Who ran a better campaign?

[Woody]

Discuss

[mencken]

Trump, as strange as that sounds:

Bush nearly lost an election he was supposed to win by several points because he wasted time campaigning in Safe Democratic states.

Trump won an election he was supposed to lost by several points in part due to successfully barnstorming several Democratic-leaning states in the last few weeks.

[junior chįmp]

The obvious answer is Trump. Him beating Hillary is the equivalent of a quadriplegic outrunning Usain Bolt

[RINO Tom]

Trump, as strange as that sounds:

Bush nearly lost an election he was supposed to win by several points because he wasted time campaigning in Safe Democratic states.

Trump won an election he was supposed to lost by several points in part due to successfully barnstorming several Democratic-leaning states in the last few weeks.

What states?

[Politician]

Trump was a terrible candidate, but ran a strong campaign, targeting the states he needed late on, and that's why he won.

[Rookie Yinzer]

Bush actually lost.

I voted Trump.

[Mr. Smith]

Who flipped 13 states and won 6 of them by a lot, while receiving almost no pushback?

And whom flipped 6 states, but won only 2 of them by anything big, while receiving a lot of pushback?

The DUI and Comey were the event turners that pretty much skewed results from what the campaigns really were.

[Peanut]

Who flipped 13 states and won 6 of them by a lot, while receiving almost no pushback?

And whom flipped 6 states, but won only 2 of them by anything big, while receiving a lot of pushback?

The DUI and Comey were the event turners that pretty much skewed results from what the campaigns really were.

I don't really remember this election, so how important was the DUI? Enough to flip narrow States like Iowa or narrow Bush's margin considerably in others?

[South Dakota Democrat]

Who flipped 13 states and won 6 of them by a lot, while receiving almost no pushback?

And whom flipped 6 states, but won only 2 of them by anything big, while receiving a lot of pushback?

The DUI and Comey were the event turners that pretty much skewed results from what the campaigns really were.

I don't really remember this election, so how important was the DUI? Enough to flip narrow States like Iowa or narrow Bush's margin considerably in others?

What probably affected it more was that, following the DUI revelation, Bush bizarrely took some of the last few days off from active campaigning.

[Progressive Pessimist]

It kills me to say it, but Trump. He completely stumbled his way through a campaign that did nothing but throw garbage at the wall to see what sticks with some of the most significant and controversial scandals plaguing his campaign only to end up winning the Electoral College by barely flipping three states without winning the national popular vote.
Why that ends up being better than Bush though is because Bush won in a similar way to Trump but actually tried to campaign in a more meaningful way and only flipped one state due to shenanigans, with one of the closest margins in American history, and only after the Supreme Court intervened. Trump, to his credit (I say this while holding back vomit), didn't need to wait a month to be declared the winner after a Supreme Court case. He had Russia instead!

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Bush won without help from foreign adversaries.

[uti2]

Bush won without help from foreign adversaries.

He had more than enough help from Jeb in FL and the Supreme Court.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Bush won without help from foreign adversaries.

He had more than enough help from Jeb in FL and the Supreme Court.

[Mr. Smith]

Bush won without help from foreign adversaries.

He had more than enough help from Jeb in FL and the Supreme Court.

Except that the pundits called the state too early and probably discouraged a lot of votes in Oregon, Wisconsin, Iowa, and New Mexico that would've given him those states even if Gore did win Florida.

And that assumes that Bush wasn't going to win Florida anyway.

[uti2]

Bush won without help from foreign adversaries.

He had more than enough help from Jeb in FL and the Supreme Court.

Except that the pundits called the state too early and probably discouraged a lot of votes in Oregon, Wisconsin, Iowa, and New Mexico that would've given him those states even if Gore did win Florida.

And that assumes that Bush wasn't going to win Florida anyway.

I imagine that the Media and Pundits calling the primary election for Obama mid-way through the 2008 primary despite the fact that Hillary was catching up hurt Hillary even more.

Nelson won his senate race pretty easily.

[South Dakota Democrat]

Bush won without help from foreign adversaries.

He had more than enough help from Jeb in FL and the Supreme Court.

Except that the pundits called the state too early and probably discouraged a lot of votes in Oregon, Wisconsin, Iowa, and New Mexico that would've given him those states even if Gore did win Florida.

And that assumes that Bush wasn't going to win Florida anyway.

Not buying this.  For one, it wasn't necessarily clear before the election that Florida would ultimately decide it - Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida were considered the big 3 swing states, and Gore had just won Florida at that point.  Additionally, why would it only be Bush voters that wouldn't turn out, if they thought Gore had it in the bag?  Wouldn't it depress turnout on both sides?

