Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2019, 01:27:55 pm
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Atlas Forum
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election (Moderators: TJ in Oregon, Virginiá)
  How would other Republicans have fared against Clinton in 2016? (search mode)
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: How would other Republicans have fared against Clinton in 2016?  (Read 1732 times)
Morningside Heights Millionaire
NYC Millennial Minority
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 832
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.58, S: -6.43

« on: November 25, 2018, 05:32:58 am »

Your OP is flawed. Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, and Jeb would all probably have lost. And while I hate to say it, I think Rand would also have lost. Of course, if you were forced to come up with a 'winning map' for those candidates, it would have looked like the ones you put up.

Cruz would probably win all the Safe R (Texas + all Trump states he won at a 10+ margin) states, but I can see him losing Florida. Maybe he still wins Ohio though.

Rubio and Kasich might win both Florida and Ohio, but I don't think they break past Colorado and Virginia and MI/WI/PA.

Jeb would probably even lose Florida.

What I like to tell people about these hypothetical scenarios is that they don't happen in some mental vacuum where months of real world campaigning don't occur. For instance, you can't take Kasich and his 'reasonable moderate' image from OTL, which he crafted to fill a niche to compensate for being a loser who didn't come close to winning the primary,  and apply that to a hypothetical Kasich GOP nominee. Kasich's image would have necessarily tilted to the right, like Romney's did, if he successfully won the GOP nomination. He ain't winning states like Oregon (according to Old School Republican's scenario) or Connecticut (according to OP's scenario).
Logged
Morningside Heights Millionaire
NYC Millennial Minority
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 832
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.58, S: -6.43

« Reply #1 on: November 26, 2018, 01:49:50 pm »

Most of them (thinking of Kasich, Walker, Rubio, etc. here) would have won, maybe even fairly easily. This little narrative that Trump was somehow the most "electable" Republican because of his "unique" strength in the Midwest who ran a flawless campaign is cute, but unfortunately it has always been nothing but baseless delusion on the part of hardcore Trumpists and bitter Clinton supporters.

bs
Logged
Morningside Heights Millionaire
NYC Millennial Minority
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 832
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.58, S: -6.43

« Reply #2 on: November 27, 2018, 02:35:28 pm »

Most of them (thinking of Kasich, Walker, Rubio, etc. here) would have won, maybe even fairly easily. This little narrative that Trump was somehow the most "electable" Republican because of his "unique" strength in the Midwest who ran a flawless campaign is cute, but unfortunately it has always been nothing but baseless delusion on the part of hardcore Trumpists and bitter Clinton supporters.

bs

LOL, it's not BS at all.  It's completely true.

I disagree
Logged
Morningside Heights Millionaire
NYC Millennial Minority
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 832
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.58, S: -6.43

« Reply #3 on: November 27, 2018, 03:31:52 pm »

Most of them (thinking of Kasich, Walker, Rubio, etc. here) would have won, maybe even fairly easily. This little narrative that Trump was somehow the most "electable" Republican because of his "unique" strength in the Midwest who ran a flawless campaign is cute, but unfortunately it has always been nothing but baseless delusion on the part of hardcore Trumpists and bitter Clinton supporters.

bs

LOL, it's not BS at all.  It's completely true.

I disagree

MT sang a very different tune during the primaries, he asserted that Trump was the most electable republican candidate alongside Kasich:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=276061.msg5885876#msg5885876

Well well well, what do we have here....thanks for letting me know uti2
Logged
Morningside Heights Millionaire
NYC Millennial Minority
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 832
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.58, S: -6.43

« Reply #4 on: November 27, 2018, 06:04:03 pm »

LOL, it's not BS at all.  It's completely true.

We’re arguing with people who live in their own little world/cult, with many of them being literal psychopaths. Case in point: that uti2 loser who appears in every thread of this kind to link to a few posts I had made years ago (of course taken out of context, and many not even meant to be taken seriously or made at a time when no one could have known how well-run Trump's GE campaign would be). He posts that link every time I (rightfully) claim that Trump wasn’t the most electable Republican. Imagine how many days/weeks it must have taken him to dig through a user's posting history like that, LMAO. I actually wouldn’t be surprised if he got paid to do it or if he had his own "MT Treasurer" folder in his basement.

did your New Hampshire ex leave you for a Drumpf supporter

edit: look guys...it's quite simple. We already had Establishment GOP vs Establishment DEM. That was 2012, and the D won easy peasy.
Logged
Morningside Heights Millionaire
NYC Millennial Minority
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 832
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.58, S: -6.43

« Reply #5 on: November 30, 2018, 07:24:04 pm »

My thought set on it has been if the democrats nominated anybody but Hillary and Trump was still the republican nominee, the democrats would win in a landslide. But I have reverse on the Hillary situation. I feel like if Hillary was still the democrat nominee, and any other republican would have won the nomination but Trump, then they would have won in a landslide

This is probably true, but people who were hardcore supporters of either candidate don't like to face that reality.

I dunno man, I think it's more like Democrats who hate Hillary for losing and Republicans who resent Trump for taking over, saying that their preferred candidates would do better. People have this incentive to paint Hillary as easier to beat than she actually was, partly because they want to big up Sanders or because they want to believe that Trump is DOA in 2020 or because they want to believe that their heroes like Kasich deserved the spot.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines