How would Buttigieg have done in the midwest rust belt states in the General Election? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 09:28:10 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2020 U.S. Presidential Election (Moderators: Likely Voter, YE)
  How would Buttigieg have done in the midwest rust belt states in the General Election? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: If Pete Buttigieg took on Trump, hailing from South Bend, Indiana, how well would he do in the rust belt?
#1
Better than Biden
 
#2
About the same as Biden
 
#3
Worse than Biden
 
#4
He would SWEEP everything, winning Iowa, Indiana, Ohio
 
#5
He would get swept by Trump
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 78

Author Topic: How would Buttigieg have done in the midwest rust belt states in the General Election?  (Read 3168 times)
Utah Neolib
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,986
United States


« on: June 25, 2021, 07:42:15 PM »

Worse than Biden, but I think he would have won Wisconsin by 0.1-0.5, Michigan by 0.5-2.0, and Pennsylvania by 0.1-0.9
Logged
Utah Neolib
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,986
United States


« Reply #1 on: June 30, 2021, 03:35:43 PM »

Worse than Biden, but I think he would have won Wisconsin by 0.1-0.5, Michigan by 0.5-2.0, and Pennsylvania by 0.1-0.9
There is no way he does worst than Biden but wins Wisconsin.

Biden won WI/MI/PA by 0.65%, 2.8%, and 1.2%

If he loses any support, WI is gone

Plus Buttigieg, being gay, would lose some minority support so there goes AZ and GA. Boom Trump wins a second term
Tammy Baldwin is way more progressive than Buttigieg and won easily in 2018 in WISCONSIN
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 0.028 seconds with 15 queries.