Was Trump's 2016 win a fluke?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:29:28 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Dereich)
  Was Trump's 2016 win a fluke?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: see question above
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
#3
Unsure
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 53

Author Topic: Was Trump's 2016 win a fluke?  (Read 4248 times)
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,454
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: January 12, 2022, 09:49:40 AM »

Inspired by the same question about the 2020 election. Was Trump's election in 2016 a fluke?

Tbh, I'm no longer saying so. I thought so between January 2017 and November 2020, but seeing how 2020 unfolded despite his presidency a complete disaster I don't think it was fluke. Biden's election wasn't fluke either, imho.
Logged
One Term Floridian
swamiG
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,042


Political Matrix
E: -2.06, S: 3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2022, 01:41:33 PM »

It's likelier that 2020 was a fluke tbh... an election completely decided by the COVID pandemic

We'll have to wait and see what 2024 entails
Logged
Kamala’s side hoe
khuzifenq
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,314
United States


P P
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2022, 01:59:35 PM »

No, given 2010s polarization trends it seems like almost any R would've won in 2016.
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,576
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2022, 03:31:59 PM »

Somehow I still feel that way, although 2020 indeed is a strong counter argument. Trump ran against an equally unpopular candidate and barely managed to win the Rust Belt trio in a perfect storm of the Comey letter and with help from third party candidates. If the election was held just a week earlier or later, there could have been a different outcome.
Logged
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,454
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 13, 2022, 09:45:37 AM »

Somehow I still feel that way, although 2020 indeed is a strong counter argument. Trump ran against an equally unpopular candidate and barely managed to win the Rust Belt trio in a perfect storm of the Comey letter and with help from third party candidates. If the election was held just a week earlier or later, there could have been a different outcome.

2016 was clearly the year of the outsider(s) and given that something like a 2/3 majority in polls wanted a prez who can "bring change to DC", Mr. Trump may have underperformed. A more disciplined candidate could have crushed HRC; or Jeb in a reverse scenario.

The Midwest was for sure not a fluke and already close in 2000 and 2004, especially WI. Obama was just an extraordinary candidate and people in 2016 overlooked these factors and just assumed said states were locked down for Dems (which is why HRC didn't invest enough to keep them).

Also needs to be said that other than the Midwest, Trump managed to win all Romney states and FL. So 2016 was not a fluke imho.
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,709
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2022, 09:14:16 AM »

2016 was a realignment, not a fluke. 

Mr. Trump may have underperformed. A more disciplined candidate could have crushed HRC; or Jeb in a reverse scenario.

See, I don't buy this.  How is a candidate like Cruz or Kasich supposed to replicate Trump's improvement with WWC voters in Michigan or Wisconsin?  A more traditionally conservative candidate would have allowed Clinton to just "Obama 2012" the thing, which was the initial operating assumption of every prognosticator of what the 2016 election would be.  You can argue *maybe* a Jeb! type does better in the suburbs than Trump, but is that enough to flip states like VA or CO that were assumed to be critical components of the GOP's path to 270 at the time?
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: April 21, 2022, 09:48:26 AM »

2016 was a realignment, not a fluke. 

Mr. Trump may have underperformed. A more disciplined candidate could have crushed HRC; or Jeb in a reverse scenario.

See, I don't buy this.  How is a candidate like Cruz or Kasich supposed to replicate Trump's improvement with WWC voters in Michigan or Wisconsin?  A more traditionally conservative candidate would have allowed Clinton to just "Obama 2012" the thing, which was the initial operating assumption of every prognosticator of what the 2016 election would be.  You can argue *maybe* a Jeb! type does better in the suburbs than Trump, but is that enough to flip states like VA or CO that were assumed to be critical components of the GOP's path to 270 at the time?

Kasich did excellent with WWC voters in 2014 and his moderate postions on healthcare could help .
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,576
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: April 21, 2022, 02:11:47 PM »

2016 was a realignment, not a fluke. 

Mr. Trump may have underperformed. A more disciplined candidate could have crushed HRC; or Jeb in a reverse scenario.

See, I don't buy this.  How is a candidate like Cruz or Kasich supposed to replicate Trump's improvement with WWC voters in Michigan or Wisconsin?  A more traditionally conservative candidate would have allowed Clinton to just "Obama 2012" the thing, which was the initial operating assumption of every prognosticator of what the 2016 election would be.  You can argue *maybe* a Jeb! type does better in the suburbs than Trump, but is that enough to flip states like VA or CO that were assumed to be critical components of the GOP's path to 270 at the time?

Kasich did excellent with WWC voters in 2014 and his moderate postions on healthcare could help .

Yeah, I think Kasich would have won as well. But I guess Mohamed has a point here, say if Trump abstained from the most divisive rhetoric and just focussed on ending illegal immigration, new trade deals, "endless wars", political corruption and been moderate on healthcare just like Kasich, while having no personal baggage/scandals, Trump could have won the popular vote and all remaining states Hillary won by less than five points.
Logged
OSR stands with Israel
Computer89
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,348


Political Matrix
E: 3.42, S: 2.61

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: April 21, 2022, 02:19:30 PM »

2016 was a realignment, not a fluke. 

Mr. Trump may have underperformed. A more disciplined candidate could have crushed HRC; or Jeb in a reverse scenario.

See, I don't buy this.  How is a candidate like Cruz or Kasich supposed to replicate Trump's improvement with WWC voters in Michigan or Wisconsin?  A more traditionally conservative candidate would have allowed Clinton to just "Obama 2012" the thing, which was the initial operating assumption of every prognosticator of what the 2016 election would be.  You can argue *maybe* a Jeb! type does better in the suburbs than Trump, but is that enough to flip states like VA or CO that were assumed to be critical components of the GOP's path to 270 at the time?

Kasich did excellent with WWC voters in 2014 and his moderate postions on healthcare could help .

Yeah, I think Kasich would have won as well. But I guess Mohamed has a point here, say if Trump abstained from the most divisive rhetoric and just focussed on ending illegal immigration, new trade deals, "endless wars", political corruption and been moderate on healthcare just like Kasich, while having no personal baggage/scandals, Trump could have won the popular vote and all remaining states Hillary won by less than five points.

Yah I don’t even think Mohammed is saying there that Cruz would have won cause his views are indeed to extreme to win an election outside truly horrendous fundamentals for the Dems . His personality is extremely unlikable too so he can’t even make up his extreme policy views with that either .


Logged
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,454
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: April 25, 2022, 09:22:20 AM »

2016 was a realignment, not a fluke. 

Mr. Trump may have underperformed. A more disciplined candidate could have crushed HRC; or Jeb in a reverse scenario.

See, I don't buy this.  How is a candidate like Cruz or Kasich supposed to replicate Trump's improvement with WWC voters in Michigan or Wisconsin?  A more traditionally conservative candidate would have allowed Clinton to just "Obama 2012" the thing, which was the initial operating assumption of every prognosticator of what the 2016 election would be.  You can argue *maybe* a Jeb! type does better in the suburbs than Trump, but is that enough to flip states like VA or CO that were assumed to be critical components of the GOP's path to 270 at the time?

Kasich did excellent with WWC voters in 2014 and his moderate postions on healthcare could help .

Yeah, I think Kasich would have won as well. But I guess Mohamed has a point here, say if Trump abstained from the most divisive rhetoric and just focussed on ending illegal immigration, new trade deals, "endless wars", political corruption and been moderate on healthcare just like Kasich, while having no personal baggage/scandals, Trump could have won the popular vote and all remaining states Hillary won by less than five points.

Yah I don’t even think Mohammed is saying there that Cruz would have won cause his views are indeed to extreme to win an election outside truly horrendous fundamentals for the Dems . His personality is extremely unlikable too so he can’t even make up his extreme policy views with that either .




Cruz most likely would have lost, yup.

What I meant is that Trump or another charismatic candidate running on his platform with little changes would have won the NPV and carried MN, NH, NV and perhaps VA on top. Remember Trump once showed some discipline in the final days of the campaign, which - combined with the fallout from the Comey letter - liftet him over the top with narrow margins in the Rust Belt trio.
Logged
hjii
Rookie
**
Posts: 24
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: May 13, 2022, 06:51:48 PM »

no Joe Biden won Pennsylvania by one point Michigan by 2 and Wisconsin by 0.6 in a d plus 10 natural environment
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,072
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: May 27, 2022, 02:37:33 PM »

Nope, it was foreign intervention.
Logged
brucejoel99
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,447
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: May 27, 2022, 03:41:36 PM »

Trump winning the Rust Belt in 2016 wasn't a fluke, but that putting him in the White House & rendering MAGA anything other than a historical footnote related to the 2016 election was certainly an unfortunate quirk of our convoluted electoral system that exists for no other election even here, let alone in any other country in the world. Most Americans didn't want him, just like how most Americans never wanted a Republican Senate majority or a 6-3 conservative SCOTUS majority.
Logged
dw93
DWL
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,870
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: May 28, 2022, 02:16:38 PM »

I thought so from November of 2016 until probably the end of 2018. By that point, he consolidated his support among the base, to where even many "Never Trump" Republicans of 2016 were rallied behind him, and any Republicans that won that year were of the MAGA persuasion. 2020 and beyond only furthered my belief that he was no fluke. 
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: May 28, 2022, 03:31:13 PM »

If winning by a <1% margin in a few deciding states is a fluke, then I guess so.  But, they knew what they were doing by targeting Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, etc. even when the almighty polls had the whole thing being a lock for Hillary.  So I'm inclined to say "no".  A fluke would've been, like, Maine-AL being the difference, or another state that Trump did not particularly target. 
Logged
Skill and Chance
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,521
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: May 28, 2022, 03:43:05 PM »

2016 was a realignment, not a fluke. 

Mr. Trump may have underperformed. A more disciplined candidate could have crushed HRC; or Jeb in a reverse scenario.

See, I don't buy this.  How is a candidate like Cruz or Kasich supposed to replicate Trump's improvement with WWC voters in Michigan or Wisconsin?  A more traditionally conservative candidate would have allowed Clinton to just "Obama 2012" the thing, which was the initial operating assumption of every prognosticator of what the 2016 election would be.  You can argue *maybe* a Jeb! type does better in the suburbs than Trump, but is that enough to flip states like VA or CO that were assumed to be critical components of the GOP's path to 270 at the time?

Kasich did excellent with WWC voters in 2014 and his moderate postions on healthcare could help .

Yeah, I think Kasich would have won as well. But I guess Mohamed has a point here, say if Trump abstained from the most divisive rhetoric and just focussed on ending illegal immigration, new trade deals, "endless wars", political corruption and been moderate on healthcare just like Kasich, while having no personal baggage/scandals, Trump could have won the popular vote and all remaining states Hillary won by less than five points.

Yah I don’t even think Mohammed is saying there that Cruz would have won cause his views are indeed to extreme to win an election outside truly horrendous fundamentals for the Dems . His personality is extremely unlikable too so he can’t even make up his extreme policy views with that either .




Cruz most likely would have lost, yup.

What I meant is that Trump or another charismatic candidate running on his platform with little changes would have won the NPV and carried MN, NH, NV and perhaps VA on top. Remember Trump once showed some discipline in the final days of the campaign, which - combined with the fallout from the Comey letter - liftet him over the top with narrow margins in the Rust Belt trio.

I think Trump underperformed in the PV vs. what Generic R would have done (chiefly because of no massive 3rd party voting in California and less narrowing in Texas), but he greatly overperformed in the EC.  The 3rd party vote really hurt R's in the PV in 2016.  Almost all of the indie candidates were some flavor of right-leaning.  As an example:



Generic Republican 290 EV 49.4%
Hillary Clinton 248 EV 48.8%




Logged
Plankton5165
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 679


P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: June 14, 2022, 06:31:48 PM »

I'd say yes.

This was the only time since 1988 that either Michigan, Pennsylvania, or Wisconsin voted Republican.

Wisconsin actually previously voted Republican in 1984!
Logged
Sir Mohamed
MohamedChalid
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,454
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: June 15, 2022, 09:41:09 AM »

2016 was a realignment, not a fluke. 

Mr. Trump may have underperformed. A more disciplined candidate could have crushed HRC; or Jeb in a reverse scenario.

See, I don't buy this.  How is a candidate like Cruz or Kasich supposed to replicate Trump's improvement with WWC voters in Michigan or Wisconsin?  A more traditionally conservative candidate would have allowed Clinton to just "Obama 2012" the thing, which was the initial operating assumption of every prognosticator of what the 2016 election would be.  You can argue *maybe* a Jeb! type does better in the suburbs than Trump, but is that enough to flip states like VA or CO that were assumed to be critical components of the GOP's path to 270 at the time?

Kasich did excellent with WWC voters in 2014 and his moderate postions on healthcare could help .

Yeah, I think Kasich would have won as well. But I guess Mohamed has a point here, say if Trump abstained from the most divisive rhetoric and just focussed on ending illegal immigration, new trade deals, "endless wars", political corruption and been moderate on healthcare just like Kasich, while having no personal baggage/scandals, Trump could have won the popular vote and all remaining states Hillary won by less than five points.

Yah I don’t even think Mohammed is saying there that Cruz would have won cause his views are indeed to extreme to win an election outside truly horrendous fundamentals for the Dems . His personality is extremely unlikable too so he can’t even make up his extreme policy views with that either .




Cruz most likely would have lost, yup.

