A simple question with a likely complex answer. If JFK were to survive the OTL assassination, how would the election of 1964 look? Firstly, I recall talk of dropping Johnson from the Democratic ticket, but don't know if that would actually pan out. Secondly, you have the issue of the GOP candidate, and who would get the nomination and who would get the VP slot. Secondly, you have the talking points and issues that would come up (Vietnam, relations with the Soviets -of whom Kennedy was beginning to get a bit friendly with in 1963 which may irk hardliners-, etc.). And Thirdly, popularity of the candidates and so forth. So how would the election of 1964 pan out?
If JFK Lives, How Does the Election of 1964 Look?
- Thread starter Emperor Norton I
- Start date
Bearcat
Banned
I have a hard time imaging JFK losing in '64 unless he does something really stupid before the election. Too much charisma, and as much as the conservatives hate him, the middle still respects him.
Can't see LBJ getting dropped that easily. JFK needs Texas and the south. A more liberal running mate jeopardizes that. Not sure that JFK would endorse LBJ in '68 though. But RFK wouldn't likely be the pick there either, that would reek of nepotism.
I still think Goldwater would be the Republican nominee in '64. He appeals to the growing right-wing base. But he still loses, unless someone publishes a pic of JFK both screwing AND shooting Marilyn.
Can't see LBJ getting dropped that easily. JFK needs Texas and the south. A more liberal running mate jeopardizes that. Not sure that JFK would endorse LBJ in '68 though. But RFK wouldn't likely be the pick there either, that would reek of nepotism.
I still think Goldwater would be the Republican nominee in '64. He appeals to the growing right-wing base. But he still loses, unless someone publishes a pic of JFK both screwing AND shooting Marilyn.
No way JFK loses, but '68 is very interesting. You can even see OTL, with LBJ facing Bobby for the Democratic nomination and Richard Nixon becoming POTUS, with RFK succeeding him in 1976. Vice President Kennedy? How about Prime Minister Kennedy! Or Deputy President anyhow...
I don't think he'd lose either, but I do think the Conservatives could make a talking point about his attempts at better relations with the Soviets and call him a "peacenik" or something, and berate him over not doing enough in Vietnam (a conflict which JFK was slowly recoiling from and considered a potential withdrawal, while still not really even a US war, and the Gulf of Tonkin could get butterflied away pretty easy to boot).
I believe the talking point was that Johnson wasn't on board enough with the administration. And I think another southerner was considered. But, I still don't know how that would pan out.
By how much of a percentile would he lose, though? LBJ won in a landslide, but had the memory of JFK to back him up and gain sympathy support for national unity. Though I suppose Goldwater would still lose pretty handily (and Kennedy could get cripled by the assasination attempt or something), would Goldwater still lose as much as he did if indeed the nominee?
I don't know as if RFK would actually succeed (or try to succeed) a living John Kennedy in the presidency. The assassination and Johnson's administration gave Robert a drive to run in 1968. He wouldn't seem to have that same drive if JFK lived, though perhaps at a later point (maybe 1972 or 1976). I also don't know if Nixon could get the GOP nomination in 1968. In the OTL, he was a dark horse.
Last edited:
I'm not sure I'd agree. JFK, I believe, would retain rather good popularity and Conservatism of Goldwater's brand was considered extreme at worst and outdated at best. Likewise, Kennedy could sell, among other things, peace while keeping a strong face (IE, better relations with the Soviets which had come in 1963 and would reasonably continue, supporting the South Vietnamese against Communist aggression while attempting not to get the US involved in a full scale war as had come to be Kennedy's position in 1963, etc) against what could be labeled "extremist militarism" in Goldwater due to stances on Vietnam. Then again, Goldwater could gain those people who supported greater activity in South Vietnam if Kennedy doesn't sell his position well enough. I don't know as if Goldwater would lose as much as he did in the OTL, but I do think he would lose by a good amount still (maybe low 40's).
I don't think he would. In my mind, he'd still lose by a pretty good margin, and the GOP could see a more moderate or moderate-conservative candidate as one to support. Also, keep in mind the issues that could come up in an alternate 1968. JFK seemed, from those who knew him and discussed what he was thinking, to be considering less activity in South Vietnam to a full withdrawal following the election of 1964 while still backing the South with supplies and aid. So by 1968, rather than seeing support for a candidate to get the US out of Vietnam against a President who supported more activity, you could see support of a candidate to get the US more active in Vietnam against a President who sought less activity. Then again, Vietnam remained an area of limited focus with the American public and limited activity of US forces under Kennedy (at least compared to what it would be), so it may be the equivalent of US activity in Lebanon and withdrawal in the election of 1984. Maybe alternate Georgy Romney?
Last edited:
JFK keeps LBJ on the ticket. Goldwater is still the Republican nominee but only this time he choses Ohio governor Jim Rhodes as his VP. In the November election JFK handidly beats Goldwater 57.1% to 42.3% with
Goldwater carrying 9 states(including an upset win in Florida). JFK gets 464 electoral votes and Goldwater 74 votes.
If JFK is shot at but survives, he might still have the sympathy boost, although it might not be to the great degree LBJ had. After all, JFK is still alive.
Does this in any way change the Republican situation. Plainly ambitious Republicans would notice the martyr thing and some might not have run.
Could a moderate have run in 1964?
If so does this cause a George Wallace type thing in 1964?
Oh and how likely is a probably successful filibuster of the Civil Rights Bill going to play?
Could a moderate have run in 1964?
If so does this cause a George Wallace type thing in 1964?
Oh and how likely is a probably successful filibuster of the Civil Rights Bill going to play?
I'm not sure if a moderate would run. I mean, you had the Johnson campaign running on Kennedy's coffin and the GOP still ran a candidate who was on the fringe of the political philosophy of the day.
With LBJ as VP, I don't think so. Johnson locks the South up.
The Civil Rights bill got passed because Johnson was an excellent arm twister and called in a lot of favors. And, Johnson would have remained regardless, as would a lot of other Civil rights bill supporters in Congress. So the Civil Rights bill, in all likelihood, will make it through regardless, though the situation could decide how much it passes by (Does JFK get shot but survive? Does he get shot and get crippled, thus ensuring sympathy points? Does Johnson get replaced by another Southerner on the 1964 ticket? Etc).
In my opinion it would be closer by still a strong win for Kennedy. Their where rumours that Kennedy was planning in dumping Johnson for Florida Senator George Smathers.
Does Goldwater still do well in the south, probably.
Also Goldwater would have picked a different running-mate to Miller if he was facing Kennedy rather than Johnson, he only picked Miller because as he said at the time "he drives Lyndon nuts".
Best case for Goldwater in my opinion.
Note Kennedy (Red) Goldwater (Blue)
Kennedy 428
Goldwater 110
Does Goldwater still do well in the south, probably.
Also Goldwater would have picked a different running-mate to Miller if he was facing Kennedy rather than Johnson, he only picked Miller because as he said at the time "he drives Lyndon nuts".
Best case for Goldwater in my opinion.
Note Kennedy (Red) Goldwater (Blue)
Kennedy 428
Goldwater 110
Last edited:
So how does 1968 and near future elections look since this thread has delved there a bit? I myself think that George Romney could run as the GOP nominee in 1968, though on a platform that included support for Vietnam and increasing forces there to combat the Communist aggressors in the North rather than withdrawal since he was an early supporter and I do think Kennedy would have either kept Vietnam minimal or would have withdrawn combat forces in full while continuing to support the South with aid and supplies, and thus Romney would not see the things he may have. I also think Johnson would be too tired to run in 1968, or at least to muster the strength to win, but don't think RFK would run either (he may not ever run for Governor of New York to give him credentials to run).
I think if Kennedy has Smathers as his VP, he would be the front-runner. But also it depends on what happens during the second term. As for the Republicans I still think Nixon comes back and has another go.
Would Wallace still run as a third party who knows.
Would Wallace still run as a third party who knows.
Well, I don't think the Republican Party would go for Nixon's Southern Strategy. Thus, perhaps in partnership with MLK, JR or even a moderating Malcom X, the Republicans would remain the party of Civil Rights and classic liberalism. Also, remember that the Republicans had been until rather recently the Party that was generally against foreign intervention. Having endured quiet a long period under FDR, Truman and JFK with only a break of Ike's two terms, the Republicans will probably move back towards their base and support smaller government, capitalism without government interference and indirect instead direct support for non-alliance anti-communists.
