I vote for Nathan and he wins in a landslide. Frankly, no other issue matters here - no candidate who utters the phrase "privatize social security" is going to ever step foot in the White House.
...George W. Bush already did! (Here's a source showing Republicans campaigning on the issue in the 2002 midterms: https://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/01/us/bush-renews-push-to-partly-privatize-social-security.html). The third rail is cuts to net benefits, but it's easy to show privatization wouldn't cause this (and even easier to just confidently assert it).
And the country's gotten significantly more fiscally conservative since then.
(But also I would try to center my campaign around criminal-justice issues, because I think that's where Nathan is most out-of-step with ordinary people).
I didn't know that Nathan had CJ views that were in any way stand out, all the moreso compared to what you've implied (not said) about your own views.
More just where my views most decisively 'beat' the views of a generic Democrat; even quite blue states like California have voted in favor of the death penalty, and by trying to raise the salience of lurid and exciting crimes and make the top question 'how can we best fight criminals' I can try to control the media narrative and prevent cracks which might harm my campaign (sort of similarly to the GHWB campaign of 1988). I expect us to have a successful Republican campaign over the next two decades or so to take this tack, actually.
Oh, okay. I had thought based on previous statements you were implying a heavily libertarian/anti-police view of criminal justice issues, and I was curious how you would differentiate or market that. This makes a lot more sense.
I have a pretty weird fundamental approach to criminal justice—explicitly Beccarian despite my allergy to utilitarianism in almost all other contexts, as well as the usual leftist rehabilitative focus—but I don't think my views On The Issues are that out-there. I don't think a complex society could literally abolish policing or incarceration and I think it's dishonest and politicaly suicidal to insist on pretending otherwise. It's probable that Vosem could successfully bait me into some sort of emotional outburst about the subject if it became a debate issue, but he could probably do that with other issues where his views are much further outside the Overton window too, so it might balance out depending on how the public responds to those.
America is not ready for a male Liz Truss presidency.
I didn't realize Vosem was a pain pig.
Poll
