Jump to content
270soft Forum
Sign in to follow this  
DrakeRlugia

2004 Clinton Campaign

Recommended Posts

I decided to see what I could do as Hillary Clinton if she had decided to run in 2004 against George Bush, using the 2004 Beta campaign. I really didn't know how this was going to turn out—but it was a lot of fun to play. I started in the primaries, and Kerry was a big challenger: he won a lot of the earlier primaries, but often the margin wasn't by much. I built up a lot of momentum and managed to take a lot of the states that had plenty of delegates to offer. I don't have any pictures from the primaries, alas. Once I took the nomination, I named Biden as my VP.

Bush was pretty much undisputed as the Republican nominee. I turned on Lincoln Chafee as a challenger for Bush, but to be honest, he fizzled out right from the start. I don't remember him winning a single delegate or primary. I also turned on Ralph Nader to add a little extra fun—he did a bit better than he actually did in 2004, ending up with 0.7% of the vote and 907,572 votes all together.

The General Election was sort of a toss up—I was pretty much leading in all the polls, though when it came to electoral votes it seemed to bounce week to week—some weeks I'd have huge gains, and sometimes the Republicans would take those gains back. I had plenty of endorsements, too, but I suffered a number of scandals during the general election, and one was actually unveiled the day before the election day, but I'm not sure how much of an effect it really had on the final results. I focused very hard on the Rustbelt—Ohio was a big one, and part of me was hoping that I would be able to get Indiana too, but it didn't happen. Florida was kind of a tossup—I had it within my grasp towards the end, but it ultimately went over to Bush. I was hoping to win Missouri over too, mostly because in 2004 it still had a status as  bellwether, but it ended up going over to Bush too. I really wasn't sure how well I was going to do, given Bush still had plenty of support from the electorate in 2004, and he was an incumbent, but Clinton also had none of the baggage that she did in 2016. Here's my final results.

HXH4ASt.png

Bush did about as well as he did historically in 2004—though he lost Iowa, Ohio, New Mexico, and Arkansas to me, which was enough to propel me over the finish line. I actually managed to get more electoral votes (290) than Bush did historically in this year (286). In terms of the popular vote, I did better than Bush and Kerry both did in '04, though Hillary in 2016 got about 800,000 more votes than I did in this scenario.

In the end, I had to carve my own coalition of voters to get to 270. Unlike Obama's election in 2008, I wasn't able to get any of the south to turn out for me aside from Arkansas. My win was firmly based on support I had in the north eastern states, combined the west coast and the more liberal Midwestern states such as Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DrakeRlugia said:

I decided to see what I could do as Hillary Clinton if she had decided to run in 2004 against George Bush, using the 2004 Beta campaign. I really didn't know how this was going to turn out—but it was a lot of fun to play. I started in the primaries, and Kerry was a big challenger: he won a lot of the earlier primaries, but often the margin wasn't by much. I built up a lot of momentum and managed to take a lot of the states that had plenty of delegates to offer. I don't have any pictures from the primaries, alas. Once I took the nomination, I named Biden as my VP.

Bush was pretty much undisputed as the Republican nominee. I turned on Lincoln Chafee as a challenger for Bush, but to be honest, he fizzled out right from the start. I don't remember him winning a single delegate or primary. I also turned on Ralph Nader to add a little extra fun—he did a bit better than he actually did in 2004, ending up with 0.7% of the vote and 907,572 votes all together.

The General Election was sort of a toss up—I was pretty much leading in all the polls, though when it came to electoral votes it seemed to bounce week to week—some weeks I'd have huge gains, and sometimes the Republicans would take those gains back. I had plenty of endorsements, too, but I suffered a number of scandals during the general election, and one was actually unveiled the day before the election day, but I'm not sure how much of an effect it really had on the final results. I focused very hard on the Rustbelt—Ohio was a big one, and part of me was hoping that I would be able to get Indiana too, but it didn't happen. Florida was kind of a tossup—I had it within my grasp towards the end, but it ultimately went over to Bush. I was hoping to win Missouri over too, mostly because in 2004 it still had a status as  bellwether, but it ended up going over to Bush too. I really wasn't sure how well I was going to do, given Bush still had plenty of support from the electorate in 2004, and he was an incumbent, but Clinton also had none of the baggage that she did in 2016. Here's my final results.

HXH4ASt.png

Bush did about as well as he did historically in 2004—though he lost Iowa, Ohio, New Mexico, and Arkansas to me, which was enough to propel me over the finish line. I actually managed to get more electoral votes (290) than Bush did historically in this year (286). In terms of the popular vote, I did better than Bush and Kerry both did in '04, though Hillary in 2016 got about 800,000 more votes than I did in this scenario.

In the end, I had to carve my own coalition of voters to get to 270. Unlike Obama's election in 2008, I wasn't able to get any of the south to turn out for me aside from Arkansas. My win was firmly based on support I had in the north eastern states, combined the west coast and the more liberal Midwestern states such as Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa.

Well, she would have been no less dubious or trustworthy than Bush, and still would have agreed on a lot of the monstrous foreign, policy, and "national security" (i.e., flagrantly passing the Patriot Act, which obviously and overtly violates the U.S. Constitution in EVERY single article, while playing upon an atmosphere of fear and outrage to stop popular opposition, like Bush did), all of which she would have had in common with Kerry - but at least she wouldn't belong to Skull and Bones, the same highly policitically-active secret society with a sinister reputation like Bush and Kerry both had in common, thus she'd be viewed as SOMEWHAT of an alternative, I suppose.

Gee. 2004 really was much like 2016 for no REAL choice of candidates but horrible monsters where the voters were thoroughly robbed and cheated, damned either way they chose, there too, wasn't it? The strict two-party Duopoly REALLY needs to go, and American voters REALLY need GENUINE political choice for their leadership...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×