Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Let’s say Hillary becomes the Democrat nominee

Discussion in 'GatorNana's Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by The_RH_Factor, Dec 5, 2019.

  1. The_RH_Factor

    The_RH_Factor GC Hall of Fame

    1,323
    171
    223
    Aug 11, 2010
    Most states are not going to switch from the way they went in 2016.

    West coast states - no
    Minnesota and Illinois - no
    New York and New Jersey - no

    Wouldn’t she just need to campaign in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and maybe one other state and carry those states to become President?
     
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2019
  2. GatorNorth

    GatorNorth Premium Member Premium Member

    12,470
    1,443
    1,068
    Apr 3, 2007
    Atlanta
    Let’s not. My head would explode at the mere thought.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  3. gatorknights

    gatorknights GC Hall of Fame

    27,576
    3,320
    1,243
    Apr 8, 2007
    Gainesville, FL
    Memo to Hillary: Why don't you and your business associate ERRRR husband just write a couple more books, hit a few talk shows, and stay the bleep out of our government?
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  4. HallGator

    HallGator Senile Mod Moderator VIP Member

    52,188
    2,578
    2,508
    Apr 3, 2007
    Outer Limits
    If Hillary were to become the Dem nominee I would vote 3rd party again. Might be the best thing that could happen for DT.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. citygator

    citygator Premium Member

    5,131
    1,607
    798
    Apr 3, 2007
    Charlotte
    Put the bong down. How about someone slightly more likable gets the nomination while Trump is greatly less likable 4 years later?o_O
     
  6. WarDamnGator

    WarDamnGator GC Hall of Fame

    6,874
    774
    548
    Apr 8, 2007
    That would be totally weird since she is not running. Besides, your same logic holds true for any democratic candidate ... none of those solid blue states are going to Trump in 2020.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. JerseyGator01

    JerseyGator01 GC Hall of Fame

    14,727
    187
    578
    Apr 10, 2007
    It would mean that the media might have to start finally investigating the Clinton Foundation.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  8. gator_fever

    gator_fever GC Hall of Fame

    3,395
    500
    393
    Nov 3, 2013
    Hillary would have no chance jumping in now. Less chance than even Bernie.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. staticgator

    staticgator GC Legend

    652
    165
    248
    Nov 27, 2016
    Let's say monkeys fly out of my bum.
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. gator_fever

    gator_fever GC Hall of Fame

    3,395
    500
    393
    Nov 3, 2013
    That is where Trump gains in 2020 as there won't be a Gary Johnson taking over 4.5 million votes this time. Many of them really thought he was going to appoint left wing judges etc.

    I think Trump would have won 3 or 4 more states without him and Stein if you gave the votes to either him or Hillary. This election those numbers will go back to levels like most elections.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  11. g8rjd

    g8rjd GC Hall of Fame

    7,308
    350
    168
    Jan 20, 2008
    Tallahassee, FL
    Let’s say Hillary announces as she decends from the clouds on a winged unicorn. Let’s say she receives posthumous endorsements from Moses, Muhammad, and Jesus. Let’s say she staffs her 2020 campaign with Billbo Baggins, Wonder Woman, Glenda the Good Witch of the North and Spider-Man.

    Let’s say all that happens. Would all that give this thread a point other than gaslighting?
     
    • Funny Funny x 4
  12. channingcrowderhungry

    channingcrowderhungry Premium Member

    5,836
    1,177
    733
    Apr 3, 2007
    Bottom of a pint glass
    Your notion that Johnson supporters who had no desire to vote for Trump in 2016 are for some reason going to decide to pull the lever for him in 2020 is hilariously flawed, both theoretically and by the actual polling numbers. Trump hasn't done a thing to woo Libertarian voters in 3 years, whether they voted Johnson out of ideology (like myself) or out of a dislike for the two main nominees.

    If Trump supporters think this is his path to victory they REALLY haven't been paying attention
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. gator_fever

    gator_fever GC Hall of Fame

    3,395
    500
    393
    Nov 3, 2013
    We will do a 30 ban bet if you want. The libertarian party won't get even 50% of what it did in 2016 as that is mostly dead as far as the Never Trumper stuff. Only a few media talking heads remain with that nonsense.
     
  14. staticgator

    staticgator GC Legend

    652
    165
    248
    Nov 27, 2016
    Let's say Republicans find something to talk about other than a political candidate who hasn't run for anything in three years and is never going to run for anything again.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. GatorRade

    GatorRade Rad Scientist Premium Member

    7,588
    865
    708
    Apr 3, 2007
    Everyone seems to be bashing you for this idea about Clinton, but I think you are hitting on a very important topic.

    Of course Clinton isn’t going to run, but I don’t think that changes your point: what’s up with this system that allows a handful of states to tip the entire balance of a national election?

    This is straight up a result of the current perverse winner-take-all version of the electoral college. One person’s vote already sort of doesn’t matter in a quantitative way, but with the electoral college, it often doesn’t matter in a qualitative way as well. Win by 10 votes in Texas or win by 10 million, the calculation for the candidate is exactly the same. It’s insane.
     
  16. CaptUSMCNole

    CaptUSMCNole GC Hall of Fame

    4,255
    372
    308
    May 23, 2007
    NCR
    The only way that this would happen is if the Democrats end up with a brokered convention and HRC is chosen as the consensus nominee, which is very unlikely. HRC isn't interested in running in the primaries. She doesn't want to punching it out with the other candidates, who will response to her every attack with "Says the women who lost a layup election to Donald Trump." HRC will wanted to be asked to be the nominee and if you are paying attention, that is what she is setting the stage for in case of a brokered convention.
     
  17. exiledgator

    exiledgator Gruntled

    8,547
    951
    418
    Jan 5, 2010
    Maine
    BGB to FSU / Hillary on (D) ticket

    Which is more preposterous?
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Wish I would have said that Wish I would have said that x 1
  18. channingcrowderhungry

    channingcrowderhungry Premium Member

    5,836
    1,177
    733
    Apr 3, 2007
    Bottom of a pint glass
    I think you missed my point because I don't disagree that there will be less Libeetarian voters. If they didn't want to vote for Trump or Hillary in 2016 why would they vote for Trump now? If the Dems run another shit candidate they will simply vote Libertarian again. Trump hasn't wont them over in 3 years, if anything he has done the opposite, based on polling numbers.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. CaptUSMCNole

    CaptUSMCNole GC Hall of Fame

    4,255
    372
    308
    May 23, 2007
    NCR
    Believe it or not, there was real angst among those on the right about Trump's policy positions because outside of trade, he doesn't really have any. There was serious worry that Trump would be more interested in making deals than about policy principals. That didn't happen and Trump's SCOUTS picks have moved the court a bit more to the Libertarian side. That might make a difference on election day from some Libertarians. Agreed the polls don't show any increase but they rarely do until very near election day.
     
  20. RealGatorFan

    RealGatorFan Premium Member

    13,128
    453
    633
    Apr 3, 2007
    Hillary ain't running so why didn't you focus on Michelle Obama? She is more likely to run than Hillary.