1976 scenarios

WI RFK lived and lost either the nomination or the election to HHH or Nixon? If he ran in 1976, what would the consequences be and would Reagan or Bush Sr. become President? I know that people felt that 68 was the last chance to change the race situation, and Nixon presumably would save Vietnam barring Watergate. However he'd be the best Democratic President post-FDR (Clinton made the Dems electable, but didn't pass much. Don't get me started on The Big Bad Rabbit's "victim".) I don't know his thoughts on the economy, besides tax incentives for industry to employ the poor. If someone wants to create a timeline, you're more than welcome.

P.S. Any thoughts on the proposed '68 debate between RFK and Nixon? (Quite brash, considering a perceived :rolleyes: generation gap in 1960 was a major factor. )
 
Last edited:
WI RFK lived and lost either the nomination or the election to HHH or Nixon? If he ran in 1976, what would the consequences be and would Reagan or Bush Sr. become President? I know that people felt that 68 was the last chance to change the race situation, and Nixon presumably would save Vietnam barring Watergate. However he'd be the best Democratic President post-FDR (Clinton made the Dems electable, but didn't pass much. Don't get me started on The Big Bad Rabbit's "victim".) I don't know his thoughts on the economy, besides tax incentives for industry to employ the poor. If someone wants to create a timeline, you're more than welcome.

P.S. Any thoughts on the proposed '68 debate between RFK and Nixon? (Quite brash, considering a perceived :rolleyes: generation gap in 1960 was a major factor. )

If RFK had lived and lost the nomination to HHH then he most likely would have run again in 72 and gotten the nomination but he would've lost to Nixon (IMO most likely scenario). However if he had got the nomination in 68 and lost to Nixon then he would likely sit out in 72 and try his luck again in 76, thus Watergate and Vietnam war happen pretty much the same in OTL. I'm not sure RFK would have gotten the nomination over Carter in 76. As for a the possible RFK and Nixon debate in 68, RFK would be eager to have it Nixon, on the other hand, clearly would not. If Nixon were to agree to the debates he would likely insist that 3rd party candidate George be included. Somehow I don't the Nixon and RFK camps would be able to come to some agreement on the debates and therfore they never take place.
 
If RFK had lived and lost the nomination to HHH then he most likely would have run again in 72 and gotten the nomination but he would've lost to Nixon (IMO most likely scenario). However if he had got the nomination in 68 and lost to Nixon then he would likely sit out in 72 and try his luck again in 76, thus Watergate and Vietnam war happen pretty much the same in OTL. I'm not sure RFK would have gotten the nomination over Carter in 76. As for a the possible RFK and Nixon debate in 68, RFK would be eager to have it Nixon, on the other hand, clearly would not. If Nixon were to agree to the debates he would likely insist that 3rd party candidate George be included. Somehow I don't the Nixon and RFK camps would be able to come to some agreement on the debates and therfore they never take place.

I think hypothesizing about a Bobby '76 run is particually interesting for two reasons. One being that it is not for certain that Bobby could have beat Carter in the Primaries. Carter had an extremley talented campaign team that understood how the new Primary System worked. That's how he was able to beat out more qualified candidates such as Scoop Jackson, Llyod Bentsen, Mo Udall...etc. Bobby might be used to the old school campaign style that he ran for Jack in '60 and for himself in '68, which may not be sufficent in 1976. Also Bobby if he stays on as Senator for New York, would have been more tarred as an Washington Insider for his 10 years of Senate Experience, working as Attorney General in JFK's adminstration and Legal consul for Joe McCarthy in the '50's.

So all in all, I think Bobby could probably pull it off(Especially if he can get on the Judiciary commitee, and play up the Ruthless Bobby image against those in the Watergate hearings). He was the best one out of the Kennedy brothers who kept his libido in check, and I don't think he drunk as much as Teddy. So without Scandal he could definatley have it, but it would not way be an easy route to the cornation
 
In 1976, I don't believe the transition to the present primary system was fully completed. If no Watergate, why is being an insider a big issue? Outsiders like Carter and Clinton both had disastrous and OK presidencies respectively. To say nothing of Wilson and Bush :D.The choice for a VP is Carter if you want some Southern states, or Jackson for the suburban swing voters. As RFK himself put it: "I appeal to people who have problems". As for the debates, why not simply agree on candidates who are contesting all states? Or he can run for NY Governor in 1970, presumably he can beat Rockefeller. Plus Wilson and LBJ, Southerners both, crashed and burned, and Carter just exploded :D. (Bush never got beyond his first term in public perception in my opinion).
 
