Talk Elections

Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion => Past Election What-ifs (US) => Topic started by: Skill and Chance on November 29, 2012, 05:05:04 pm



Title: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Skill and Chance on November 29, 2012, 05:05:04 pm
Which states would McCain pick up?  How close would it get?  I remember that RCP was showing an EV/PV split during the 1st week of September 2008.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Mr.Phips on November 29, 2012, 05:23:50 pm
McCain definately picks up Indiana and North Carolina, and NE-02.  Probably Florida too.  Ohio is probably the dividing line here.  Im not sure which way it would have gone. 


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: NHI on November 29, 2012, 06:10:21 pm
()
Obama/Biden: 311 (51.5%
McCain/Palin: 227 (47.7%)



Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Oldiesfreak1854 on November 29, 2012, 06:23:58 pm
McCain might have even won without the financial crisis.  On the day that it started he was leading in all the national polls.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Blackacre on December 01, 2012, 07:40:05 pm
Bush's low approval ratings, (which started with Katrina) Obama's historical nature, Sarah Palin, the unpopular Iraq War, and the rest of Bush's awful foreign policy would have given the win to Obama. Easily.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Sec. of State Superique on December 08, 2012, 07:20:56 am
I believe that Hillary would be the Nominee, not Obama.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Paul Kemp on December 10, 2012, 05:20:04 pm
McCain might have even won without the financial crisis.  On the day that it started he was leading in all the national polls.

Just like Mitt Romney!

I believe that Hillary would be the Nominee, not Obama.

Obama was the nominee before the financial crisis so no, she wouldn't have been.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Wherever you want to go, you can't go there! on December 20, 2012, 09:46:26 pm
McCain might have even won without the financial crisis.  On the day that it started he was leading in all the national polls.

Just like Mitt Romney!

I believe that Hillary would be the Nominee, not Obama.

Obama was the nominee before the financial crisis so no, she wouldn't have been.

I think its fair to say that McCain would have done the same as Romney if there was no crash. Heck, we didn't know how bad the crash was until everyone was fired or couldn't get a job that spring/summer. Unemployment was 6.8 on Election Day and at 8 by the time Obama took office...and by the end of that summer it got to 10. McCain would have probably lost Montana, Missouri and Georgia if we knew the gravity of what was happening then.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: tmthforu94 on December 20, 2012, 09:49:04 pm
McCain might have even won without the financial crisis.  On the day that it started he was leading in all the national polls.
Well, to be fair, that was right after the RNC.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: dudeabides on January 12, 2013, 01:04:17 am
Well, it depends.....

Obama/Biden (D) 52% 312 EV
McCain/Palin (R) 47% 226 EV
()

Obama/Biden (D) 51% 302 EV
McCain/Romney (R) 48% 236 EV
()


McCain/Huckabee (R) 50% 281 EV
Obama/Biden (D) 49% 257 EV
()


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: old timey villain on January 12, 2013, 01:16:35 am
Think about this.

Without the financial crisis, Obama wins by a smaller margin but the recession isn't as severe. Without the massive deleveraging of debt from the bailouts, the economy recovers much more quickly and in 2012 Obama wins in a landslide.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Likely Voter on January 22, 2013, 06:18:45 pm
McCain might have even won without the financial crisis.  On the day that it started he was leading in all the national polls.
Well, to be fair, that was right after the RNC.
And let's not forget it was before the Palin interviews with Katy Couric and Charlie Gibson (and subsequent SNL parodies).

I agree McCain would have held IN, NC, FL, NE2, but even without the financial collapse the economy had been slowing and the war in Iraq was very unpopular as was Bush. Country wanted a change.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Siloch on February 08, 2013, 04:21:15 pm
()

McCain would have won the electoral college, Obama would probably have won the popular vote.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Blackacre on February 08, 2013, 05:05:10 pm
()

McCain would have won the electoral college, Obama would probably have won the popular vote.

so you're saying that a Republican who loses the PV wins Michigan, Pennsylvania, "New Virginia", and Colorado?


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: morgieb on February 08, 2013, 05:13:45 pm
Obama doesn't carry North Carolina and Indiana and maybe not Ohio and Florida. Still, Obama wins.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Siloch on February 08, 2013, 06:02:46 pm
so you're saying that a Republican who loses the PV wins Michigan, Pennsylvania, "New Virginia", and Colorado?

