On the main blog, Dan writes about Nevada and New Mexico:

If Republicans in those states are as libertarian-minded as they’re cracked up to be, Barr could inflict some real damage on McCain.

It’s hard to know, but despite the libertarian leanings of our former Gov. Johnson I think it is safe to say that Republicans in New Mexico are much less libertarian-minded than their fellow partisans in, say, Texas.  These are impressions and may exaggerate things a bit, but New Mexico Republicans tend to be more moderate in the center and north of the state, strongly socially conservative and more restrictionist in the south and southeast and, when you can find them, staunchly and primarily pro-gun and anti-EPA in the west.  While I can see Barr gaining some support on account of immigration, his opposition to the war is not likely to resonate very well back home among most Republicans, but I could see him making some inroads in the southeast.  My guess, and I admit that is mostly just a guess, is that Barr would fare much better in states such as Montana and Idaho.  Those are states that are probably least in danger of being flipped to Obama unless Barr has a remarkably large share of the vote.  Nevada and New Mexico may be close enough that even the relatively smaller success of a Barr ticket could change the outcome.  Depending on the impact Barr wants to have, he could choose the focus of his campaigning accordingly.   

P.S.  Not that it will matter to the Libertarians who are busily deciding their nomination, but I would add that I have very little interest in voting for a Libertarian ticket that does not have Barr at the top.  If Barr does not win the nomination, it will be Baldwin ’08 for me.

Advertisement