Bill Clinton vs. George Bush Jr. 2000

[MorningInAmerica]

If Clinton wasn't term-limited he would have won a third term easily against anybody.

Bullsh**t.  He wouldn't have won at all.  The GOP would've proceeded with caution in impeachment, and let it run it's course.  No impeachment, Clinton loses in a landslide and 98 is a disaster for the Dems.  Bush mobilizes social conservatives and wins in a landslide

LOL

Why?  Think about it: why did Bush win the GOP nomination in 2000?  Because social conservatives weren't satisfied with McCain.  Why?  Backlash against the Clinton administration.  Why was it a close GE despite a massive budget surplus, an incumbent dem with sky-high approvals, and a kick-ass economy?  Social conservatives were mobilized by the family values candidate.

Social conservatives didn't decide that election, they decided the Republican primary. The election was close because Gore was an awful campaigner and was terrified of having Clinton campaign for him which was a mistake. Let's remember that on election day 2000, Clinton had positive approval in all 50 states.

I think Jerseyrules could be on to something. You actually could make a pretty decent argument that had Clinton been able to run for a third term, and had the GOP not pursued impeachment over Lewinsky, Clinton would have had a tough road ahead of him. True, Clinton did have good job approval ratings post-impeachment, but job ratings are different from favorability ratings. Clinton's JOB rating remained high because of the roaring economy. But look at Gallup's measure of Clinton's favorables post impeachment (post Jan-1999). http://www.gallup.com/poll/1618/favorability-people-news.aspx#2 From then til the end of his presidency, they are noticeably lower than pre - impeachment.

So given that Clinton's favorability ratings took a hit despite the perceived GOP overreach involving impeachment, why WOULDN'T Clinton's favorables have taken a bigger hit without the overreach? Combine that with the audacity of running for a third term, and you have a recipe for electoral trouble for Clinton. Anyone remember the phrase "Clinton fatigue?" http://www.nytimes.com/1999/08/05/opinion/a-clear-case-of-clinton-fatigue.html Well maybe some of you are too young to remember, but it was real, and it's reflected in Clinton's 42/54% favorable rating in August of 2000. His favorables remained very mediocre until 2004.

Having said that, I still guess Clinton wins, though by smaller margins than his 1992 and 1996 wins.

[MorningInAmerica]

Assuming the GOP congress does not pursue impeachment in 1998, assuming Bush is still the GOP nominee, and assuming Nader still runs, I say the map looks something like this.

Clinton wins 297 EVs, Bush wins 241 EVs
Clinton wins 49.4% of the popular vote, Bush wins 47.3%

And I think I'm being generous to Clinton, especially considering that in real life, George W. Bush's favorability rating on the eve of election, as measured by Gallup, was a strong 55/39%. President Clinton's was 54/44%. I think Bubba's numbers would have been worse absent the GOPs impeachment overreach, and in light of Clinton fatigue/3rd term audacity.

[MorningInAmerica]

Assuming the GOP congress does not pursue impeachment in 1998, assuming Bush is still the GOP nominee, and assuming Nader still runs, I say the map looks something like this.

Clinton wins 297 EVs, Bush wins 241 EVs
Clinton wins 49.4% of the popular vote, Bush wins 47.3%

And I think I'm being generous to Clinton, especially considering that in real life, George W. Bush's favorability rating on the eve of election, as measured by Gallup, was a strong 55/39%. President Clinton's was 54/44%. I think Bubba's numbers would have been worse absent the GOPs impeachment overreach, and in light of Clinton fatigue/3rd term audacity.

Favorability doesn't matter when you are the incumbent and GDP is growing by 5% a year. Bush could have personally stopped an alien invasion and Clinton would have still won.

Also, LOL at you giving West Virginia, Ohio, Missouri, and New Mexico to Bush. And Arkansas at 40% shade...HA...obvious troll is still obvious.

Troll? LOL at you getting your panties all in a wad over playful political speculation. I explained in detail how I reached this result.

Edited to ask:

obvious troll is still obvious.

What in the hell does this even mean? Redundant much?