The matchup, or any libertarian vs. communitarian matchup really, would be really interesting to see. With fiscal and social conservativism decoupled, for instance, we could finally see which one drives the most votes in each state for certain.
But I'm not a pure communitarian, and NiK isn't a pure libertarian, so it would be a bit different from that, not to mention that the libertarian vote is split. It's rather hard making maps for this.
I'm not sure what NiK's positions are on most issues. I know that for a substantial portion of the electorate, they will vote their party regardless. This somewhat limits the amount of change from the mean that can occur in the span of one election. However, for the rest of the populace, there would be massive changes in voting habits.
I would be the pro-life candidate in the race, as NiK supports abortion rights. I could pretty easily position myself as the socially conservative candidate, although with NiK unafraid to pursue socially liberal ones, I wouldn’t need to run that terribly far to the right. That said, there are a number of hot-button social issues that I am not conservative on, such as immigration, although if NiK runs to the left, I might become the more conservative candidate by default. It probably wouldn’t be too difficult for me to pick up large chunks of the outstanding Catholic vote, the Mormon vote, and potentially even the Southern Baptist vote. I could probably take Utah and maybe Idaho with a little bit of triangulation between the Mormons, some of the evangelicals, and the old school democrats in the panhandle.
However, I think most of the race would be fought over economics. I would be the populist Keynesian with social justice undertones, and NiK would probably be more willing to evoke Reagan and fiscal discipline, which would probably sell better in a year like this one. However, I’m not sure which states this affects the most. I would win on economics in the Rust Belt (PA, OH, and MI especially) and among minorities, but probably get crushed in suburban and exurban areas. I might be able to retake Louisiana with a combination of the Cajun vote, African-American vote, and a chunk of the Baptist vote, and I might be able to get Arkansas or Tennessee, but I don’t have any strong ties to the South, so maybe not.
Appalachia would be interesting. I would probably run well in the old TVA areas, but the coal mining regions would probably kill me, as I am very much against coal. I don’t know if the social conservatism or the mining interests of the area would win out; I suspect the latter would. This also would vary depending on NiK’s position on the issue; it may not matter.
NiK would almost certainly take some of the Northeastern states back. I can’t see winning New Hampshire, and Vermont and Connecticut could go too. The Catholics in Massachusetts and Rhode Island would probably save me there, and the minorities in NYC might be enough to win the state, but I could also lose there. I wouldn’t be surprised in New Jersey also went to NiK.
As for the rest of the states, I can’t really say. I suspect, like in 1960, almost every state would be a swing state. I have no idea what California would do, for example. Adding a strong Libertas campaign into the mix only complicates it more, but I would certainly win a few more states that way.
Of course, I could just implode and all of this would go for naught.
Poll