As to who would run well, I'm not sure yet. But most likely JFK would still win, especially if he survived an assassination attempt. So in 1968 the Republicans would try to capture as much of the Black and liberal vote as possible. Most likely the their ticket would include a person from the Northeast or Northwest and a person from the West. This way they could win the election without worrying about the Solid South. Of course Wallace would probably still run and drain some votes from the Dems. giving them reason to whine later.
Benjamin
As to who would run well, I'm not sure yet. But most likely JFK would still win, especially if he survived an assassination attempt. So in 1968 the Republicans would try to capture as much of the Black and liberal vote as possible. Most likely the their ticket would include a person from the Northeast or Northwest and a person from the West. This way they could win the election without worrying about the Solid South. Of course Wallace would probably still run and drain some votes from the Dems. giving them reason to whine later.
Benjamin
In my opinion it would be closer by still a strong win for Kennedy. Their where rumours that Kennedy was planning in dumping Johnson for Florida Senator George Smathers.
Does Goldwater still do well in the south, probably.
Also Goldwater would have picked a different running-mate to Miller if he was facing Kennedy rather than Johnson, he only picked Miller because as he said at the time "he drives Lyndon nuts".
Best case for Goldwater in my opinion.
Note Kennedy (Red) Goldwater (Blue)
Kennedy 428
Goldwater 110
If Kennedy drops Johnson, TX will go Republican.
I think the Conservative faction growing within the GOP would turn off folks like MLK and Southern blacks by 64 nonetheless. Likewise, keep in mind that the Republicans had been losing the black vote since FDR and the black vote was rather pro-Democrat, at least in the North, and would likely be pro-Democrat nation wide by 1968 as much as it was OTL following civil rights.
Likewise, the GOP was not the party of small government and noninterference in the "Free Market", etc and that wasn't their base; that was the Conservative faction's base. The party was simply always pro business and focused more on economics. However, the GOP was frequently supportive of Progressivism concerning social and economic matters and up until pretty much the 20's and from the (Franklin) Roosevelt era to Reagan, was rather Progressive dominated or moderate dominated. Likewise, the Conservative faction was frequently criticized for their ideas as not being what the GOP had been about, which gives you a good idea of the party's standing.
In 1968, I think that what you'd see in the GOP is a moderate to Liberal who could likewise draw in the Conservative faction, and I'd think that'd be George Romney. Romney was already prominent and a likely runner, pleased the moderate-liberal faction, and his views on morality and Vietnam (since events would likely ensure he'd be pro-intervention in Vietnam and increased intervention) could please the Conservatives. Likewise, he was popular with labor and blacks and could draw in both (though it'd likely be a flash in the pan for the GOP in those areas since I think that future Republicans wouldn't gain those two; sorta like blacks who voted for Nixon).
I'm also not sure about Wallace. A ticket for Dixiecrats is generally always a possibility in any TL at any point, and perhaps it was destined as a last hurrah for Dixiecrats before they joined the GOP, but I'm not sure if it's definite. Likewise, a Southern Democrat could be on the main ticket in 1968.
But who is the Democratic contender in 1968?
It could be Lyndon Johnson, Hubert Humphrey or perhaps Scoop Jackson. I really can't think of any others in this scenario. Keep in mind, if RFK runs, he'll win both the nomination and probably the election, though losing the entire South to Nixon or whomever the GOP nominates. It really depends if we have a domestic rerun of the LBJ years.
The New Frontier was essentially Johnson's Great Society, not allowed to flourish. However, without pulling a Johnson in Vietnam, said programs would be workable as the funds wouldn't be blown on the war and social welfare when only one or the other was affordable.
I doubt either LBJ, HHH, or RFK would run. LBJ would be tired, Humphrey would remain sorta low level as he would never have been VP, and RFK may not ever become governor and the nation may not want another Kennedy so soon, and there wouldn't be the drive as his brother is alive. I also doubt Nixon he was essentially a dark horse and a washup and would likely be seen as such. I do think Romney would be the pick, though I don't know who would be the VP on that ticket.