AHC: Vermont and Alabama both on the losing side...

AHC: Pick a US Presidential election of the 20th or 21st century. With a POD less than a decade previous, have the presidential election end up with Vermont and Alabama's electoral votes going to the same candidate *and* have that candidate end up losing the election.

Note, this may be easier in the 19th century with some of the elections in the 1840s, but I'm looking for 20th and 21st.
 
1968 - Humphrey wins, but Wallace doesn't run so Alabama goes to Nixon.

Map (narrow victory):
genusmap.php
 
Cheating slightly, but how about Bernie Sanders runs as an independent and wins Vermont, and the election winner doesn't win Alabama? That way they are both on A losing side...
 

Thande

Donor
What if the main issue is federal power vs states' rights, and Vermont and Alabama both disagree with something the federal government wants to enforce, and it's a different something, but they both vote for the same pro states' rights candidate because his policies will both let them gain the power to change it? Like, for example, the federal government has passed amendments requiring all states to ban both gay marriage and right-to-work policies.
 
Considering Vermont was a Republican state until the nineties, and Alabama was potentially up for grabs by the GOP at least by the late sixties, there are loads of elections in which this could apply. Not really much of a challenge.
 

Thande

Donor
Considering Vermont was a Republican state until the nineties, and Alabama was potentially up for grabs by the GOP at least by the late sixties, there are loads of elections in which this could apply. Not really much of a challenge.

That's true. Our idea of plausibility is probably masked by the fact that the Democratic candidate in 1976 happened to be a southerner who could mend bridges. If 1976 was Reagan versus somebody like Birch Bayh with a good economy and no Iran hostage crisis, it could happen then.
 
Top