2008: Romney the Republican nominee

[darklordoftech]

Would any states have voted differently?

[OSR stands with Israel]

North Carolina votes for Romney while Missouri and Montana vote for Obama

[538Electoral]

2012 map.

[OSR stands with Israel]

2012 map.

I dont see him winning Missouri(remember McCain barely won it) , and probably not Montana(Palin probably helped here a lot).

Indiana is a maybe though he does win North Carolina

[dw93]

He does worse. The Democrats had a field day with Romney's record at Bain in 2012, imagine what they'd do with it in the midst of the 2008 crisis.

[morgankingsley]

As I said if you go down a bit in my post history, he does worse. Not much electorally, but much worse popularly. Electorally he only drops MO. Popular vote wise he probably drops to about 43 percent or 44, and loses these states by larger margins

[Agonized-Statism]

Fmr. Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) / Fmr. Governor Mike Huckabee (R-AR)
Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) / Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) ✓

"I like being able to fire people."

-The guy who looks like he'd fire you

[brucejoel99]

He does worse. The Democrats had a field day with Romney's record at Bain in 2012, imagine what they'd do with it in the midst of the 2008 crisis.

^ Yeah, very much this. His Wall Street ties would hurt him more in 2008 than they did in 2012 because fall 2008 was obviously the height of the meltdown & there was a lot more outright anger toward that group.

Seriously, I think Romney would go down in a bigger landslide defeat than McCain did. Flip Georgia, Missouri, South Carolina, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Arizona, & Alaska. That's 410 electoral votes for Obama & 128 electoral votes for Romney.

[Agonized-Statism]

He does worse. The Democrats had a field day with Romney's record at Bain in 2012, imagine what they'd do with it in the midst of the 2008 crisis.

^ Yeah, very much this. His Wall Street ties would hurt him more in 2008 than they did in 2012 because fall 2008 was obviously the height of the meltdown & there was a lot more outright anger toward that group.

Seriously, I think Romney would go down in a bigger landslide defeat than McCain did. Flip Georgia, Missouri, South Carolina, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Arizona, & Alaska. That's 410 electoral votes for Obama & 128 electoral votes for Romney.

That may be, but I'd bet on polarization, Mormons, and possibly racism keeping Romney from losing a total landslide. If McCain- neocon: the person, literally the villain from the first Iron Man movie- didn't lose by 400+ electoral votes, neither would Mitt. I do agree that he'd do worse, but most of that bleed would be in the margins of states rather than losing states outright.

[dw93]

He does worse. The Democrats had a field day with Romney's record at Bain in 2012, imagine what they'd do with it in the midst of the 2008 crisis.

^ Yeah, very much this. His Wall Street ties would hurt him more in 2008 than they did in 2012 because fall 2008 was obviously the height of the meltdown & there was a lot more outright anger toward that group.

Seriously, I think Romney would go down in a bigger landslide defeat than McCain did. Flip Georgia, Missouri, South Carolina, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Arizona, & Alaska. That's 410 electoral votes for Obama & 128 electoral votes for Romney.

That may be, but I'd bet on polarization, Mormons, and possibly racism keeping Romney from losing a total landslide. If McCain- neocon: the person, literally the villain from the first Iron Man movie- didn't lose by 400+ electoral votes, neither would Mitt. I do agree that he'd do worse, but most of that bleed would be in the margins of states rather than losing states outright.

Missouri would flip to Obama, Montana, Alaska, and Arizona likely would to.

[OSR stands with Israel]

He does worse. The Democrats had a field day with Romney's record at Bain in 2012, imagine what they'd do with it in the midst of the 2008 crisis.

^ Yeah, very much this. His Wall Street ties would hurt him more in 2008 than they did in 2012 because fall 2008 was obviously the height of the meltdown & there was a lot more outright anger toward that group.

Seriously, I think Romney would go down in a bigger landslide defeat than McCain did. Flip Georgia, Missouri, South Carolina, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Arizona, & Alaska. That's 410 electoral votes for Obama & 128 electoral votes for Romney.

That may be, but I'd bet on polarization, Mormons, and possibly racism keeping Romney from losing a total landslide. If McCain- neocon: the person, literally the villain from the first Iron Man movie- didn't lose by 400+ electoral votes, neither would Mitt. I do agree that he'd do worse, but most of that bleed would be in the margins of states rather than losing states outright.

Missouri would flip to Obama, Montana, Alaska, and Arizona likely would to.

