President McMullin?

[Catalunya]

I know it’s almost impossible to get him into the Oval Office, but let’s say Hillary wins Pennsylvania and Michigan as well and McMullin wins Utah nobody has a majority.

Even than McConell and Ryan would probably just get Trump to become President, or if they’re feeling bold Mike Pence. Let’s say Democrats win the Senate seats in Pennsylvania and Missouri as well somehow we have a 50-50 EC split, with which Democrats can make Kaine VP than we could see deadlock in the House cause Paul Ryan to decide that a McMullin presidency is better than a Kaina presidency.

Somehow all of this comes into fruition. How would the McMullin presidency look like? Who would be in his cabinet and what kind of legislation would he try to pass? How would 2018 and 2020 go?

 

[claybaskit]

No talk of a wall. More conservative government he still loses in 20.

 

[rosa]

Oh hey I did this

 

[rosa]

Contrary to others, I believe McMullin could still win in 2020, but that's beside the point. I'd see him switching back to join the Republicans, having 'saved' the Republican party. His presidency itself would be much how a Romney Presidency would have looked like. He would have attempted to repeal the ACA, appointed justices in the mold of Scalia and Thomas, and done as much to privatize what he could.

 

[napoleon IV]

Contrary to others, I believe McMullin could still win in 2020, but that's beside the point. I'd see him switching back to join the Republicans, having 'saved' the Republican party. His presidency itself would be much how a Romney Presidency would have looked like. He would have attempted to repeal the ACA, appointed justices in the mold of Scalia and Thomas, and done as much to privatize what he could.

What's his path to victory exactly? He was only on the ballot in 11 states (although he had write-in access on most others), and the only state he got a large portion of the vote in is Utah (and even then he had a little under half of Trump's vote share). Even if he does outstandingly better than OTL he probably maxes out at winning Utah, and a contingent election is unlikely because a really successful McMullin campaign would split the Republican vote and given Clinton a victory. Finally, if somehow he overcomes all of this and gets to a contingent election there's no way the House Republicans are going to support him, because their base would eat them alive.

 

[rosa]

What's his path to victory exactly? He was only on the ballot in 11 states (although he had write-in access on most others), and the only state he got a large portion of the vote in is Utah (and even then he had a little under half of Trump's vote share). Even if he does outstandingly better than OTL he probably maxes out at winning Utah, and a contingent election is unlikely because a really successful McMullin campaign would split the Republican vote and given Clinton a victory. Finally, if somehow he overcomes all of this and gets to a contingent election there's no way the House Republicans are going to support him, because their base would eat them alive.

Here's how I did it. In the House, it deadlocks as Republicans continue to bleed to McMullin and some Democrats give in as they realize Clinton's chances are nil. Now, this isn't extremely likely in any way, but it's the most plausible way to get a McMullin victory.

 

[napoleon IV]

Right, but in this scenario there's no reason for the House to choose McMullin. He won less than 1% of the vote nationwide and only 1 state. In the fight between him and Donald Trump for the soul of the Republican Party it's clear who Republican voters prefer. GOP Congressmen deciding "We don't care what the voters think, we're choosing McMullin" would be electoral suicide, and they know that. They may really dislike Donald Trump, but they'll back him for fear of what their voters will do if they don't. This isn't just "not extremely likely" it's "What if Operation Sealion Succeeds?" levels of unlikely. Basically, the only way for McMullin to win a contingent election is if he proves that a substantial fraction of Republican voters are on his side, and if he does that there won't be a contingent election because the split Republican vote would allow Clinton to clean up in the Electoral College. This electoral math is the reason that third parties don't succeed in the US.

 

[lerk]

would be electoral suicide

Not just electoral but could actually be literal suicide. I think the best case scenario for McMullin in a contingent election is essentially we get Fear, Loathing, and Gumbo but in 2016, and he still won't become President.

 

[rosa]

Right, but in this scenario there's no reason for the House to choose McMullin. He won less than 1% of the vote nationwide and only 1 state. In the fight between him and Donald Trump for the soul of the Republican Party it's clear who Republican voters prefer. GOP Congressmen deciding "We don't care what the voters think, we're choosing McMullin" would be electoral suicide, and they know that. They may really dislike Donald Trump, but they'll back him for fear of what their voters will do if they don't. This isn't just "not extremely likely" it's "What if Operation Sealion Succeeds?" levels of unlikely. Basically, the only way for McMullin to win a contingent election is if he proves that a substantial fraction of Republican voters are on his side, and if he does that there won't be a contingent election because the split Republican vote would allow Clinton to clean up in the Electoral College. This electoral math is the reason that third parties don't succeed in the US.

No, this is definitely not Sealion levels of unlikely. Donald Trump was still extremely disliked by both Democrats and Republicans at this point, and Republican leader still had some kind of faith in the Republican voting public at the time. It wasn't until a little later that Republicans began to fall even more into the fold and realize "hey, these people are kind of dangerous". Again, quite unlikely, but not bordering on ASB like Sealion is.