/01/liberals-explain-why-theyre-strategically-voting-as-republicans/

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/Virginia-Election-Results-370707361.html

[Pericles]

Rubio would have easily won the national popular vote as well by losing CA by 15-20% instead of Trump's 30, losing IL by 10-15%, and winning TX by around 15%, GA by 8-10%, FL by 4-6%.

Rubio was consistently tied in FL polling from day 1 vs. Hillary, while he was always up ~7 on murphy:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/fl/florida_rubio_vs_clinton-3553.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/senate/fl/florida_senate_rubio_vs_murphy-5222.html

Senate race =/ presidential.

Hillary led Trump in Florida and nationwide by a large margin during the campaign but because she was very unpopular and ran a terrible campaign(not because Trump was popular!), she lost Florida and the election.