Last edited:
If RFK had lived and lost the nomination to HHH then he most likely would have run again in 72 and gotten the nomination but he would've lost to Nixon (IMO most likely scenario). However if he had got the nomination in 68 and lost to Nixon then he would likely sit out in 72 and try his luck again in 76, thus Watergate and Vietnam war happen pretty much the same in OTL. I'm not sure RFK would have gotten the nomination over Carter in 76. As for a the possible RFK and Nixon debate in 68, RFK would be eager to have it Nixon, on the other hand, clearly would not. If Nixon were to agree to the debates he would likely insist that 3rd party candidate George be included. Somehow I don't the Nixon and RFK camps would be able to come to some agreement on the debates and therfore they never take place.

I don't know; Bobby could very well have beaten Nixon in '72, especially if he loses the nomination to HHH. He'd be able to present himself as a dove and not be perceived as weak like McGovern was. Plus, he knows the same political tricks that Nixon does, and Tricky Dick won't be able to completely dismiss him, like he did to McGovern.
 
I don't know; Bobby could very well have beaten Nixon in '72, especially if he loses the nomination to HHH. He'd be able to present himself as a dove and not be perceived as weak like McGovern was. Plus, he knows the same political tricks that Nixon does, and Tricky Dick won't be able to completely dismiss him, like he did to McGovern.

I disagree, I don't think any Democrat could beaten Nixon in 72. Not even Christ, Buddha, Gandhi or Mother Theresa could have defeated Nixon. The only difference is that RFK would have done better McGovern and made it much closer.
 
I think it'd be a stretch for RFK to lose in 1968 in any way to begin with. He had an appeal which stretched to near all sectors of US society, presented change and a reuniting of a divided America, and carried with him the memories of his brother's Presidency and simpler times.
 
In 1972, Nixon is invincible. Purring economy, Vietnam drawdown, no draft, relative domestic tranquillity. Why vote Dem, even without their Barry :D? 1968, willful destruction of the party by LBJ rather than give RFK his chair, civil unrest not seen in a century, Vietnam wrongly fought and unpopular, and the turning of the South. Although the only Democrat who has any chance of beating Nixon, loyalty to incumbents takes precedence for bosses (unsure about Daley, conflicting sources). And beat Nixon in ten weeks. Robert Kennedy was far too smart to commit political harakari in 1972. Forgetting what I've mentioned above, as long as the economy is relatively OK, incumbents get re-elected. In 1976, Nixon is leaving unpopular and the GOP is discredited. RFK realized that Camelot was obsolete, and that what Americans want is security. The secret that both Nixon and Kennedy know, and is the key to the campaign. When he assumes personal and ideological command in the 70's, there can be a civil discourse with Nixon without rabid hippies and silent hawks on the Democratic bench. Don't get me started on the Big Bad Rabbit's victim. He is older than RFK,as is Bush Sr, his probable successor. Hardly any experience, and if Nixon survives till the end of his term, no need for an outsider. The last true outsider was the Dixiecrat Wilson, in the end a Democratic Bush. If Reagan is butterflied by RFK in 1980, we have a succession of moderate Democratic and Republican Presidents, RFK, Bush Sr, Clinton, Bush Jr (no flames please).

P.S. How would a RFK-Nixon debate in 68 turn out assuming they agree?
No Canadian-style shouting match (yours are way better). Nor can we have an improperly formatted yawnfest :rolleyes: like Kennedy-McCarthy. "Why do you want to be President?" Prompt recital of CV. Vietnam? "Cut and run" (Gene) "Drawdown" (RFK) Race: detailed proposals. (RFK) "Forced relocation" (Gene). It would at least be quite interesting, original with thoughtful policy ideas and civility.
 
Last edited:
So all in all, I think Bobby could probably pull it off(Especially if he can get on the Judiciary commitee, and play up the Ruthless Bobby image against those in the Watergate hearings). He was the best one out of the Kennedy brothers who kept his libido in check, and I don't think he drunk as much as Teddy. So without Scandal he could definatley have it, but it would not way be an easy route to the cornation

Historico, agreed except my scenario has Nixon erasing smoking gun in 1972. No scandals for RFK, but the Mongoose stuff will come out by then, but can be damage-controlled. Nothing happened anyways... I'm keeping Nixon because he's my type of Republican (though I would vote for Thatcher:D) and also an RFK admirer.
 
I think it'd be a stretch for RFK to lose in 1968 in any way to begin with. He had an appeal which stretched to near all sectors of US society, presented change and a reuniting of a divided America, and carried with him the memories of his brother's Presidency and simpler times.

