Fred Karger is a socially liberal, fiscally conservative, openly gay, Jewish atheist activist from California who briefly ran for the 2012 GOP nomination. He is pro-choice, supports marriage equality, supports the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, supports an assault weapons ban and universal background checks, supports immigration reform ("amnesty"), supports a non-interventionist foreign policy, supports the death penalty, and supports keeping the Guantanamo Bay Prison open. If Fred Karger had somehow won his party's nomination in 2012, what would his chances have been against Obama? Would his generally liberal policies have convinced some conservative, moderate, or even liberal Democrats to vote for him? Would bigots, xenophobes, racists, and white supremacists have voted for an ethnic Jew just to spite Obama? Would Karger have won a single state, or would he so turn off the GOP base (particularly the social conservatives) that turnout would be sufficiently low to allow Obama to win every state? Would the fact that Karger worked on and in the Reagan/Bush campaign and administration excite the base enough to vote for him as the nominee, assuming the other primary challenges (i.e. Santorum and Bachmann) were gone?
This is my map of predictions:
http://www.270towin.com/maps/597mk I figure Karger would choose Jon Huntsman, one of his primary challengers, because (a) Huntsman is also a "moderate" Republican who appeals to independent voters, and (b) because Huntsman is a Mormon and former Utah Governor, which Karger hopes will alleviate concerns among Mormon voters that Karger sued the LDS Church in 2008 over its support of Proposition 8. Ultimately, however, Karger is too liberal for Mormon voters in Utah (and Idaho and Arizona), and even their former Governor cannot save the ticket.
I have Karger/Huntsman winning West Virginia because Obama barely won the Democratic primary there, running against a federal inmate. If WV Democrats will not vote for Obama, then clearly WV Republicans will not vote for him. WV is a safe R state for Karger/Huntsman, despite the fact he is an openly gay, socially liberal, Jewish atheist. I have Kentucky as a win for Karger/Huntsman because of (a) demographics (the state is one of the whitest, and it is right next to WV [not a good prospect for Obama]), and (b) the fact that Kentucky elected Rand Paul to the Senate, perhaps suggesting a libertarian streak among some Kentuckians (is that too big of a stretch?). McCain lost some of Nebraska's electoral votes to Obama in 2008, suggesting the state is competitive; that said, it is not quite as conservative as neighboring Kansas, nor is it considered to be in the Bible Belt, unlike Kansas, so I think Nebraska will split in half for Karger, as it did for McCain in '08.
Texas, despite stereotypes, is not part of the Bible Belt, and while having a heavy social conservative influence, it also elected Ron Paul and is one of those states that I suspect will go Republican no matter what (whether the Republican nominee is a social conservative like Santorum, or a libertarian like Ron Paul,
or Fred Karger/Jon Huntsman). Finally, I have Montana, Alaska, Wyoming, and the Dakotas as breaking for Karger:
A.) As of 1964, Wyoming is so heavily Republican, that it would vote for Obama if he was the Republican nominee, and therefore Karger if he was the nominee.
B.) Alaska has a heavily libertarian streak, and is even trending Democratic lately.
C.) Finally, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Montana are three of the whitest and most Republican states in the country, and also have heavily libertarian (read: more fiscally-focused Republicans) streaks, and I suspect would be safe for Karger.
All that said, the end result is Karger/Huntsman winning just Alaska, Kentucky, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Texas, Wyoming, West Virginia, and a single congressional district in Nebraska. That is a landslide loss on the scale of 1964 or 1988; Obama/Biden received 471 electoral votes, and Karger/Huntsman received 67.
What are your thoughts? Entertain me.
