Pat Buchanan in 1992

[CPT MikeyMike]

Suppose Pat Buchanan succeeds in denying President Bush the Republican nomination in 1992. I'm curious to see how you guys would think about that scenario and the following:

1. Would Ross Perot fully withdraw from the race? Since he was generally running because of his hatred for Bush, would he simply drop out and back Buchanan?

2. Who would Buchanan select as his running mate?

3. How well would Buchanan do in the general election against Bill Clinton? Would Buchanan do any better in the south and in the Rocky Mountain states?

[War on Want]

Buchanan would do about as good as Bush in the South and okay in the Mountain West but would get thrashed in the Southwest. He could possibly loose Texas even with greatly increased Hispanic turnout.

[cmt]

Hmm, very interesting.

I'm not sure that Perot would have necessarily withdrawn (well he did withdraw, and then got back in it in real life, didn't he?).  I think Perot might have actually thought it would be easier to win against Buchanan.

Who would be a Buchanan VP?  How about Rep. Duncan Hunter of CA who also opposed NAFTA and shares Buchanan's position on immigration.

I think there is a very real chance that in a Clinton-Buchanan-Perot race in 1992 that Clinton would have still won but that Perot may have done much better than his 19%.  He might have pushed that up to 25% or so.

[War on Want]

I was thinking something like this, forgot to add in Buchanan best case scenario:

[True Democrat]

I think Perot has a chance at second, but I'll give him third:

477-61

[Kaine for Senate '18]

[War on Want]

Why would Utah vote for Buchanan? Mormons don't have a problem with him. Also flip Texas and Maine to Texas.

[War on Want]

oops my bad, I meant why would Utah go for Perot? That makes no sense. Also Texas would vote for Clinton in this scenario because of huge Hispanic turnout.