Actually it would be a stretch to assume that he would win in 68. First of all when he was assassinated in June of 68 it was far from certain that he would get the nomimation, he was lagging considerably behind in the delagate count to VP Humphrey. Secondly, even if he did get the nomination it's not altogether certain he could beat Nixon. Nixon had the advantage of running for president 8 years before, he learned the lessions of 1960, he learned them well and he did not make the same mistakes of 8 years before. Nixon ran a very disciplined and effective campaign, many people underestimated Nixon in 68, possibly RFK would have too.:cool:
 
Actually it would be a stretch to assume that he would win in 68. First of all when he was assassinated in June of 68 it was far from certain that he would get the nomimation, he was lagging considerably behind in the delagate count to VP Humphrey. Secondly, even if he did get the nomination it's not altogether certain he could beat Nixon. Nixon had the advantage of running for president 8 years before, he learned the lessions of 1960, he learned them well and he did not make the same mistakes of 8 years before. Nixon ran a very disciplined and effective campaign, many people underestimated Nixon in 68, possibly RFK would have too.:cool:

Agreed with Std X, Nixon knew RFK was enemy #1 much earlier than vice-versa. Best route for RFK is for Daley to say no, overthrow Daley with 72 commission :D, and win in 1976.
 
In 1976, I don't believe the transition to the present primary system was fully completed. If no Watergate, why is being an insider a big issue? Outsiders like Carter and Clinton both had disastrous and OK presidencies respectively. To say nothing of Wilson and Bush :D.The choice for a VP is Carter if you want some Southern states, or Jackson for the suburban swing voters. As RFK himself put it: "I appeal to people who have problems". As for the debates, why not simply agree on candidates who are contesting all states? Or he can run for NY Governor in 1970, presumably he can beat Rockefeller. Plus Wilson and LBJ, Southerners both, crashed and burned, and Carter just exploded :D. (Bush never got beyond his first term in public perception in my opinion).

As I said before if he had won the nomination in and lost to Nixon in 68 then would likely take a page Nixon's playbook (the comeback 8 years later) make another run in 76. In the meantime he runs for reelection in 70 to senate rather than run for governor. He supports Art Goldberg for NY Governor but Goldberg still loses to Rockefeller, and he convinces his brother Ted to seek reelection in the Senate that same year (Chappaquidick still happens), The best opportunity comes to him in 1974 with the race for Governor of NY, Rockefeller had just stepped down at the end of the previous year to give his Lietantenant Gov Malcolm Wilson as head start. Perhaps after 10 years in the Senate he feels he's being overshadowed by his brother Ted and may feel the need to gain some necessary executive experience and outsider credentails with a eye towards 76. The Governorship of New York would pretty much his for the taking. He represented the state long enough for the carpetbagger stigama to completely disappear. He would easily beat Hugh Carey in the Democratic primary and likely have little problem beating Malcom Wilson in the governor's race, and I think he would take Mario Cuomo as his Lietentant Governor. So he enters the race in 76, he wins some primaries and gives Jimmy Carter a run for his money but it won't be enough to beat Carter and so he ends up coming in second to Carter in the primaries and at the Conventon. However he does have a distinguished career as Governor and remains pretty for most of the time he served. After serving terms he leaves office in 1987 and Mario Cuomo succeeds him as Governor.
 
I understand that Carter had a great primary team. However it's Jimmy Carter we're talking about. It's not so much that RFK has "the name" (as we saw in '80:rolleyes:), but rather is a known quantity. It's not Hillary vs. Obama, the known, experienced, older candidate against the dark horse. Hillary was never the leader of the Democratic Party. She was just the establishment candidate, nothing more, nothing less. As was Rudy. RFK is clearly the leader of the party, with the organization, will and decent policy/ideology. None of Carter's OTL opponents were leaders. Plus, if no Nixon resignation, why outsiders. Southerners (particularly Texans) have always crashed and burned, with the partial exception of Clinton. No reason to think differently. Besides, Carter makes an excellent veep. Plus, with RFK around, the civil war will end with "victory" for the New Dems, which took another 15 years in OTL.
 
Last edited:
I understand that Carter had a great primary team. However it's Jimmy Carter we're talking about. It's not so much that RFK has "the name" (as we saw in '80:rolleyes:), but rather is a known quantity. It's not Hillary vs. Obama, the known, experienced, older candidate against the dark horse. Hillary was never the leader of the Democratic Party. She was just the establishment candidate, nothing more, nothing less. As was Rudy. RFK is clearly the leader of the party, with the organization, will and decent policy/ideology. None of Carter's OTL opponents were leaders. Plus, if no Nixon resignation, why outsiders. Southerners (particularly Texans) have always crashed and burned, with the partial exception of Clinton. No reason to think differently. Besides, Carter makes an excellent veep. Plus, with RFK around, the civil war will end with "victory" for the New Dems, which took another 15 years in OTL.
Ok, the question is finally begged; Why would Watergate be butterflyed simply because RFK survived an attempt on life in 68? There are PODs that could make that possible but certainly not on the sole basis of RFK dodging an assassin's bullet. :rolleyes:
 
Absolutely not, but simply erasing the smoking gun tape can prevent his resignation. Watergate itself can be butterflied if CREEP merges with RNC ASAP. It was always stupid, since the Dems were not going to win for a long time anyways. Perhaps he got the idea from the internal RNC break-in in 65:D.
 
