Powell v. Clinton - 1996
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 08:44:55 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs? (Moderator: Dereich)
  Powell v. Clinton - 1996
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Powell v. Clinton
#1
Powell
 
#2
Clinton
 
#3
Perot
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 30

Author Topic: Powell v. Clinton - 1996  (Read 3241 times)
Hermit
Guest
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 06, 2004, 02:19:43 PM »

Back in '96, there was some talk of trying to nominate Colin Powell as the challenger. Let's say that he does run, and is somehow nominated as well. Does he beat Clinton? If so, who runs against him in 2000?
Logged
The Dowager Mod
texasgurl
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,973
United States


Political Matrix
E: -9.48, S: -8.57

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 06, 2004, 03:03:43 PM »

Not a chance of beating bill.
Clinton would have still won the black vote.
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 06, 2004, 09:24:17 PM »

No win for Powell. He would probably break 200 electoral votes, but Powell woulkd lose. Clinton was unbeatable in 1996.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 06, 2004, 10:09:58 PM »

I'm not sure there would have been much of an ideological gap between these two.  But Clinton would've won easily.  Powell wouldn't get as many states as Dole, as places like Mississippi, South Carolina, etc, would've gone to  Clinton.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 06, 2004, 10:21:55 PM »

I'm not sure there would have been much of an ideological gap between these two.  But Clinton would've won easily.  Powell wouldn't get as many states as Dole, as places like Mississippi, South Carolina, etc, would've gone to  Clinton.

What makes you think that the south wouldn't have been ready to vote for a black Republican in 1996?  A black Democrat would have had zero chance to win the south and a black Republican would not have done well in the primaries, but I can't see any large scale white flight to Clinton.  At worst, those voters would have gone to Perot, and Powell would have easily been able to attract enough moderates from Clinton to make up the difference.  Powell would have done better than Dole, but not enough to win the election.


States in green are Powell's pickups over Dole.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 06, 2004, 10:33:33 PM »

I'm not sure there would have been much of an ideological gap between these two.  But Clinton would've won easily.  Powell wouldn't get as many states as Dole, as places like Mississippi, South Carolina, etc, would've gone to  Clinton.

What makes you think that the south wouldn't have been ready to vote for a black Republican in 1996?  A black Democrat would have had zero chance to win the south and a black Republican would not have done well in the primaries, but I can't see any large scale white flight to Clinton.  At worst, those voters would have gone to Perot, and Powell would have easily been able to attract enough moderates from Clinton to make up the difference.  Powell would have done better than Dole, but not enough to win the election.


States in green are Powell's pickups over Dole.

Well, you may be right, but I was assuming a white flight to Clinton.  I tend to assume a pretty high degree of racism in the South.  But you may be right that they'd go for Perot - still that could give Clinton a plurality in some additional Southern states.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 06, 2004, 11:01:41 PM »

Well, you may be right, but I was assuming a white flight to Clinton.  I tend to assume a pretty high degree of racism in the South.  But you may be right that they'd go for Perot - still that could give Clinton a plurality in some additional Southern states.

The only really close southern Republican state in the actual 1996 race was Georgia.  However, the racist rednecks in general tend to believe in the America First trade protectionism that was a central theme of Perot, so a good part of those who might abandon the Republicans because of the race of their candidate already had.
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,714
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 06, 2004, 11:09:48 PM »

but keep in mind that Powell was pro-choice, and many of those southern Republicans are single issue abortion voters. Phillips would've done a lot better and would've picked up those voters. So Clinton could've picked up a few southern states.
Logged
Nym90
nym90
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,260
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 06, 2004, 11:58:35 PM »

However, the racist rednecks in general tend to believe in the America First trade protectionism that was a central theme of Perot,

And you're calling them racist??

He said "the racist rednecks". That doesn't mean that all rednecks are racist; he's just talking about a certain group of rednecks, not all inclusive.
Logged
Vincent
azpol76
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 466
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 07, 2004, 12:04:08 AM »

but keep in mind that Powell was pro-choice, and many of those southern Republicans are single issue abortion voters. Phillips would've done a lot better and would've picked up those voters. So Clinton could've picked up a few southern states.

With a pro-choice Republican there probably would be a significant pro-life third party candidate. Perhaps Keyes or Buchanan(and I dont think he would run on a "safe-states" stratagey in this scenario.)
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 07, 2004, 07:23:25 PM »

There are both racist rednecks and non-racist rednecks.  There also plenty of racist Yankees, so the south is hardly the only place where the color of Powell's skin would cost him votes for no good reason.
Logged
NYGOP
nygop
Rookie
**
Posts: 142


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 07, 2004, 07:43:27 PM »

I'd vote POwell
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 07, 2004, 09:07:37 PM »

My map (and I amy be too nice to General Powell):



Bill Clinton/Al Gore: 314

Colin Powell/Orrin Hatch: 224
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,714
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 07, 2004, 09:18:40 PM »

I don't think Powell would be stupid enough to run with Hatch.
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 07, 2004, 09:54:34 PM »

I don't think Powell would be stupid enough to run with Hatch.

I originaly had Pete Wilson as his running mate when I wrote it down, but wasn't he sick in 1996 so he had to drop out of the Republican Primary?
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 07, 2004, 10:24:38 PM »

I ran this on President Forver, not what I expected to say the least:



Bill Clinton/Al Gore: 345 Electoral Votes; 48% of the popular vote

Colin Powell/Orian Hatch: 193 Electoral Votes; 40% of the popular vote

Ross Perot/Pat Choate: 0 Electoral Votes; 9% of the popular vote

Harry browne/Jo Jorgensen: 0 Electoral votes; 1% of the popular vote
Logged
they don't love you like i love you
BRTD
Atlas Prophet
*****
Posts: 112,714
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -6.50, S: -6.67

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 08, 2004, 12:00:05 AM »

Kemp would be a good running mate for him as well, except isn't Powell from New York as well? Of course they would have no chance at winning New York anyway, so being ineligible for the EVs wouldn't be an issue.

Otherwise I think Powell would want a conservative on the ticket to balance it out but not an extremist to scare off potential voters. So I'd bet on a conservative but not extremist senator from a swing state.
Logged
PBrunsel
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,537


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: October 08, 2004, 09:41:11 AM »

Kemp would be a good running mate for him as well, except isn't Powell from New York as well? Of course they would have no chance at winning New York anyway, so being ineligible for the EVs wouldn't be an issue.

Otherwise I think Powell would want a conservative on the ticket to balance it out but not an extremist to scare off potential voters. So I'd bet on a conservative but not extremist senator from a swing state.

Like Jim Talent
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.05 seconds with 14 queries.