DBWI: RFK Dies in '68?

As we all know, on June 5, 1968, then-Senator and presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy was nearly assassinated by Sirhan Sirhan, a pro-Palestinian activist, as he walked through the Ambassador Hotel's kitchen following his victory in the South Dakota and California primaries. On his way to address supporters and the press, Kennedy made the ill-advised decision to ignore the security concerns of his private detail, and pass through this narrow walkway in the kitchen. As a result, he was temporarily separated from them, at which point Sirhan opened fire. In the chaos, he managed to fire off two shots, one of them wounding Kennedy severely and the other killing Democratic party activist Elizabeth Evans. He was then quickly subdued by bodyguard William Barry. While Kennedy was not killed that day, his injuries caused him to drop out of the 1968 primary and endorse Vice President Hubert Humphrey. Humphrey then went on to lose the general election to Republican Richard Nixon, who was in turn defeated by Senator Kennedy in 1972. While Kennedy was of course personally popular, the central reason for his victory is widely agreed to be the last minute revelation by journalists that associates of the Nixon reelection campaign had burgled both the DNC headquarters in the Watergate office complex, and his opponent's own offices in New York. This, coupled with rumors about Vice President Spiro Agnew's own corruption (charges that were later confirmed by a rigorous investigation by Kennedy's Attorney General), not to mention his increasingly erratic behavior and repeated mishandling of the Vietnam War sunk Tricky Dick once and for all, leading RFK to a landslide in the electoral college, taking 486 EVs to Nixon's 52. Kennedy, and his running mate Oklahoma Senator Fred Harris, were inaugurated in January, 1973, and served until 1981.

But what if RFK had died that day in 1968? What if Sirhan had managed to rattle off just a few more shots, or perhaps just one much luckier shot, and killed the second Kennedy son in less than 5 years? Would Nixon still have been exposed as a crook, and lost reelection to a different opponent? Some suggest that Nixon's bitterness towards the Kennedy family fueled a paranoia deep within him, that caused him to act irrationally and wildly, leading to the incidents that brought him down (while also offering a possible explanation for his inexplicably poor action in regards to Vietnam). Is this really true, or would he have been as unscrupulous no matter who he was facing? And, without Kennedy in the race, who might that be?

Of course, it's also worth discussing President Robert Kennedy's far reaching and ambitious agenda, and what would become of the US without him, but I've rambled enough. Who cares to take it from here?
 
OOC: For reference, here's the electoral map i'm going by. May or may not make much sense, I recognize that, but just roll with it; point is, Kennedy wins huge and Nixon gets crushed, but still takes a handful of states as to avoid a /total/ collapse. If someone wants to propose a more logical alternative with the same effect, i'm open to changing it.

D9F72319-B094-4CCF-981B-0D1AE5D5E60E.jpeg
 
Nixon most likely loses to some other Democrat in 1972, albiet more narrowly. The question is can that new Democratic President enact a Full Employment Bill, the National Health Act, or the other liberal policies of the RFK administration? And remember that Kennedy almost lost in 1976 due to the poor economy. A less competent or charismatic Democrat might lose to Ronald Reagan.
 
Nixon most likely loses to some other Democrat in 1972, albiet more narrowly. The question is can that new Democratic President enact a Full Employment Bill, the National Health Act, or the other liberal policies of the RFK administration? And remember that Kennedy almost lost in 1976 due to the poor economy. A less competent or charismatic Democrat might lose to Ronald Reagan.

Who do you think is the most likely opponent to Nixon in 72 if not Kennedy? Senator Harris himself, perhaps? I doubt HH could pull it off, though maybe if Nixon's still as sloppy ITTL as he was IOTL, virtually any of the most plausible candidates could've at least won by a squeaker assuming the scandal comes out similarly.

As for Kennedy's policies, I think there's a good chance that a President Harris, or President Eugene McCarthy, really most of the mainstream Democrats could've done many (or at least some) of the things he did. Given their solid majorities in Congress, as long as there was no major friction between the executive and legislative branches, passing bold legislation would've been rather easy I think. But with that said, Kennedy definitely did it differently than many others would have; his specific kind of "new liberalism" was not necessarily in the mainstream prior to his ascension. He pushed for increased cooperation with businesses to create jobs, rather than funding them entirely by tax increases and government programs, which was reflected in his Full Employment Bill. While the federal government did create many jobs through public works programs and the expanded Peace Corps, as well as its domestic equivalent, the AmeriCorps program, Kennedy also sought to stimulate private sector growth by limiting regulation and evening out the tax code to close various loopholes. Job training and placement programs also became more common in poor areas throughout the country, and while the economy did stagnate for a time, it quickly expanded during Kennedy's second term.

You're absolutely right about Reagan in 76, though. I think anybody but Kennedy would've lost, quite honestly. No other candidate would've been able go toe to toe with his charisma, and we most likely would've seen Reagan/Baker win. The televised debates between those two, RFK and Reagan, were pretty epic as far as debates go. Despite his huge mandate from 72, Bobby was humbled by his much closer reelection.
 
Who do you think is the most likely opponent to Nixon in 72 if not Kennedy? Senator Harris himself, perhaps? I doubt HH could pull it off, though maybe if Nixon's still as sloppy ITTL as he was IOTL, virtually any of the most plausible candidates could've at least won by a squeaker assuming the scandal comes out similarly.

As for Kennedy's policies, I think there's a good chance that a President Harris, or President Eugene McCarthy, really most of the mainstream Democrats could've done many (or at least some) of the things he did. Given their solid majorities in Congress, as long as there was no major friction between the executive and legislative branches, passing bold legislation would've been rather easy I think. But with that said, Kennedy definitely did it differently than many others would have; his specific kind of "new liberalism" was not necessarily in the mainstream prior to his ascension. He pushed for increased cooperation with businesses to create jobs, rather than funding them entirely by tax increases and government programs, which was reflected in his Full Employment Bill. While the federal government did create many jobs through public works programs and the expanded Peace Corps, as well as its domestic equivalent, the AmeriCorps program, Kennedy also sought to stimulate private sector growth by limiting regulation and evening out the tax code to close various loopholes. Job training and placement programs also became more common in poor areas throughout the country, and while the economy did stagnate for a time, it quickly expanded during Kennedy's second term.

You're absolutely right about Reagan in 76, though. I think anybody but Kennedy would've lost, quite honestly. No other candidate would've been able go toe to toe with his charisma, and we most likely would've seen Reagan/Baker win. The televised debates between those two, RFK and Reagan, were pretty epic as far as debates go. Despite his huge mandate from 72, Bobby was humbled by his much closer reelection.

Reagan in '76 means no Bush in 1980. In fact the 1980s might be a Democratic decade if Reagan loses his re-election bid.
 
Does Teddy still end up the Kennedy family embarrassment of OTL? If Bobby dies, maybe he won't drive drunk and leave his mistress to drown in the bottom of a river.
 
Top