Humphrey Wins In 1968: What Next?

I wanna bump this topic since I think it deserves good discussion and it looks like it only made it to the tip of an iceberg:

I would peg Rockefeller as the man who would succeed Humphrey, whether in 1972 or later in 1976 (Rockefeller's 1979 death of the OTL is also not assured, as I believe it was cause by a heart attack while in mid-coitus). If 1972, he'd be young enough that it wouldn't be too greatly a radical "achievement", or whatever you may label it. If 1976, he'd be pulling a Reagan, but would still be some years younger than Reagan when he was elected (I believe Reagan was 69 when he became President, and Rocky would have been maybe 67 or so).

The question is can Humphrey get reelected in 1972, or is it unlikely?
 
If the economy is stalled and withdrawals aren't completed, then Humphrey could be defeated by Reagan or Rocky in 1972. If neither of them fix the economy, then it'll be Scoop or Ted Kennedy in '76, and go from there. Humphrey wouldn't be able to go to China (though IOTL all candidates except Reagan advocated switching to the PRC) like Nixon did without taking major flak from the Right.
 
If Humphrey manages to salvage what he can in Vietnam and keeps the domestic economy chugging along, I think he's a shoo-in for '72. If not, then you're probably going to have President Reagan eight years earlier than IOTL.

I get the feeling though that this earlier Reagan presidency is going to be less conservative than IOTL's (the early seventies wasn't exactly ripe for slash and burn neoliberalism), but largely the same. He's probably re-elected in 1976 over someone like Henry Jackson or Ed Muskie.

If Humphrey, however, is re-elected in '72, his likely successors are either Ted Kennedy or Ed Muskie, come '76.
 
TNF:"less conservative but largely the same"? :confused: Would Gene or George McGovern challenge Humphrey in the 1972 primaries because he isn't liberal enough (you can taste the irony)? Reagan would try and apply his methods and if the economy doesn't start recovering by the 1974 midterms there will be a midterm massacre and the WH will go to Teddy or Ed Muskie in '76.
 
From the cartographer... :cool:

genusmap.php


(R) Ronald W. Reagan/Charles H. Percy: 314 EV, 52.6%
(D) Hubert H. Humphrey/ Edmund S. Muskie: 224 EV, 46.7%

Incumbent President: Hubert Humphrey (D)
President-elect: Ronald Reagan (R)

1976: Reagan v. Ted Kennedy

genusmap.php


(D) Edward M. Kennedy/ Ernest F. Hollings: 286 EV, 50.1%
(D) Ronald W. Reagan/Charles H. Percy: 252 EV, 49.8%

Incumbent President: Ronald Reagan (R)
President-elect: Ted Kennedy (D)
 
Another thing that won't happen: McGovern-Fraser. The old methods might survive for both parties, which means much dirtier elections. Also, the pre-Watergate ROE are partially preserved. Both of these will have significant butterflies in future presidential elections. So who succeeds Hizzonor as Chief Boss when he dies in 1976?
 
Maybe it's just from reading Nixonland, but that book gave me the sense that Rocky couldn't get nominated in the GOP. In 72 the conservative faction would be fully behind Reagan with Nixon finished, and they would propel him to the nomination. Rocky just couldn't match that large, dedicated base.

Humphrey would go for ending the war and a continuation of the Great Society as has been said repeatedly. He would probably make a major push towards universal health care. Would it succeed? I remember that Nixon's OTL plan was defeated by Teddy, who thought the Democrats could get a better plan under a Dem President.

HHH wins a close re-election in 72 over Reagan. In 76 Reagan runs against Teddy(Chappaquiddick is butterflied of course) and wins. The economy goes to shit and Teddy comes back and wins the rematch in 1980, serving two terms.
 
Here's a summary of Nixon's CHIP.

President Nixon sought to forestall single-payer national health insurance by proposing an alternative. He wanted to combine a mandate, which would require that employers cover their workers, with a Medicaid-like program for poor families, which all Americans would be able to join by paying sliding-scale premiums based on their income.
 
Maybe it's just from reading Nixonland, but that book gave me the sense that Rocky couldn't get nominated in the GOP. In 72 the conservative faction would be fully behind Reagan with Nixon finished, and they would propel him to the nomination. Rocky just couldn't match that large, dedicated base.

Rocky has savings factors:
The conservative faction was the minority, albeit a vocal one. Rocky's faction was the larger (the Moderate-Liberal alliance). Reagan was of Goldwaterite stripe, which makes him a bit of a niche candidate, albeit one with charisma and good exploitation of white backlash and so forth which could and did help him admittedly (he beat Nixon in popularity in the 1968 primaries). Rocky was a Moderate-Liberal, although all previous attempts at the White House had lost steam.

Granted, the GOP was moving further to the right during the era, but that basically entailed Nixonian positions more so than anything Goldwaterite, and Rocky moved along with it (Attica, tough drug laws, etc.).

As I've stated elsewhere, Reagan would have his saving graces, among them his charisma and exploitation of backlash. But I have to go with Rockefeller as the electable candidate between the two for 1972 or 1976, at least from a party establishment point-of-view.
 
Last edited:
Top