[dw93]

Bush ran against Peace, Prosperity, and sort of ran against Incumbency and won.  Trump was lucky to run against an opponent  that was almost as hated as he himself was/is, and Hillary was in some respects the Thomas Dewey of our times, in a sense that her campaign took so much for granted.  So, that means Bush gets my vote.

[uti2]

Bush ran against Peace, Prosperity, and sort of ran against Incumbency and won.  Trump was lucky to run against an opponent  that was almost as hated as he himself was/is, and Hillary was in some respects the Thomas Dewey of our times, in a sense that her campaign took so much for granted.  So, that means Bush gets my vote.

This is funny, you have posters constantly saying that it should be taken for granted that Hillary would've lost to a normal republican, and the bulk of the other republicans themselves were also running on that assumption, all they needed to do was engage in some empty flattery and that was enough to win. The only exceptions to this may have been Christie and Cruz who wanted to run more aggressive campaigns against Hillary.

By the way, it should be noted that Hillary changed her entire electoral strategy specifically because of Trump.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rubycramer/how-a-decision-in-may-changed-the-general-election

[dw93]

Bush ran against Peace, Prosperity, and sort of ran against Incumbency and won.  Trump was lucky to run against an opponent  that was almost as hated as he himself was/is, and Hillary was in some respects the Thomas Dewey of our times, in a sense that her campaign took so much for granted.  So, that means Bush gets my vote.

This is funny, you have posters constantly saying that it should be taken for granted that Hillary would've lost to a normal republican, and the bulk of the other republicans themselves were also running on that assumption, all they needed to do was engage in some empty flattery and that was enough to win. The only exceptions to this may have been Christie and Cruz who wanted to run more aggressive campaigns against Hillary.

By the way, it should be noted that Hillary changed her entire electoral strategy specifically because of Trump.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rubycramer/how-a-decision-in-may-changed-the-general-election

I agree Hillary would've ran a different campaign against a normal Republican, but I also think a normal Republican in many  respects would've campaigned differently than Trump. It'd be a close election either way, Kasich is the only main Republican other than Trump that I could see winning any of the three states in the Rust Belt that decided the election. Rubio, Jeb!, or Cruz would've had to try and duplicate Dubya's 2004 map.  Personally, I think if he somehow got nominated, Kasich would've beaten Hillary, Christie to if not for Bridgegate.  Rubio would be a toss up and Cruz, Jeb!, and the rest of the Clown show would've lost to Hillary.

[South Dakota Democrat]

Bush ran against Peace, Prosperity, and sort of ran against Incumbency and won.  Trump was lucky to run against an opponent  that was almost as hated as he himself was/is, and Hillary was in some respects the Thomas Dewey of our times, in a sense that her campaign took so much for granted.  So, that means Bush gets my vote.

This is funny, you have posters constantly saying that it should be taken for granted that Hillary would've lost to a normal republican, and the bulk of the other republicans themselves were also running on that assumption, all they needed to do was engage in some empty flattery and that was enough to win. The only exceptions to this may have been Christie and Cruz who wanted to run more aggressive campaigns against Hillary.

By the way, it should be noted that Hillary changed her entire electoral strategy specifically because of Trump.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rubycramer/how-a-decision-in-may-changed-the-general-election

I agree Hillary would've ran a different campaign against a normal Republican, but I also think a normal Republican in many  respects would've campaigned differently than Trump. It'd be a close election either way, Kasich is the only main Republican other than Trump that I could see winning any of the three states in the Rust Belt that decided the election. Rubio, Jeb!, or Cruz would've had to try and duplicate Dubya's 2004 map.  Personally, I think if he somehow got nominated, Kasich would've beaten Hillary, Christie to if not for Bridgegate.  Rubio would be a toss up and Cruz, Jeb!, and the rest of the Clown show would've lost to Hillary.

I love your signature!

[dw93]

Bush ran against Peace, Prosperity, and sort of ran against Incumbency and won.  Trump was lucky to run against an opponent  that was almost as hated as he himself was/is, and Hillary was in some respects the Thomas Dewey of our times, in a sense that her campaign took so much for granted.  So, that means Bush gets my vote.

This is funny, you have posters constantly saying that it should be taken for granted that Hillary would've lost to a normal republican, and the bulk of the other republicans themselves were also running on that assumption, all they needed to do was engage in some empty flattery and that was enough to win. The only exceptions to this may have been Christie and Cruz who wanted to run more aggressive campaigns against Hillary.

