Villaraigosa/ Klobuchar VS Christie/ Martinez

[Mister Mets]

Full disclosure: I'm trying to select a combination of presidential contenders that would result in a Republican landslide under most circumstances, although your mileage may vary.

In 2016, let's say Democrats nominate Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa for President. He gets the support of Unions, and Hispanic voters, in a race without Biden or Hillary Clinton. And he selects Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar as his running mate.

Chris Christie wins the Republican presidential nomination due to strong debate performances and conservative candidates (Rubio, Ryan, Jindal, Walker, Cruz) splitting the vote. Christie then selects New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez as his running mate.

How does the election go?

[badgate]

It wouldn't be the first time the Dems had nominated a relatively unknown person of color with a seemingly unapproachable name.........but this time we'd lose.

[Maxwell]

Christie CRUSHES Villaraigosa. No question. The only questions I have is if Christie wins Connecticut or Washington.

[bedstuy]

Villaraigosa is a joke.  There is no chance he will be nominated. 

But, assuming he was, it would be a significant margin for Christie in this scenario.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

This is essentially what I imagine a reverse 2008 map will look like. the Republican winning every single toss-up and a few surprise states in the process.

I thought about Oregon and Nevada, but they're in Villaraigosa's media market and Nevada's union machine probably means the state is gone for the GOP.

[BluegrassBlueVote]

One of the weakest Democratic tickets meets arguably the strongest Republican pairing imaginable. Christie pushes flirts with 400.

[PolitiJunkie]

Villaraigosa's a joke. He is a sub-par mayor who already has an extramarital affair, campaign finance ethics violation, and nepotism charges to his name. If you are going for the "Democratic rising star" concept, go Castro. Not that either of them could be on a ticket before making it to Governor or Senator (something that Castro could do, not in 2014, but maybe in the 2018 Texas Gubernatorial Election or 2018 Senate Election). Klobuchar's pretty average; Gillibrand is the much stronger female Democratic presidential prospect.

On the other hand, Christie and Martinez are two of the strongest Republican candidates for a general election. Neither appears as a spineless flip flopper or angry maverick like Romney and McCain did respectively, but at the same time, neither come from the most severely conservative wing of the Republican Party that is littered with the likes of Ted Cruz and Rick Santorum. Additionally, Christie and Martinez can appeal to a whole lot of factions- youth, Hispanics, moderates, independents, fiscal conservatives, Northeasterners, and Westerners (Martinez could do a lot for Nevada/Colorado/New Mexico). Martinez has pretty solid socially conservative credentials, and while neither is hugely embodying of the so-con perspective, a so-con is still obviously going to vote for Christie/Martinez over V/K.

So I'd say Christie/Martinez wins Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Florida quite easily. Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Virginia are Lean R. Very very narrow Villaraigosa/Klobuchar wins in New Hampshire and Wisconsin. Iowa would be the biggest toss-up.

[PJ]

I find this scenario extremely unlikely, but I'll post it for the sake of those who want it to happen.

Summary: For the women vote, Martinez is a stronger candidate than Klobuchar, and Villaraigosa is a weak hispanic candidate compared Martinez. Personally, I think between the two dem nominees, Villaraigosa would be VP to Klobuchar.

[Anti Democrat Democrat Club]

Maine itself, Wisconsin, Nevada, and Oregon are tossups in this scenario. Villaraigosa is extremely weak, and this is the strongest ticket the Republicans can run. Honestly, the only reason Wisco is red is because of Klobuchar.

[Mister Mets]

I find this scenario extremely unlikely, but I'll post it for the sake of those who want it to happen.

Summary: For the women vote, Martinez is a stronger candidate than Klobuchar, and Villaraigosa is a weak hispanic candidate compared Martinez. Personally, I think between the two dem nominees, Villaraigosa would be VP to Klobuchar.

I sincerely doubt that any politician would pick Villaraigosa as a running mate.

See the comment above you for the reasons why not.

[PJ]

Oregon has the lowest level of moderates in the country. It's almost certainly not a swing state.

[Mister Mets]

Oregon has the lowest level of moderates in the country. It's almost certainly not a swing state.

Bush lost it by a quarter of a percent in 2000. Gore won the national vote by more. In a landslide Republican year when you have a great Republican ticket versus a horrible Democratic candidate, it might be in play.

[PJ]

I know, I just meant between the two of them.

I find this scenario extremely unlikely, but I'll post it for the sake of those who want it to happen.

Summary: For the women vote, Martinez is a stronger candidate than Klobuchar, and Villaraigosa is a weak hispanic candidate compared Martinez. Personally, I think between the two dem nominees, Villaraigosa would be VP to Klobuchar.

I sincerely doubt that any politician would pick Villaraigosa as a running mate.

See the comment above you for the reasons why not.

[pbrower2a]

Big-city mayors are at least one statewide office away from the Presidency, just like Congressional Representatives. Never mind that "Mayor of Los Angeles" has far more responsibility than a Senator or a Governor from a small and homogeneous state (Delaware and New Hampshire are the only such states that that at all resembles a microcosm of America.

Big city mayors rarely represent places of suburban-style development (OK -- Los Angeles, Phoenix, Dallas, Indianapolis, and Houston might be exceptions) as well as core cities and never any significant rural areas. The are usually in areas at most on the boundary between two cultural regions of the country. Nobody outside their state owes them any favors (it is usually the other way around).

If Rudy Giuliani could never win the Republican nomination for President, no big-city mayor has a real chance except after being elected Governor or Senator.

[PJ]

Big-city mayors are at least one statewide office away from the Presidency, just like Congressional Representatives. Never mind that "Mayor of Los Angeles" has far more responsibility than a Senator or a Governor from a small and homogeneous state (Delaware and New Hampshire are the only such states that that at all resembles a microcosm of America.

Big city mayors rarely represent places of suburban-style development (OK -- Los Angeles, Phoenix, Dallas, Indianapolis, and Houston might be exceptions) as well as core cities and never any significant rural areas. The are usually in areas at most on the boundary between two cultural regions of the country. Nobody outside their state owes them any favors (it is usually the other way around).

If Rudy Giuliani could never win the Republican nomination for President, no big-city mayor has a real chance except after being elected Governor or Senator.

It's not that he won't get elected because he's only a mayor. He probably won't get elected because of all the things PolitiJunkie listed.

[morgieb]

Republicans would flog the Democrats. It's basically their strongest ticket vs one of our weakest.

I could semi-see a right-wing third party ticket doing well here though.

[Michaelf7777777]

A 384-154 win for Christie

[PJ]

Christie gets MN, MI, RI, CT, DE, MD, and ME but not WI?

A 384-154 win for Christie

[Consciously Unconscious]

It'd be a big win.