AZ was too Republican in those days , I could see Obama coming within 4 but not closer and why Alaska, that’s as solid of a Republican state  as it gets . Even their  Republican Senator  who literally was convicted of a felony just a week prior to the election came super close to being re-elected and he would have if not for a far right party taking away a good chunk of their votes .


No way do I see Obama winning Alaska

[dw93]

He does worse. The Democrats had a field day with Romney's record at Bain in 2012, imagine what they'd do with it in the midst of the 2008 crisis.

^ Yeah, very much this. His Wall Street ties would hurt him more in 2008 than they did in 2012 because fall 2008 was obviously the height of the meltdown & there was a lot more outright anger toward that group.

Seriously, I think Romney would go down in a bigger landslide defeat than McCain did. Flip Georgia, Missouri, South Carolina, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Arizona, & Alaska. That's 410 electoral votes for Obama & 128 electoral votes for Romney.

That may be, but I'd bet on polarization, Mormons, and possibly racism keeping Romney from losing a total landslide. If McCain- neocon: the person, literally the villain from the first Iron Man movie- didn't lose by 400+ electoral votes, neither would Mitt. I do agree that he'd do worse, but most of that bleed would be in the margins of states rather than losing states outright.

Missouri would flip to Obama, Montana, Alaska, and Arizona likely would to.

AZ was too Republican in those days , I could see Obama coming within 4 but not closer and why Alaska, that’s as solid of a Republican state  as it gets . Even their  Republican Senator  who literally was convicted of a felony just a week prior to the election came super close to being re-elected and he would have if not for a far right party taking away a good chunk of their votes .


No way do I see Obama winning Alaska

If I remember correctly the polls were close in Alaska prior to the Palin pick and Clinton won Arizona in 1996, so it's not impossible for it to flip without McCain.

[OSR stands with Israel]

He does worse. The Democrats had a field day with Romney's record at Bain in 2012, imagine what they'd do with it in the midst of the 2008 crisis.

^ Yeah, very much this. His Wall Street ties would hurt him more in 2008 than they did in 2012 because fall 2008 was obviously the height of the meltdown & there was a lot more outright anger toward that group.

Seriously, I think Romney would go down in a bigger landslide defeat than McCain did. Flip Georgia, Missouri, South Carolina, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Arizona, & Alaska. That's 410 electoral votes for Obama & 128 electoral votes for Romney.

That may be, but I'd bet on polarization, Mormons, and possibly racism keeping Romney from losing a total landslide. If McCain- neocon: the person, literally the villain from the first Iron Man movie- didn't lose by 400+ electoral votes, neither would Mitt. I do agree that he'd do worse, but most of that bleed would be in the margins of states rather than losing states outright.

Missouri would flip to Obama, Montana, Alaska, and Arizona likely would to.

AZ was too Republican in those days , I could see Obama coming within 4 but not closer and why Alaska, that’s as solid of a Republican state  as it gets . Even their  Republican Senator  who literally was convicted of a felony just a week prior to the election came super close to being re-elected and he would have if not for a far right party taking away a good chunk of their votes .


No way do I see Obama winning Alaska

If I remember correctly the polls were close in Alaska prior to the Palin pick and Clinton won Arizona in 1996, so it's not impossible for it to flip without McCain.

Clinton only won AZ due to Perot and the state did Trend Solidly Republican in the 2000s along with the vast majority of the Sunbelt(With the exception of VA and NC)

[brucejoel99]

He does worse. The Democrats had a field day with Romney's record at Bain in 2012, imagine what they'd do with it in the midst of the 2008 crisis.

^ Yeah, very much this. His Wall Street ties would hurt him more in 2008 than they did in 2012 because fall 2008 was obviously the height of the meltdown & there was a lot more outright anger toward that group.

Seriously, I think Romney would go down in a bigger landslide defeat than McCain did. Flip Georgia, Missouri, South Carolina, South Dakota, North Dakota, Montana, Arizona, & Alaska. That's 410 electoral votes for Obama & 128 electoral votes for Romney.

That may be, but I'd bet on polarization, Mormons, and possibly racism keeping Romney from losing a total landslide. If McCain- neocon: the person, literally the villain from the first Iron Man movie- didn't lose by 400+ electoral votes, neither would Mitt. I do agree that he'd do worse, but most of that bleed would be in the margins of states rather than losing states outright.

Missouri would flip to Obama, Montana, Alaska, and Arizona likely would to.

AZ was too Republican in those days , I could see Obama coming within 4 but not closer and why Alaska, that’s as solid of a Republican state  as it gets . Even their  Republican Senator  who literally was convicted of a felony just a week prior to the election came super close to being re-elected and he would have if not for a far right party taking away a good chunk of their votes .