Yes, my opinon is without the financial crisis, McCain does better with blue collar whites in Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania, he also narrowly wins Florida and North Carolina.

Virginia was a mistake, I should have made that 40% Dem.

Obama still gets huge minority turnout (which gives him Nevada and New Mexico) but in Michigan and Pennsylvania without winning as much blue collar whites he loses those states.

I think without the terrible economy more blue collar whites would have stuck with what they knew instead of going for Obama's change.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Blackacre on February 08, 2013, 06:07:57 pm
so you're saying that a Republican who loses the PV wins Michigan, Pennsylvania, "New Virginia", and Colorado?

Yes, my opinon is without the financial crisis, McCain does better with blue collar whites in Ohio, Michigan and Pennsylvania, he also narrowly wins Florida and North Carolina.

Virginia was a mistake, I should have made that 40% Dem.

Obama still gets huge minority turnout (which gives him Nevada and New Mexico) but in Michigan and Pennsylvania without winning as much blue collar whites he loses those states.

I think without the terrible economy more blue collar whites would have stuck with what they knew instead of going for Obama's change.

Ohio I can understand since that was a bush 2004 state, but Michigan and Pennsylvania are pretty reliably Democratic, and Pennsylvania especially is an "inelastic" state, so I don't see it flipping except in the case of a true landslide.

And Bush was unpopular anyway at that point, since Katrina.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Siloch on February 08, 2013, 06:27:51 pm
Ohio I can understand since that was a bush 2004 state, but Michigan and Pennsylvania are pretty reliably Democratic, and Pennsylvania especially is an "inelastic" state, so I don't see it flipping except in the case of a true landslide.

And Bush was unpopular anyway at that point, since Katrina.

Bush seriously underperformed in Michigan (he only got 52% in Macomb and 49 in Oakland) but he still got 47 percent of the vote, he came pretty close in Pennsylvania 50 to 48 I think. His approval ratings in 04 were pretty bad aswell.

McCain (more like Specter in 04) would be a much better candidate in Pennsylvania, he is more moderate and would have done better than Bush in the Philadelphia mainline suburbs, while the western part of Pennsylvania trended heavily to him even with the financial crisis.

I don't think these would have been landslide wins in either state, he would just have won enough of the blue collar vote to win them.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Blackacre on February 08, 2013, 06:42:57 pm
Ohio I can understand since that was a bush 2004 state, but Michigan and Pennsylvania are pretty reliably Democratic, and Pennsylvania especially is an "inelastic" state, so I don't see it flipping except in the case of a true landslide.

And Bush was unpopular anyway at that point, since Katrina.

Bush seriously underperformed in Michigan (he only got 52% in Macomb and 49 in Oakland) but he still got 47 percent of the vote, he came pretty close in Pennsylvania 50 to 48 I think. His approval ratings in 04 were pretty bad aswell.

McCain (more like Specter in 04) would be a much better candidate in Pennsylvania, he is more moderate and would have done better than Bush in the Philadelphia mainline suburbs, while the western part of Pennsylvania trended heavily to him even with the financial crisis.

I don't think these would have been landslide wins in either state, he would just have won enough of the blue collar vote to win them.

Thing about Pennsylvania is that it is an inelastic state, meaning there's not too many voters to swing. There's a reason why it's "fool's gold" for the GOP. A Republican can easily get 48-49 percent of the state's vote, but it's much, much harder to get 50%.

And any semblance of McCain's moderation would be offset by Sarah Palin, who he picked before the crash.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Siloch on February 08, 2013, 06:56:28 pm
Thing about Pennsylvania is that it is an inelastic state, meaning there's not too many voters to swing. There's a reason why it's "fool's gold" for the GOP. A Republican can easily get 48-49 percent of the state's vote, but it's much, much harder to get 50%.

And any semblance of McCain's moderation would be offset by Sarah Palin, who he picked before the crash.

Pennsylvania's traditional political makeup is changing though, for the past few cycles the western part of the state has been getting more Republican (Westmoreland County is good indicator of this), this area used to be staunchly Democratic, it didn't swing. Democrats have compensated by gaining in the mainline suburbs but these suburban voters can more easily be wooed to a more moderate GOP than the blue collar appalachians can to the increasinly liberal DNC.