Absolutely not, but simply erasing the smoking gun tape can prevent his resignation. Watergate itself can be butterflied if CREEP merges with RNC ASAP. It was always stupid, since the Dems were not going to win for a long time anyways. Perhaps he got the idea from the internal RNC break-in in 65:D.

You would need a major change in Richard Nixon's personality for that one to happen. He didn't have the same total control over the RNC he had over things like CREEP, which were run by his whatever-you-want to call-them like Haldeman and Liddy.
 
Fine, but surely the tape can be erased with one tap of the pedal? Or so said Ms. Woods...
Ok,but there still will be an investigation, Senate hearings, Archie Cox, Woodward & Bernstein, and Leon Jaworski. Like Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton he will not be forced out of office or resign but he will be greatly damaged for the remaining 2 and a half years of his presidency. With Nixon remaining in office for the rest of his term VP Ford won't seek the GOP nomination so the pressumed frontrunner will either be John Connally or George HW Bush. But Reagan will challenge either one of them and probably will get the nomination.
 
Agree, but how will my RFK/Reagan matchup turn out in 1980? In 1976 RFK will probably win, for Reagan is seen as too extreme and the GOP is damaged goods, as they were last year. 1980 is far more debatable. Depending on how RFK handles the economy, such as letting Volcker perform his OTL role, we can see a narrow victory for the Democrats. RFK's charisma matches Reagan's. I'd say, depending on how Iran goes and Lebanon, where Kennedy would not send Marines, Bush Senior succeeds him. The presidencies go the same as OTL, minus Reagan. If this causes the RFK branch of the family to overtake JFK's branch politically, the Dems will gallop, not walk towards Pelosi-wank. Forgetting for a moment the felonies, strange vaccine theories, etc. I can't imagine RFK Jr getting elected outside of Pelosi's district or a very liberal NY one :p.

Robert Kennedy (1977-85), Lloyd Bentsen (1985-89) Bob Dole (1989-93) Bill Clinton (1993-2001) John McCain (2001-09) George W. Bush (2009-)

Robert F. Kennedy/James E. Carter- 316 ECV, 54.4%
Ronald Reagan/ John Connally- 218 ECV, 45.3%

1976 election results.
genusmap.php
 
Last edited:
TL: Kennedy Act II

June 5, 1968- Sen. Robert Kennedy thanks his supporters at the Ambassador Hotel after a narrow victory over Gene McCarthy. He decides to exit through the crowd instead of the kitchen, going with instinct over convenience. On June 18th, he wins the New York primary 60-40 over McCarthy. Now it appears that he has momentum, and the media spins it as such. June 26, 1968- Gene McCarthy announces that: "I am ending my campaign for the Presidency, because our goal of not having Lyndon Johnson as the nominee has been successful. Therefore my delegates are hereby released from their commitment to me. They may vote for whomever they choose." Giving HHH the delegates negates the whole point of the campaign, and since he didn't merge with RFK earlier, why now? Now it's down to Kennedy and Humphrey...

Fast forward to August 26, 1968- 1st ballot- Humphrey 850, RFK 600, and McCarthy 150. That only accounts for about half the delegates.
2nd ballot- HHH 1500, RFK, 1200. Now we're near deadlock, since Daley is leaning towards HHH, but wants to consult the others.
3rd ballot- Daley announces: "I cannot endorse an act of betrayal." Therefore, the Illinois delegation votes for Hubert Humphrey. 1750 votes for HHH, and he is duly nominated. RFK declines the Veep slot, like Hillary, and instead asks for State in the event of a Democratic victory.

Meanwhile Richard Nixon is watching the proceedings in New York. He tells Finch that "they just lost it. Humphrey is a LBJ clone and obeys everything he says. If they nominated Bobby, we'd have to worry. Now we just attack the Administration. No debates either."

Nixon-Agnew is nominated at the RNC, and HHH chooses Gov. Ellington of Tennessee as his running mate. Preliminary polling, shows Nixon with a fifteen-point lead, and he and Wallace will split the South...
 
Top