2004: Warner/Feingold (D) vs. Bush/Cheney (R)

[Robespierre's Jaw]

Let's say in 1996, Mark Warner defeats incumbent Republican Senator John Warner.

In 2000, Senator Warner is consider to be a possible running mate to Vice President Al Gore. However, Al Gore selects Connecticut Senator Joe Liberman. In 2002, Warner is re-elected over former Virginia Governor, George Allen.

In late 2003, Senator Warner announces he'll run for the 2004 Democratic nomination. After a shock win in Iowa, Senator Warner manages to string together victories and by early March is able to secure the Democratic nomination.

For Vice President, Senator Warner selects fellow Senator, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin.

How would this election turn out? Discuss with maps.

[Lincoln Republican]

A hard fought and close race.

Ultimately, voters pick Bush for re-election, believing him to be better able to handle national security.

Bush was still relatively popular at the time of the 2004 election.

Bush/Cheney          273 EV  51% PV
Warner/Feingold     265 EV  29% PV

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

[AndrewTX]

That would be a tough race. I don't think Warner would carry his home state, because I'm sure he would have run to the left after his initial election to the Senate, or right as the primaries begin.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

I think that Mark Warner would of been competetive in West Virginia. West Virginia was leaning towards Gore  until the final weeks of 2000, but Bush pulled out the gun issue and it pulverized Gore in the rural parts of the state. West Virginia has never flipped without VA, and I think Mark Warner would of been competetive there as well.

[Lincoln Republican]

A hard fought and close race.

Ultimately, voters pick Bush for re-election, believing him to be better able to handle national security.

Bush was still relatively popular at the time of the 2004 election.

Bush/Cheney          273 EV  51% PV
Warner/Feingold     265 EV  29% PV

I think that you might have had a typo. The democratic ticket won 49% of the vote not 29% of the vote.

OK, Bush/Cheney 273 EV 51% PV, Warner/Feingold 265 EV 49% PV.  No way does Warner defeat President Bush in 2004.  My map is being generous to Warner.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Warner is to the right of J.Kerry on a lot of issues such as: taxes gay marriage, defense, guns, and religion. I think he could of made a compelling case against President Bush in those areas that J.Kerry lacked sufficient credentials in to make ground with those crucial independent voters in OH, NM, and IA.

Also, Kerry voted against the funding for the war because of Howard Dean in the primary, I don't think Warner would of allowed Bush to define him as a flip flopper, because he would of voted in favor of that funding and would of won the nomination in spite of that.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

Warner/Feingold 51% 297 EV
Bush/Cheney 49%      241 EV 

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Warner/Feingold: 50.5 PV, 270 EV
Bush/Cheney: 49.5 PV, 268 EV

[jokerman]

Warner/Feingold 360 EV
Bush/Cheney 178 EV

A Warner/Feingold ticket both appeals to moderates and contents the base.  You guys forget how much Kerry completely snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

[pragmatic liberal]

Warner/Feingold 360 EV
Bush/Cheney 178 EV

A Warner/Feingold ticket both appeals to moderates and contents the base.  You guys forget how much Kerry completely snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

I don't know. Kerry made several major mistakes, but Bush's approval ratings were around 50% in 2004 (slightly above in many surveys). And Bush's ratings among Republican-leaners and traditional Republican voters were at record highs - he polled better among Republican leaners than even Ronald Reagan did.

While I think the Democrats could have won that race, I seriously doubt any Democrat could have gotten much more than a bare victory in that climate.

[jokerman]

Bush's Approval Ratings were around 50% because he was now being compared to John Kerry.  Look at Bush's approvals before and after the election season.  Those better reveal the political climate.