Will Hillary win by a smaller or greater margin than Obama-2012? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 03, 2024, 07:12:14 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Will Hillary win by a smaller or greater margin than Obama-2012? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Well?
#1
Smaller margin
 
#2
Greater margin
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 80

Author Topic: Will Hillary win by a smaller or greater margin than Obama-2012?  (Read 3794 times)
WVdemocrat
DimpledChad
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 954
United States


« on: May 28, 2015, 04:48:34 PM »

I'd say greater. In 2012, Obama wasn't interested in expanding the map or putting up a fight in states which he could have won. Hillary is a fighter. She will try to expand the map, even if only by one or two states.
Logged
WVdemocrat
DimpledChad
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 954
United States


« Reply #1 on: May 29, 2015, 06:34:57 PM »

Why is everybody assuming precedent is God? I know how unprecedented it is for a candidate seeking a consecutive third term for their party to expand the map, but 2016 is a special case. Each Republican candidate has a big weakness, and Hillary I think has very little lasting weaknesses.

Hillary can expand the map in 2016, and I think she will. I think she has more of a will, and really more of a capability, than Obama to pick up one or two more states. In 2012, Obama showed no interest in picking up Missouri or Arizona or Montana or Georgia, or in holding Indiana. I think Missouri and Arizona are two very possible pickups for her in 2016, the other three would be in a landslide.
Logged
WVdemocrat
DimpledChad
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 954
United States


« Reply #2 on: May 30, 2015, 11:14:57 PM »

Jeb Bush will be the 45th President of the United States.

Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were elected and re-elected as President because both appealed to America's yearning for change, both gave a good speech, both could relate to people, and both were disciplined on the campaign trail.

Hillary Clinton now represents the status-quo, she's good but not great at speeches, she comes across as out of touch with ordinary Americans, and she is undisciplined on the campaign trail, as proven in 2008.

Jeb Bush will not only appeal to the nation's yearning for change, but for leadership that seeks to bridge the partisan divide - congress has an approval rating of under 15%. Like Hillary, he's no Ronald Reagan, but he can give a decent speech. He can relate to people far better than Hillary, and he is very disciplined and on message, yet he can answer ANY question with an impressive depth of knowledge.

Take all that, plus foreign policy and a weak economic recovery, plus the fact that Clinton won't perform as well with blacks, hispanics, and centrists as Obama did, and you have a narrow Jeb Bush victory (Hillary will still do well with these groups, plus win the female vote).

Yeah, Bush is the candidate of the future, but Clinton is a blast from the past. Nice logic.

Republicans were marching to the fife of "weak recovery" and "Obama's led the Middle East to chaos and let Russia run wild" in 2012. It didn't work then, and it especially won't work with a Bush on the ticket, whose brother is responsible for this mess.

I really hope he runs on that though. I can see the debates now...

JEB: It's been a weak recovery. I'd do better at -
HILLARY: What? Getting us out of your brother's mess.
JEB: Uh, well, um -

JEB: I would support a robust strategy for defeating ISIL. President Obama has failed to -
HILLARY: What? Clean up your brother's other mess?
JEB: Aw, jeez...

Keep doing that though. Just remember that a referendum on the 2000s and the 1990s is exactly what we want in 2016. Just remember that.
Logged
WVdemocrat
DimpledChad
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 954
United States


« Reply #3 on: May 30, 2015, 11:18:07 PM »

By the way, isn't it possible she could do better in the popular vote but worse in the electoral college (or vice versa, but that seems less likely)?

It's possible, but personally I think she'll pick up a couple states. North Carolina, Missouri come to mind...
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.024 seconds with 15 queries.