2012: Daniels/Paul vs. Obama/Biden

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

2012:

Mitch Daniels of Indiana/ Ron Paul of Texas

vs.

Barack Obama of Illinois/ Joe Biden of Delaware

Discuss, with maps.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Go easy on me, it's my first map:

[SvenssonRS]

I'd say something along the lines of...

Mitchell E. Daniels/Ronald E. Paul: 336
Barack H. Obama/Joseph R. Biden: 202

Daniels, just by himself, would easily take back the Rust Belt, due to his popularity in the region and proven-effective policies, thus shearing off a massive chunk of Obama's electoral votes alone. The choice of Paul as VP would unite the vast majority of the Tea Party under the ticket and thus solidify the West and the more Tea Party-inclined regions of the South. There would be some hyperconservatives and more hardline Tea Partiers who would abandon the ticket for more conservative ventures, of course, but not enough to make the difference. Daniels/Paul wins, and so does America.

[feeblepizza]

I'd say something like this. Michigan would almost swing towards the Republicans, and traditional Dem states like MN, WI, PA, and IA would be just out of their reach.

[justW353]

Wisconsin and Iowa go to Daniels by several thousand votes, less than 1%.

[feeblepizza]

Wisconsin and Iowa go to Daniels by several thousand votes, less than 1%.

Yes, but I'd say that MN, PA, CO, and OH would go for Daniels, also. He would sweep the Rust Belt. Also, with Paul on the ticket, the Northeast (i.e Maine and New Hampshire) would be competivie. Maybe Oregon but probably not.

[Derek]

http://

I was going to put one up today that was Mitch Daniels/Rand Paul lol. I'd say Daniels would get about 54% at this rate.

[pbrower2a]

The Indiana Toll Road deal (leasing a state asset to a profiteering monopolist) is unpopular in Michigan and Ohio, so I don't expect him to win either state. Daniels cannot win without Ohio.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

The Indiana Toll Road deal (leasing a state asset to a profiteering monopolist) is unpopular in Michigan and Ohio, so I don't expect him to win either state. Daniels cannot win without Ohio.

You don't expect any Republican to win any state, so what does it matter?

[justW353]

Wisconsin and Iowa go to Daniels by several thousand votes, less than 1%.

Yes, but I'd say that MN, PA, CO, and OH would go for Daniels, also. He would sweep the Rust Belt. Also, with Paul on the ticket, the Northeast (i.e Maine and New Hampshire) would be competivie. Maybe Oregon but probably not.

1).  GTFO, get an elementary school education and you can come back.

2).  Ron Paul would destroy the ticket.  An 80 year old as Vice President who believes heroin should be legalized wouldn't do too well in the suburbs, methinks.

[Derek]

The Indiana Toll Road deal (leasing a state asset to a profiteering monopolist) is unpopular in Michigan and Ohio, so I don't expect him to win either state. Daniels cannot win without Ohio.

1. Yes he can win without Ohio because it's dropping to 18 EV.
2. The health care bill is more unpopular than anything that Daniels has done.

[Derek]

Wisconsin and Iowa go to Daniels by several thousand votes, less than 1%.

Yes, but I'd say that MN, PA, CO, and OH would go for Daniels, also. He would sweep the Rust Belt. Also, with Paul on the ticket, the Northeast (i.e Maine and New Hampshire) would be competivie. Maybe Oregon but probably not.

1).  GTFO, get an elementary school education and you can come back.

2).  Ron Paul would destroy the ticket.  An 80 year old as Vice President who believes heroin should be legalized wouldn't do too well in the suburbs, methinks.

Who are you talking to? Besides Ron Paul isn't 80 and if he were he'd be better than Biden calling bakery workers smart asses.

[King]

I don't understand this fascination with Mitch Daniels.  The guy makes Bobby Jindal look like a good public speaker and he isn't very good looking either.  There's dozens of other Republican Governors/Senators that would do better than him.

Even if Obama is unpopular in 2012, Daniels would be like Kerry in 2004 and won't be able to transmit any sort of sound message to anybody in a general election campaign.

[milhouse24]

I don't understand this fascination with Mitch Daniels.  The guy makes Bobby Jindal look like a good public speaker and he isn't very good looking either.  There's dozens of other Republican Governors/Senators that would do better than him.

Even if Obama is unpopular in 2012, Daniels would be like Kerry in 2004 and won't be able to transmit any sort of sound message to anybody in a general election campaign.

I think Haley will do better than Daniels in the primaries.  The map is okay, but I think whoever wins will need to carry Both Ohio and Florida.

[pbrower2a]

Wisconsin and Iowa go to Daniels by several thousand votes, less than 1%.

Yes, but I'd say that MN, PA, CO, and OH would go for Daniels, also. He would sweep the Rust Belt. Also, with Paul on the ticket, the Northeast (i.e Maine and New Hampshire) would be competivie. Maybe Oregon but probably not.

1. No way does Mitch Daniels sweep the Rust Belt. In fact the only recent GOP nominee (1992 or later) for President whom he will exceed in winning states in the Rust Belt will be John McCain, who managed to lose Indiana.  Because Daniels is associated with Indiana he will win the Hoosier state.

