One way to look at it is to say that Barack Obama, although an above-average vote-getter, gets polarizing results. That could be race (for which he is obviously excused) or his unusual ability to win northern suburban votes but unusual incapacity for winning rural votes. Hillary Clinton isn't as polarizing a figure, or she can win the sorts of voters that he husband won but Obama could not reach.
If she is able to win the sorts of voters who went for Barack Obama won in 2008 and 2012 and the sorts of voters that her husband won in 1992 and 1996 but Gore, Kerry, and Obama lost beginning in 2000, then this is what I can predict for 2016:
Clinton vs. Rubio
At this point I have no idea of how Arizona, Indiana, Mississippi, or two of the three Congressional districts of Nebraska would go. It could also be that Marco Rubio fails badly to live up to the early hype and will get wiped out early.
If Republicans think Barack Obama troublesome, then wait until they see Hillary Clinton.
For a Democrat to win Texas one or two things happen:
1. Win the U.S. Popular Vote with at least 57 percent.
2. See Texas's demographics move sharply away from being advantageous with the Republicans and without needing so much rope to bring it in.
If Texas is going Democratic, so is Montana. So is Indiana. And so are North Dakota and South Dakota and the first two Congressional Districts in the state of Nebraska. Nebraska, statewide and with the 3rd Congressional District, and Kansas would be reduced to (at best) a 5-point hold for the losing Republican.
If Texas goes Democratic, it's going to be a 40-state [plus] landslide election.
Since 1912 -- dating back 100 years -- South Carolina has voted the same as Mississippi and Alabama in all but two elections: 1960 and 1968. If ever a split, Ala. and Miss. -- which have voted alike in all elections since their first vote in 1820 (exception is 1840) -- would stay Republicans (because, long term, they vote opposite Vermont) while S.C. would flip Democratic. This is like Ind. + N.D. + S.D. + Neb. + Kan. = same since 1920. Those five states voted the same in all of 1920 to 2004. In 2008, Barack Obama flipped Ind. and Neb. #02. It was a difference in tipping point.
In recent elections, S.C. has been about 15 points more Republican than the country. Tex. has been about 20 points. We can't hold them all to a tee … but if Texas is willing to flip Democratic, it would be wise to look out for S.C. But for this to be happening, it's a likelihood than Montana will have already flipped. It would be such a national tide that Montana would come in. It's just that Democrats should be going after Montana.
If all of this is happening … Arizona is there for the Democrats.