What I meant is that Trump or another charismatic candidate running on his platform with little changes would have won the NPV and carried MN, NH, NV and perhaps VA on top. Remember Trump once showed some discipline in the final days of the campaign, which - combined with the fallout from the Comey letter - liftet him over the top with narrow margins in the Rust Belt trio.

I think Trump underperformed in the PV vs. what Generic R would have done (chiefly because of no massive 3rd party voting in California and less narrowing in Texas), but he greatly overperformed in the EC.  The 3rd party vote really hurt R's in the PV in 2016.  Almost all of the indie candidates were some flavor of right-leaning.  As an example:



Generic Republican 290 EV 49.4%
Hillary Clinton 248 EV 48.8%


Tbh, I'd also flip NH here.
Logged
Statilius the Epicurean
Thersites
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,596
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: July 04, 2022, 01:17:05 PM »

Wut? How the hell could anyone believe Trump winning was a fluke? Republicans were favoured in 2016, parties very rarely win a third consecutive term.

If anything Clinton winning would have been more of a fluke benefiting from a historically unpopular challenger.
Logged
dw93
DWL
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,870
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: July 04, 2022, 01:20:47 PM »

Wut? How the hell could anyone believe Trump winning was a fluke? Republicans were favoured in 2016, parties very rarely win a third consecutive term.

If anything Clinton winning would have been more of a fluke benefiting from a historically unpopular challenger.

With that in mind I have to ask, and by asking I by no means am saying Trump's win was a fluke, but was Bush's win in 1988 a fluke then given the margin?
Logged
Statilius the Epicurean
Thersites
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,596
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: July 04, 2022, 02:14:53 PM »

Wut? How the hell could anyone believe Trump winning was a fluke? Republicans were favoured in 2016, parties very rarely win a third consecutive term.

If anything Clinton winning would have been more of a fluke benefiting from a historically unpopular challenger.

With that in mind I have to ask, and by asking I by no means am saying Trump's win was a fluke, but was Bush's win in 1988 a fluke then given the margin?

To an extent, yeah maybe? Dukakis did lead by 17 points out of the convention. Democrats even made gains downballot that year.
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,576
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: July 07, 2022, 03:38:32 PM »

Wut? How the hell could anyone believe Trump winning was a fluke? Republicans were favoured in 2016, parties very rarely win a third consecutive term.

If anything Clinton winning would have been more of a fluke benefiting from a historically unpopular challenger.

With that in mind I have to ask, and by asking I by no means am saying Trump's win was a fluke, but was Bush's win in 1988 a fluke then given the margin?

To an extent, yeah maybe? Dukakis did lead by 17 points out of the convention. Democrats even made gains downballot that year.

Somehow I always felt that 1988 was actually a winnable race for the Democrats if they didn't nominate an atrocious candidate that ran an uninspiring, gaffe prone campaign. A Southerner may very well have beaten Bush, such as Lloyd Bentsen, Sam Nunn or Lawton Chiles. Or even Bill Clinton.
Logged
The Smiling Face On Your TV
slimey56
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,494
Korea, Democratic People's Republic of


Political Matrix
E: -6.46, S: -7.30

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: July 07, 2022, 07:21:55 PM »

Far from. Ds went from retaining a blue Driftless Area/Saginaw and Bay county MI in Walker/Snyder's re-election wins in 2014 to Trump not only peeling off those voters en route to the White House, but retaining most of them despite losing in 2020. To prove its not a merely a state result, Peters won both Macomb/Oakland by double digits and cracked 60+% in the Flint metro in the '14 R-wave. In contrast he was unexpectedly fighting for his life when Trump was up for re-election and brought all the Nascar dads and Kid Rock clones out. While its important to prioritize fundamentals over candidates in analysis, Trump indisputably redrew the political geography of a few crucial swing states in ways others have already retired writing books off of.
Logged
Inmate Trump
GWBFan
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,022


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -7.30

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: October 21, 2022, 08:19:40 AM »

I don't know, tbh.

I do believe that almost any other Republican would have won the popular vote in addition to the electoral college.

But I'm not sure which of them could've won PA, MI, and WI. Maybe Kasich?
Logged
dw93
DWL
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,870
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: October 21, 2022, 11:38:11 AM »

I don't know, tbh.

I do believe that almost any other Republican would have won the popular vote in addition to the electoral college.

But I'm not sure which of them could've won PA, MI, and WI. Maybe Kasich?

Kasich is the only one I can think of too. Out of all the candidates that had a realistic shot at the nomination, he and Rubio were the only ones I could see beating Hillary, though Rubio certainly wouldn't have won MI and I doubt he'd win both of PA and WI. Cruz or Jeb would've lost.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.069 seconds with 15 queries.