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.

[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%.

[Arbitrage1980]

Most likely, none. Possibly Virginia, Colorado, Nevada and New Hampshire. Rubio almost certainly would not have replicated Trump's success across the Midwest and PA.

People here are acting like Rubio would do better because he's a "moderate" but that is a dubious assertion. Rubio is a Koch brothers guy through and through on every economic issue. Trump held strong capitalist views as well, but he mixed in populism with a willingness to get the government more involved in infrastructure and protecting fighting outsourcing. Rubio supports an outright ban on abortion WITH NO EXCEPTIONS, a position that the overwhelming majority of Americans reject. Especially running against a woman, that would have been a recipe for disaster. According to every exit poll, Trump had his best performance among voters who listed immigration as their top concern. Rubio would not have gotten that. If anything, his gang of 8 amnesty bill (written in his first term after he swore he was against amnesty in 2010), would have dampened conservative and right wing populist turnout for him.

I think the most realistic Rubio vs Clinton race sees him winning all of the Romney states + Florida.

Rubio is certainly more conservative than Trump, no doubt. But likability matters, and he had it in spades. All the head-to-head polls showed Rubio beating Hillary. Rubio would have done better than Trump with latinos and college whites. Hillary lost because she could not turn out the Obama coalition. Trump received fewer votes in WI than Romney, fewer votes in MI and OH than Bush 04.

[Arbitrage1980]

Most likely, none. Possibly Virginia, Colorado, Nevada and New Hampshire. Rubio almost certainly would not have replicated Trump's success across the Midwest and PA.

People here are acting like Rubio would do better because he's a "moderate" but that is a dubious assertion. Rubio is a Koch brothers guy through and through on every economic issue. Trump held strong capitalist views as well, but he mixed in populism with a willingness to get the government more involved in infrastructure and protecting fighting outsourcing. Rubio supports an outright ban on abortion WITH NO EXCEPTIONS, a position that the overwhelming majority of Americans reject. Especially running against a woman, that would have been a recipe for disaster. According to every exit poll, Trump had his best performance among voters who listed immigration as their top concern. Rubio would not have gotten that. If anything, his gang of 8 amnesty bill (written in his first term after he swore he was against amnesty in 2010), would have dampened conservative and right wing populist turnout for him.

I think the most realistic Rubio vs Clinton race sees him winning all of the Romney states + Florida.

[Arbitrage1980]

I don't think Rubio would have won WI and ME02 because he would have been weaker than Trump with working class whites but agree with the rest of it. I think Rubio could have won MN by doing well in the twin cities and the suburbs.

No doubt that Rubio would have won the national popular vote as well.