1988 - Gephardt/Bentson vs. Bush/Quale

[bhouston79]

Here's my prediction:

Popular Vote
Gephardt   51%
Bush          48%

Electoral Vote
Gephardt   317
Bush          221

[Robespierre's Jaw]

Who are these Bentson and Quale fellows? I assume are you referring to Lloyd Bentsen and Dan Quayle in this scenario regarding the 1988 Presidential Election? Anywho, here's my thoughts on such a 1988 match up between Congressman Dick Gephardt and Vice President George Bush.

George H.W. Bush/J. Danforth Quayle (R): 286 EV, 50% of the PV
Richard A. Gephardt/Lloyd M. Bentsen (D): 252 EV, 49% of the PV

Vice President Bush narrowly defeats Congressman Dick Gephardt to succeed Ronald Reagan as 41st President of the United States. I believe that had this match up had occurred in 1988 that the two closest states would be California and Michigan, with Michigan being the deciding factor. As for California, I gave Congressman Gephardt the benefit of the doubt.

[bhouston79]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, I screwed up and mispelled their names.  I am horrible with spelling, and I usually double check myself by going to look up names prior to posting, but I was being a little bit lazy.

I agree with you that California would have been close in this election, but I figured that if Dukakis could lose the state by only about 4% that Dick Gephardt, who would have been a much stronger candidate IMHO would have probably flipped enough votes to take the state narrowly.  I disagree with you about Michigan though.  I just think that Gephardt's populist appeal would have put him over the top in both Michigan and Ohio.  Indiana may have even been somewhat competetive with Gephardt as the nominee.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Bush wins, 298-240:

[LiberalLibertarian]

Gephardt would win by a mile. Who doesn't love Dick Gephardt? And to top that Lloyd Bentsen? Who doesn't love Lloyrd Bentsen? And who likes Dan Quayle? Or George Bush? The only reason the Democrats lost is because Dukakis was such a jerky, liberal blowhard.