2. There is no "Indiana Miracle". Indiana is just as much a part of the Rust Belt as any other neighboring or nearly-neighboring state. It endures the same ravages of the economic meltdown that Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin have felt.    

3. He does not yet get much national attention. Hard-line Republicans do because they either fit the ideology of FoX or because they are veritable strawmen for other networks. Sure, he could get the GOP nomination, but he won't have the advantage that Ronald Reagan had of having attention throughout the Carter Presidency. If he gets the nomination he is more likely to get the role of Thomas E. Dewey than that of Ronald Reagan.

[Derek]

Wisconsin and Iowa go to Daniels by several thousand votes, less than 1%.

Yes, but I'd say that MN, PA, CO, and OH would go for Daniels, also. He would sweep the Rust Belt. Also, with Paul on the ticket, the Northeast (i.e Maine and New Hampshire) would be competivie. Maybe Oregon but probably not.

1. No way does Mitch Daniels sweep the Rust Belt. In fact the only recent GOP nominee (1992 or later) for President whom he will exceed in winning states in the Rust Belt will be John McCain, who managed to lose Indiana.  Because Daniels is associated with Indiana he will win the Hoosier state.

2. There is no "Indiana Miracle". Indiana is just as much a part of the Rust Belt as any other neighboring or nearly-neighboring state. It endures the same ravages of the economic meltdown that Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin have felt.    

3. He does not yet get much national attention. Hard-line Republicans do because they either fit the ideology of FoX or because they are veritable strawmen for other networks. Sure, he could get the GOP nomination, but he won't have the advantage that Ronald Reagan had of having attention throughout the Carter Presidency. If he gets the nomination he is more likely to get the role of Thomas E. Dewey than that of Ronald Reagan.

Indiana is not just another part of the rust belt even if the democrats want people to think so. It's more farm oriented than MI or western NY and is socially conservative to the point of not allowing alcohol purchases after 6p.m. on Sundays. He would have the advantage Clinton had of not having attention throughout the Obama Presidency. If he gets the nomination he is more likely to get the role of Bill Clinton than that of John Kerry.

[pbrower2a]

Wisconsin and Iowa go to Daniels by several thousand votes, less than 1%.

Yes, but I'd say that MN, PA, CO, and OH would go for Daniels, also. He would sweep the Rust Belt. Also, with Paul on the ticket, the Northeast (i.e Maine and New Hampshire) would be competivie. Maybe Oregon but probably not.

1. No way does Mitch Daniels sweep the Rust Belt. In fact the only recent GOP nominee (1992 or later) for President whom he will exceed in winning states in the Rust Belt will be John McCain, who managed to lose Indiana.  Because Daniels is associated with Indiana he will win the Hoosier state.

2. There is no "Indiana Miracle". Indiana is just as much a part of the Rust Belt as any other neighboring or nearly-neighboring state. It endures the same ravages of the economic meltdown that Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin have felt.    

3. He does not yet get much national attention. Hard-line Republicans do because they either fit the ideology of FoX or because they are veritable strawmen for other networks. Sure, he could get the GOP nomination, but he won't have the advantage that Ronald Reagan had of having attention throughout the Carter Presidency. If he gets the nomination he is more likely to get the role of Thomas E. Dewey than that of Ronald Reagan.

Indiana is not just another part of the rust belt even if the democrats want people to think so. It's more farm oriented than MI or western NY and is socially conservative to the point of not allowing alcohol purchases after 6p.m. on Sundays. He would have the advantage Clinton had of not having attention throughout the Obama Presidency. If he gets the nomination he is more likely to get the role of Bill Clinton than that of John Kerry.

Unemployment is sky-high in some places. An example: Lagrange County, a very rural county that depends heavily on farming, tourism, and RVs, has had an unemployment rate of 15%. Reason: the double-whammy first of a credit crunch and then the meltdown of the market for high-ticket durable consumer goods.

Indiana used to be much more rural than neighboring states, but it did attract manufacturing jobs from other states in the supposed good times -- except that those jobs  have disappeared in large numbers  in Illinois, Michigan, and Indiana.

The liquor law is a relic  of a paternalistic attitude of the legislature to working people -- that if people aren't buying liquor on Sunday night they will more likely be sober and alert for work on Monday morning. Such legal relics can last for decades.

Need I tell you that Texas used to have so-called Blue Laws that prohibited retail sales of such items as clothing, books (except religious ones), housewares, and motor vehicles? One could buy food, medicine, or gasoline... but roughly in the time in which those legal relics vanished, Texas went from being more Democratic than the US as a whole (the state voted for Humphrey in 1968 and Carter in 1976)  to more Republican than the US on the whole. Texas never voted for Bill Clinton even though Clinton was from an area very close to Texas. Pure coincidence.

I see practically no analogue between Barack Obama and the elder Bush. The elder Bush didn't win a Senate campaign, never ran for Governor, and had no idea of what to do aside from foreign policy. The elder Bush had much the same problem that Gerald R. Ford had in running for re-election: he didn't know how to manage a campaign.