Who would be weakest against Clinton? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 06, 2024, 04:27:52 AM
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
  Who would be weakest against Clinton? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Which of the below Republicans would be weakest against Clinton in the general election?
#1
Jeb Bush
 
#2
Scott Walker
 
#3
Marco Rubio
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 80

Author Topic: Who would be weakest against Clinton?  (Read 2946 times)
JonathanSwift
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,122
United States



« on: June 22, 2015, 05:22:01 PM »

Rubio would definitely be the strongest. I voted that Bush would be the weakest, but I can certainly see why some would go with Walker.
Logged
JonathanSwift
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,122
United States



« Reply #1 on: June 23, 2015, 08:26:21 PM »

Hillary Clinton would be a strong general election candidate because she has her husband's last name, enthusiasm from the majority of the Democratic Party, and she'd be able to win a larger majority of the female vote, for obvious reasons. While she will win the black vote overwhelming, Republicans could gain a few points with black voters. The moderate vote (not to be confused with independents), the catholic vote, and the white working class vote will be up for grabs. Additionally, Clinton is often undisciplined on the campaign trail, and voters are not happy with the direction of the country under President Obama and the current congress.

So, how do I think she would do against the Republicans?

Jeb Bush has the very best chance of beating Hillary Clinton. His message, which so far has been about reform and stronger economic growth, resonates with a nation that has fallen on hard times for the last 7 years. His message on immigration reform resonates with hispanic voters and coupled with his economic message, hispanic outreach, and love for the hispanic commuynity, Jeb Bush would win over a number of hispanics who supported President Bush in 2000 & 2004, but then backed President Obama in 2008 & 2012. As a devout catholic, talking about compassion for the vulnerable, and as a defender of the pro-life position, Bush can win the catholic vote. He also can close the gap amongst white working class voters, and Bush probably would do the least bad, with the exception of Carly Fiorinia, with female voters. I would say Bush has about a 52% chance of victory in 2016 should he be nominated.

Scott Walker has appeal to white working class voters, especially in the midwest where he has been Governor. He also won in a blue state three times, but not a diverse blue state like New Jersey or California. He will face the same challenge Mitt Romney faced in 2012: he takes a hard line position on immigration reform, he has flip-flopped on some issues, and the Democrats will paint him as out of touch for his history with the unions. I'd give Walker a 35% chance of winning in 2016 if he's nominated.

Marco Rubio, on paper, has the same advantages in a general election as Jeb Bush. The problem, however, is Rubio has some skeletons in his closet, and he will be attacked as inexperienced. Additionally, Rubio is serving in Washington, a major weakness for him. But, given that he has many of the same advantages as Bush, I'd say Rubio's odds are 50/50 in a general election.

Intriguing. Please tell us about these skeletons.
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 0.031 seconds with 15 queries.