AHC/WI: Libertarian GOP and Populist Democrats

1) Goldwater votes for the Civil Rights Act
2) Rockefeller is the nominee in 1964
3) Nixon is the nominee in 1968 and picks Goldwater as his running mate after a hard-fought primary.
4) George Wallace avoids getting shot in 1972 and wins the plurality in the Democratic Primary. At a brokered convention he pushes Scoop Jackson, a New Dealer opposed to bussing and other social liberal policies, onto the ticket either as nominee or running-mate.
5) When Nixon is forced out, Goldwater (who is pro-choice and ultimately came to oppose the drug war) is president. He proceeds to pick recently-retired Margaret Chase Smith as his running mate. Goldwater also appoints Milton Friedman Fed Chair, who puts in place a policy of tight money in response to 70s inflation which prevents things from getting as bad as OTL.
6) Goldwater, in conjunction with certain Democrats, puts in place modest entitlement reforms like means-testing Security and Medicare that please both anti-rich liberals and right-wing hawks.

Goldwater-Republicanism: liberal on abortion, liberal on drug policy, fiscally conservative, tight on money, and with a focus on winning upper middle class educated women, becomes the GOP norm.
 
The "establishment" wing of the GOP has always been fairly libertarian in terms of economics. I don't know how you make the party libertarian generally, particularly with regards to drugs, with a PoD in the 90's. You need to avoid the drug policies of Nixon and Reagan in order to not of the anti-drug stance of the party firmly established. The only thing that sort of springs to mind is a scenario where Ron Paul snatches the GOP nomination in 2008 or 2012 by some series of crazy occurrences. He'd almost certainly lose in either election, but his libertarianism might be able to impact the party platform during the election and into the future. As for the Democrats, you're seeing it now to some degree with the next generation of Democrat elected officials. If labor movements hold greater sway over the party somehow maybe you could see more populism generally. Obama's ACA being just straight single payer, and somehow passing, could close the healthcare issue for the Democrat side and move the goalposts further towards a left wing populism.
 
3) Nixon is the nominee in 1968 and picks Goldwater as his running mate after a hard-fought primary.
That seems unlikely with Goldwater being critical of the Eisenhower administration and you still get nixon’s Strictness on drugs. It might be easier to just have Goldwater not run in ‘64 and have him win in ‘68
 
Huey Long's Presidency reshapes the Democratic Party as a solidly left wing party. His share our wealth movement and LongCare healthcare plan are popular across most of the country, but his anti-corporate screeds, isolationism and support for immigration restrictions draws the ire of more pro-business and hawkishly anti-communist republicans.
 
That seems unlikely with Goldwater being critical of the Eisenhower administration and you still get nixon’s Strictness on drugs. It might be easier to just have Goldwater not run in ‘64 and have him win in ‘68

Maybe, but IIRC Goldwater wasn't totally against the Drug War yet in 1968.

But anyways, a pro-civil rights Barry Goldwater who keeps the GOP pro-choice and has the GOP being the more liberal party on drug policy mostly gets you to where you want to be. If there's an exception, it'd be in foreign policy as Goldwater was hawkish (albeit not as hawkish as he's portrayed). Part of the reason I like having goldy become President in 1973 rather than 1969 is that it take Vietnam off the table as an issue.

If the Goldwater v Nixon race is tight, I could see Nixon picking Goldy just to unify the party. Goldwater was also a team player, so I don't see the issue.

Goldwater's social changes could be a means for distancing himself from Nixon as well.

Goldwater-Smith is a good ticket for 1968 though as well.
 
Last edited:
Top