2004: Bush vs Kucinich

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

George Bush/Dick Cheney

vs

Dennis Kucinich/Carol Moseley Braun

[CatoMinor]

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

472-66

[Dancing with Myself]

I agree with your map, we would basically have a 1972 redo with this matchup.

[joece]

George Bush manages to win 49 of the 50 states, but narrowly loses Vermont to Dennis Kucinich, in addition to the District of Columbia.

Bush finishes with 60-62 percent of the vote on election night, and manages to win California by a 58-40 margin.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Kucinich would do George McGovern proud. For starters, he'd lose Ohio even worse than John Kerry. I also think Bush would do surprisingly well in the big cities because he'd use Kucinich's record (as mayor of Cleveland) against him. DC still goes for Kucinich, though, so he doesn't lose 0-538.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

[President Mitt]

Kucinich/Bush

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Kucinich/Bush

pretty good map. DC, VT, MA and RI are very likely Kucinich. NY, MD and ME-1 are somewhat likely.  IL and CA are possible but less likely. I do think Bush wins but gets less than 60% in IA, NM and NH, and over 70% only in UT, ID, WY, NE and OK.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

No matter how weak a candidate Kucinich might be, people seem to be forgetting that George W. Bush is still the other option on the ballot. Even with the much-hyped "9/11 bounce", Bush barely broke 40% in New York. New England states like Maine and New Hampshire swung Democratic due to dislike for Bush, not love for Kerry.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if Kucinich did better than Kerry in Vermont, possibly breaking 60%. I don't think Kucinich is any more extreme than Bernie Sanders. At the very least he would have absorbed much of Nader's support.

[feeblepizza]

Bush wins 516-22. He breaks 60% in most states. In some he has 70-90%.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

Bush wins 516-22. He breaks 60% in most states. In some he has 70-90%.

Bush taking 90% in Wyoming, Utah, Oklahoma, South Carolina, West Virginia?  70% in New Hampshire, Montana, Nevada, Colorado, Virginia? Let's be reasonable now, that's just ridiculous.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

No matter how weak a candidate Kucinich might be, people seem to be forgetting that George W. Bush is still the other option on the ballot. Even with the much-hyped "9/11 bounce", Bush barely broke 40% in New York. New England states like Maine and New Hampshire swung Democratic due to dislike for Bush, not love for Kerry.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if Kucinich did better than Kerry in Vermont, possibly breaking 60%. I don't think Kucinich is any more extreme than Bernie Sanders. At the very least he would have absorbed much of Nader's support.

Are you really that much of a Kucinich hack?

[tpfkaw]

Are you really that much of a Kucinich hack?

I'm not really sure what he sees in him.  He's not "mainstream" and he's anti-war.  That's about it.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Bush wins 516-22. He breaks 60% in most states. In some he has 70-90%.

Bush taking 90% in Wyoming, Utah, Oklahoma, South Carolina, West Virginia?  70% in New Hampshire, Montana, Nevada, Colorado, Virginia? Let's be reasonable now, that's just ridiculous.

No less ridiculous than what you think of Kucinich. By the way re: Nader, Kucinich would have a far greater problem with moderate/conservative Democrats than Kerry did with liberal Democrats. Nader wasn't even much of a factor in 2004 because Kerry was already a liberal. However, Kerry succeeded in portraying himself as a "moderate" who had the better ideas on Iraq, the economy, and so forth. That's why he won New Hampshire and other states, and did pretty well among "moderates". There's no way that Kucinich could do that, and there's no way he could do better than Kerry anywhere. Kucinich could never win the same "moderates" (specifically, conservative Democrats) where Kerry managed to do well. Kerry was at least mainstream and could be considered a credible candidate, the same could never be said of Kucinich.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

No matter how weak a candidate Kucinich might be, people seem to be forgetting that George W. Bush is still the other option on the ballot. Even with the much-hyped "9/11 bounce", Bush barely broke 40% in New York. New England states like Maine and New Hampshire swung Democratic due to dislike for Bush, not love for Kerry.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if Kucinich did better than Kerry in Vermont, possibly breaking 60%. I don't think Kucinich is any more extreme than Bernie Sanders. At the very least he would have absorbed much of Nader's support.

Are you really that much of a Kucinich hack?

LOL, you people are posting ridiculous maps with George W. Bush taking 90% of the vote and then accusing me of being a "hack"...

[RIP Robert H Bork]

No matter how weak a candidate Kucinich might be, people seem to be forgetting that George W. Bush is still the other option on the ballot. Even with the much-hyped "9/11 bounce", Bush barely broke 40% in New York. New England states like Maine and New Hampshire swung Democratic due to dislike for Bush, not love for Kerry.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if Kucinich did better than Kerry in Vermont, possibly breaking 60%. I don't think Kucinich is any more extreme than Bernie Sanders. At the very least he would have absorbed much of Nader's support.

Are you really that much of a Kucinich hack?

LOL, you people are posting ridiculous maps with George W. Bush taking 90% of the vote and then accusing me of being a "hack"...

Where have I had any state with Bush over 90%? The highest I have is over 70%, and even then in states like Utah and Oklahoma, where Bush taking over 70% against Kucinich is plausible.

And, of course, even if you were correct on that point, it doesn't mean that you're not a hack.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

No matter how weak a candidate Kucinich might be, people seem to be forgetting that George W. Bush is still the other option on the ballot. Even with the much-hyped "9/11 bounce", Bush barely broke 40% in New York. New England states like Maine and New Hampshire swung Democratic due to dislike for Bush, not love for Kerry.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if Kucinich did better than Kerry in Vermont, possibly breaking 60%. I don't think Kucinich is any more extreme than Bernie Sanders. At the very least he would have absorbed much of Nader's support.

Are you really that much of a Kucinich hack?

LOL, you people are posting ridiculous maps with George W. Bush taking 90% of the vote and then accusing me of being a "hack"...

Where have I had any state with Bush over 90%? The highest I have is over 70%, and even then in states like Utah and Oklahoma, where Bush taking over 70% against Kucinich is plausible.

And, of course, even if you were correct on that point, it doesn't mean that you're not a hack.

feeblepizza gave Bush 90%+ in multiple states.

And I gave Dennis a whopping 66 electoral votes versus 472 for Bush, what a Kucinich hack I am...

[RIP Robert H Bork]

No matter how weak a candidate Kucinich might be, people seem to be forgetting that George W. Bush is still the other option on the ballot. Even with the much-hyped "9/11 bounce", Bush barely broke 40% in New York. New England states like Maine and New Hampshire swung Democratic due to dislike for Bush, not love for Kerry.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if Kucinich did better than Kerry in Vermont, possibly breaking 60%. I don't think Kucinich is any more extreme than Bernie Sanders. At the very least he would have absorbed much of Nader's support.

Are you really that much of a Kucinich hack?

LOL, you people are posting ridiculous maps with George W. Bush taking 90% of the vote and then accusing me of being a "hack"...

Where have I had any state with Bush over 90%? The highest I have is over 70%, and even then in states like Utah and Oklahoma, where Bush taking over 70% against Kucinich is plausible.

And, of course, even if you were correct on that point, it doesn't mean that you're not a hack.

feeblepizza gave Bush 90%+ in multiple states.

And I gave Dennis a whopping 66 electoral votes versus 472 for Bush, what a Kucinich hack I am...

Okay, I concede on that count. I still think you're being overly generous to Kucinich, however.