I think PA is ripe for the taking for the GOP, they just need to appeal to suburban women more and they will easily win 50% of the vote in PA.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Blackacre on February 08, 2013, 07:42:25 pm
Thing about Pennsylvania is that it is an inelastic state, meaning there's not too many voters to swing. There's a reason why it's "fool's gold" for the GOP. A Republican can easily get 48-49 percent of the state's vote, but it's much, much harder to get 50%.

And any semblance of McCain's moderation would be offset by Sarah Palin, who he picked before the crash.

Pennsylvania's traditional political makeup is changing though, for the past few cycles the western part of the state has been getting more Republican (Westmoreland County is good indicator of this), this area used to be staunchly Democratic, it didn't swing. Democrats have compensated by gaining in the mainline suburbs but these suburban voters can more easily be wooed to a more moderate GOP than the blue collar appalachians can to the increasinly liberal DNC.

I think PA is ripe for the taking for the GOP, they just need to appeal to suburban women more and they will easily win 50% of the vote in PA.

I don't see the "increasingly liberal" DNC that you're talking about. I really don't. Appealing to suburban women won't help when you have Palin on the ticket, espousing views that are certainly not moderate. Pennsylvania might find itself in a position where it is more Republican than the country, for whatever reason, but 2008 is just not that year.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Siloch on February 08, 2013, 07:55:21 pm
I don't see the "increasingly liberal" DNC that you're talking about. I really don't.

With all due respect that is probably because you are a 17 year old Green Party supporter.

Appealing to suburban women won't help when you have Palin on the ticket, espousing views that are certainly not moderate. Pennsylvania might find itself in a position where it is more Republican than the country, for whatever reason, but 2008 is just not that year.

Without starting a whole debate about Palin because that is not what this is about. I gave my reasons for giving Pennsylvania to McCain and I stick by them. In an election where the economy was ok, confronted with Obama's change or McCain a guy they knew, a guy with experience blue collar workers would have went with McCain and many did but the poor economy gave enough of them to Obama to win him the state.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Blackacre on February 08, 2013, 08:35:22 pm
I don't see the "increasingly liberal" DNC that you're talking about. I really don't.

With all due respect that is probably because you are a 17 year old Green Party supporter.

No, it's because I have an understanding of where the Democratic party is now and where it was in 2008. I've heard the story of the Democratic party moving to the left many times, but it's just not true.


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Mr.Phips on February 08, 2013, 08:49:31 pm
I don't see the "increasingly liberal" DNC that you're talking about. I really don't.

With all due respect that is probably because you are a 17 year old Green Party supporter.

Appealing to suburban women won't help when you have Palin on the ticket, espousing views that are certainly not moderate. Pennsylvania might find itself in a position where it is more Republican than the country, for whatever reason, but 2008 is just not that year.

Without starting a whole debate about Palin because that is not what this is about. I gave my reasons for giving Pennsylvania to McCain and I stick by them. In an election where the economy was ok, confronted with Obama's change or McCain a guy they knew, a guy with experience blue collar workers would have went with McCain and many did but the poor economy gave enough of them to Obama to win him the state.

The myth that the economy was "OK" before the September collapse needs to be debunked.  The economy went into recession in late 2007 and consumer confidence(which matters most for the economy) plunged in the early months of 2008 and the stock market was also on a slow slide downward ever since its all time high in October 2007.  The economy was already poor before September 2008. 


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Wherever you want to go, you can't go there! on February 09, 2013, 01:42:01 pm
What would have happened if it didn't just totally implode like it did? Would it have just been followed by a normal recession?


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Undecided Voter in the Midwest on February 15, 2013, 08:39:52 am
2008: Much closer but Obama still wins with 311 EVs. McCain wins FL, IN, NC and NE-2 and ends up with 227 EVs. Popular vote would be 50.7%-48.0% for Obama.

2012: With no financial crisis to recover from the economy is stronger and Obama coasts to re-election. Romney decides to wait until '16. Santorum gets the nod, chooses Huckabee and gets crushed. Obama picks up FL, IN, NC, GA, MT and MO, along with NE-2, and wins 388-150.  Popular vote would be 55.2%-43.7% for Obama.

(Sorry, no maps. This is my first post.)


Title: Re: 2008 with No Financial Crisis
Post by: Cryptic on February 15, 2013, 04:13:53 pm
()
Obama/Biden: 311 (51.5%
McCain/Palin: 227 (47.7%)

This.  Closer election, but Obama would've won through in the end.