By the way, it should be noted that Hillary changed her entire electoral strategy specifically because of Trump.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rubycramer/how-a-decision-in-may-changed-the-general-election

I agree Hillary would've ran a different campaign against a normal Republican, but I also think a normal Republican in many  respects would've campaigned differently than Trump. It'd be a close election either way, Kasich is the only main Republican other than Trump that I could see winning any of the three states in the Rust Belt that decided the election. Rubio, Jeb!, or Cruz would've had to try and duplicate Dubya's 2004 map.  Personally, I think if he somehow got nominated, Kasich would've beaten Hillary, Christie to if not for Bridgegate.  Rubio would be a toss up and Cruz, Jeb!, and the rest of the Clown show would've lost to Hillary.

I love your signature!

Thanks. Found it on Google searching presidential memes.

[twenty42]

It’s worth noting that 2000 was a very boring, sleepy election that only became (in)famous because of the Election Night results. If Gore would’ve embraced Clinton and put a little more effort into his campaign, Bush would probably be remembered today in the same vein as Dukakis. The FL thing would be remembered as obscure election trivia if Gore would’ve won AR, TN, and NH.

OTOH, Trump won his election through sheer energy and force of will. 2016 was also a much smoother Election Night for Trump than 2000 was for Bush. Despite going into the night as a greater than 2-1 underdog, he managed to wrap up NC and FL pretty quickly and painlessly, and turned several Lean D states into tossups pretty early in the evening. I think the 2000 results were affected by the coverage, whereas 2016 was going to be Trump’s night regardless.

[Sumner 1868]

It’s worth noting that 2000 was a very boring, sleepy election that only became (in)famous because of the Election Night results. If Gore would’ve embraced Clinton and put a little more effort into his campaign, Bush would probably be remembered today in the same vein as Dukakis. The FL thing would be remembered as obscure election trivia if Gore would’ve won AR, TN, and NH.

OTOH, Trump won his election through sheer energy and force of will. 2016 was also a much smoother Election Night for Trump than 2000 was for Bush. Despite going into the night as a greater than 2-1 underdog, he managed to wrap up NC and FL pretty quickly and painlessly, and turned several Lean D states into tossups pretty early in the evening. I think the 2000 results were affected by the coverage, whereas 2016 was going to be Trump’s night regardless.

I think Clinton's popularity in 2000 is vastly overrated. His personal favorability ratings were nearly Drumpf-level horrible and polling showed a majority said they didn't want "Clinton policies" continued. The problem wasn't that Gore distanced himself from Clinton but that he did so in an overt way (i.e., Lieberman, the music panic, the DNC kiss) that made him look cynical.

[South Dakota Democrat]

It’s worth noting that 2000 was a very boring, sleepy election that only became (in)famous because of the Election Night results. If Gore would’ve embraced Clinton and put a little more effort into his campaign, Bush would probably be remembered today in the same vein as Dukakis. The FL thing would be remembered as obscure election trivia if Gore would’ve won AR, TN, and NH.

OTOH, Trump won his election through sheer energy and force of will. 2016 was also a much smoother Election Night for Trump than 2000 was for Bush. Despite going into the night as a greater than 2-1 underdog, he managed to wrap up NC and FL pretty quickly and painlessly, and turned several Lean D states into tossups pretty early in the evening. I think the 2000 results were affected by the coverage, whereas 2016 was going to be Trump’s night regardless.

I think Clinton's popularity in 2000 is vastly overrated. His personal favorability ratings were nearly Drumpf-level horrible and polling showed a majority said they didn't want "Clinton policies" continued. The problem wasn't that Gore distanced himself from Clinton but that he did so in an overt way (i.e., Lieberman, the music panic, the DNC kiss) that made him look cynical.

^^ This.

[darklordoftech]

It’s worth noting that 2000 was a very boring, sleepy election that only became (in)famous because of the Election Night results. If Gore would’ve embraced Clinton and put a little more effort into his campaign, Bush would probably be remembered today in the same vein as Dukakis. The FL thing would be remembered as obscure election trivia if Gore would’ve won AR, TN, and NH.

OTOH, Trump won his election through sheer energy and force of will. 2016 was also a much smoother Election Night for Trump than 2000 was for Bush. Despite going into the night as a greater than 2-1 underdog, he managed to wrap up NC and FL pretty quickly and painlessly, and turned several Lean D states into tossups pretty early in the evening. I think the 2000 results were affected by the coverage, whereas 2016 was going to be Trump’s night regardless.

I think Clinton's popularity in 2000 is vastly overrated. His personal favorability ratings were nearly Drumpf-level horrible and polling showed a majority said they didn't want "Clinton policies" continued. The problem wasn't that Gore distanced himself from Clinton but that he did so in an overt way (i.e., Lieberman, the music panic, the DNC kiss) that made him look cynical.

I also think Gore failed to realize that there were few, if any, voters who cared about Lewinsky but were pro-choice.