No way do I see Obama winning Alaska

Actually, Alaska was surprisingly close in 2012, with Obama even winning the Alaska native vote - 2012 basically indicated that Palin's home state effect effectively cancelled out the 2008 Democratic wave effect - so a lack of Palin in combination with the 2008 Democratic wave would give the Democrats their best chance of taking it in many years. There's also the 'Indiana factor,' where if the 2008 Republican nominee just assumes that he's gonna hold safe Republican states & goes to campaign in swing ones, said safe states could unexpectedly flip due to the wave effect.

[dw93]

My question is if Romney is the one that takes the fall in 2008 instead of McCain, who gets the Republican nomination in 2012? McCain is definitely not running a third time that's for sure.

[brucejoel99]

My question is if Romney is the one that takes the fall in 2008 instead of McCain, who gets the Republican nomination in 2012? McCain is definitely not running a third time that's for sure.

This is the more interesting question to me. 2012 was such a vacuum for the GOP, so it really is up in the air without a solidly establishment candidate like Romney. Huntsman could do a lot better without being in Romney's shadow, or not because - of course - it's Huntsman.

I think Pawlenty & Perry probably have the most to gain from no Romney.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

My question is if Romney is the one that takes the fall in 2008 instead of McCain, who gets the Republican nomination in 2012? McCain is definitely not running a third time that's for sure.

This is the more interesting question to me. 2012 was such a vacuum for the GOP, so it really is up in the air without a solidly establishment candidate like Romney. Huntsman could do a lot better without being in Romney's shadow, or not because - of course - it's Huntsman.

I think Pawlenty & Perry probably have the most to gain from no Romney.

I agree, Pawlenty would certainly be up there in terms who benefits. But Santorum and Gingrich would actually benefit the most I suspect, because they would have weaker opposition, and a much easier path to the nomination.

[dw93]

My question is if Romney is the one that takes the fall in 2008 instead of McCain, who gets the Republican nomination in 2012? McCain is definitely not running a third time that's for sure.

This is the more interesting question to me. 2012 was such a vacuum for the GOP, so it really is up in the air without a solidly establishment candidate like Romney. Huntsman could do a lot better without being in Romney's shadow, or not because - of course - it's Huntsman.

I think Pawlenty & Perry probably have the most to gain from no Romney.

I agree, Pawlenty would certainly be up there in terms who benefits. But Santorum and Gingrich would actually benefit the most I suspect, because they would have weaker opposition, and a much easier path to the nomination.

Huckabee could also jump in the race in the absence of Romney.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

My question is if Romney is the one that takes the fall in 2008 instead of McCain, who gets the Republican nomination in 2012? McCain is definitely not running a third time that's for sure.

This is the more interesting question to me. 2012 was such a vacuum for the GOP, so it really is up in the air without a solidly establishment candidate like Romney. Huntsman could do a lot better without being in Romney's shadow, or not because - of course - it's Huntsman.

I think Pawlenty & Perry probably have the most to gain from no Romney.

I agree, Pawlenty would certainly be up there in terms who benefits. But Santorum and Gingrich would actually benefit the most I suspect, because they would have weaker opposition, and a much easier path to the nomination.

Huckabee could also jump in the race in the absence of Romney.

Assuming he does...he successful is he?

[brucejoel99]

My question is if Romney is the one that takes the fall in 2008 instead of McCain, who gets the Republican nomination in 2012? McCain is definitely not running a third time that's for sure.

This is the more interesting question to me. 2012 was such a vacuum for the GOP, so it really is up in the air without a solidly establishment candidate like Romney. Huntsman could do a lot better without being in Romney's shadow, or not because - of course - it's Huntsman.

I think Pawlenty & Perry probably have the most to gain from no Romney.

I agree, Pawlenty would certainly be up there in terms who benefits. But Santorum and Gingrich would actually benefit the most I suspect, because they would have weaker opposition, and a much easier path to the nomination.

Huckabee could also jump in the race in the absence of Romney.

Assuming he does...he successful is he?

He'd probably just be a more effective version of Santorum, but I don't think it'd be good enough to actually win him the nomination or anything.

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

Any chance Jeb runs in '12 if Romney takes the fall in '08? He would be the most obvious establishment candidate...

[brucejoel99]

Any chance Jeb runs in '12 if Romney takes the fall in '08? He would be the most obvious establishment candidate...

Maybe. Or Mitch Daniels, perhaps?