orgtheory.net

hillary v. trump – who would win? i have no idea

A common question – should Trump win the nomination, would he beat Hillary Clinton? There are two contradictory answers:

  1. According to decades of political science research, incumbent parties do well if the economy is doing well. Unemployment is low and GDP is positive, though modest. We also have few casualties in foreign wars. And Trump has really, really bad negative ratings. Conclusion: Hillary Clinton will win.
  2. The bungler – Hillary Clinton is not a very effective campaigner. Her infamous campaign of 2008 was bankrupt and chaotic. She lost to a first term Senator with no name recognition. In 2016, she’s pulling ties in big states against a geriatric commie after spending hundreds of millions. One can imagine her losing the entire South, maybe even Florida, and some how screwing up a big Midwestern state. That would be enough for a Trump win.This is similar to Gore winning the popular vote in 2000 and screwing up by losing his *home state* of Tennessee.

Use the comments to spin out other fanciful tales.

50+ chapters of grad skool advice goodness: Grad Skool Rulz ($2!!!!)/From Black Power/Party in the Street

Written by fabiorojas

March 22, 2016 at 12:03 am

5 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. […] blogging yet, and I don’t plan to do much more, but here’s a tidbit. Fabio Rojas believes that Hillary Clinton may (may) have a difficult time against […]

    Like

  2. Few thoughts: http://thefairjilt.com/2016/03/22/nah-hillarys-doing-great/.

    Also, we should get a beer sometime, yes?

    Like

    kindredwinecoff

    March 22, 2016 at 7:15 am

  3. The scary scenario is if all the centrists and self-described independents stay home. I have been hoping all along that they will choose to not have both houses of Congress and the White House in the hands of a single party. This is the norm for post WWII American government and a good reason for centrists to vote anti-Republican in the fall and even more so anti-Trump. But, as The Fair Jilt notes, Hillary had very large negatives in 2008 and she has very large negatives now. What if sufficiently large numbers of non-party loyalists decide the coin flip between two presidential candidates with large negatives isn’t worth a trip to the polls?

    Like

    Randy

    March 22, 2016 at 2:39 pm

  4. Kindred: I am literally across the street from you. No need to ask!

    Like

    fabiorojas

    March 22, 2016 at 3:57 pm

  5. The overwhelming sense from the head-to-head polls is that HRC would beat Trump (though slim enough to show how un-liked both are by the survey taking masses). While we’d usually discount these polls this far out from November, there is an unusual reason to think they could be accurate. These are both candidates the public has a lot of information about—they are literally on a first name basis with them. This is less true for Sanders, Cruz, and Kasich, which would suggest any head-to-head polls for them are less likely to be accurate down the road. Sans some sort of massive externality the polls should bare out; which I think is part of the reason the GOP is so eager to see Trump sunk.

    This election, however, just keeps on giving us surprises (and mortifications) the likes of which we haven’t seen in decades. What is the line on neither the eventual Democratic or Republican nominee being on the ballot in the primary? I want that bet.

    Like

    Michael Corey

    March 22, 2016 at 10:05 pm


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: