Despite the unpopularity of President Johnson, the 1968 election was extremely close and could easily have gone the other way given a 3% shift to the Democrats in a few swing states. If the Democrats win in '68 (whether their candidate is Humphrey or RFK, the only two with a real chance,) they would be on track to win again in 1972 provided they end the war and implement popular domestic reforms. However, with the economy in the tank by 1976 a Republican is guaranteed to win back the White House. Who do think would be their nominee, and how would they handle stagflation, the Iran Crisis, and controversial social issues like the ERA?
If the Democrats win in 1968 and '72, who wins in '76?
- Thread starter Amadeus
- Start date
In one word: no. The longer explanation is that Reagan would probably run in 1972 and lose to the Democratic incumbent. Being viewed as a second Goldwater who lost because he's too right wing (even in 1980 he was so nationally unpopular he trailed Carter until the debates), he won't have the chance to redeem himself four years later. Further, the moderate Republicans who didn't run in 1976 because President Ford was an obstacle (Baker, Mathias, Chuck Percy) would throw their hats into the ring and probably beat Reagan. Percy in particular (a handsome, charismatic former entrepreneur from Illinois) would be a very popular moderate alternative to Reagan even if the Gipper waited out '72. Reagan became President in OTL because the Democrats failed under Carter and the moderate Republican establishment was devastated by Watergate. So if a Democrat wins in 1968, he would still be a powerful leader of the GOP's conservative wing, but he's unlikely to become President. Ever.
marathag
Banned
RFK wouldn't really have a chance, it would be Triple H
Vietnam would still be a mess, as he wanted the cease-fire sooner than RMN and a withdrawal of American troops( that would lead to RVN collapsing well before '75), and the US Economy was starting to go down the Path to stagflation.
Between more pressure on the Left and Right, hard to see Humphrey winning in '72, and even if he did, his Health started to fade in '73. With the pressure that the Presidency puts on all, that would happen during his first term and then Muskie would be Prez.
That's so many Butterflies that '76 is anyone's guess, but it certainly won't be Carter
Vietnam would still be a mess, as he wanted the cease-fire sooner than RMN and a withdrawal of American troops( that would lead to RVN collapsing well before '75), and the US Economy was starting to go down the Path to stagflation.
Between more pressure on the Left and Right, hard to see Humphrey winning in '72, and even if he did, his Health started to fade in '73. With the pressure that the Presidency puts on all, that would happen during his first term and then Muskie would be Prez.
That's so many Butterflies that '76 is anyone's guess, but it certainly won't be Carter
That's easy to say given HHH's OTL delegate lead and the role convention politics played in 1968, but the reality is more complicated. According to Richard Daley's son the Mayor was going to endorse Kennedy after California, but the assassination put an end to that. (For the record, in OTL Daley tried to draft Ted Kennedy during the convention to run instead of Humphrey, obviously he didn't think HHH would win and favored the Kennedys).
In an alliance with Daley, Kennedy supporters would be in control (or at least dominant) on the floor of the '68 convention. By that time Kennedy would have scored enough primary victories to rival Humphrey. That doesn't mean RFK would've been nominated, contrary to popular belief and liberal wish fulfillment, but it does make him a formidable contender had he lived.
Agreed. Had the Dems won in '68 Nixon, Ford, Carter, and even Reagan never become President.
Agreed that Vietnam would be a mess, but I think anyone who manages to end that war "with honor" would be popular enough to withstand the backlash from SV falling as it inevitably would. Ford after all just barely lost to Carter even though SV fell on his watch. As for the economy, under Nixon it was still pretty strong until 1973 with the OPEC embargo and recession. So I think anyone who won in 1968 and does at least an okay job would be favored for re-election come 1972, but it wouldn't be a landslide like Nixon v. McGovern.
After four consecutive defeats, with at least two being arch conservatives assuming Reagan runs in 72, the GOP will probably be forced to nominate some moderate. Maybe George Romney if he runs for Senate in 1970 instead of his wife.
raharris1973
Gone Fishin'
I've heard Nixon strong-armed the Federal Reserve and ran fiscal policy to delay overdue economic correction (ie, recession) till after the election.
Would HHH be willing and able to do so, and in so doing, get reelected?
Would HHH be willing and able to do so, and in so doing, get reelected?
That's not a bad option, however after Romney's 1968 fiasco he'd have a hard time getting support in any subsequent campaign. But speaking of the 1970 Senate elections, it's likely that year is favorable to the Republicans, helping Bush 41 win that race against Lloyd Bentsen in TX. He wouldn't be a bad candidate for President in '76, and he'd definitively be a strong contender for VP.
I think any shrewd politician would try to delay recession as much as possible in any year, certainly in an election year. Also, it's important to consider that even in the 1950's Nixon was a Keynesian like most Democrats were at the time, so it's fair to say that any Democratic President would have taken similar economic actions to Tricky Dick. The biggest differences between Nixon and a hypothetical Humphrey/Kennedy administration are in regards to Vietnam, civil rights, the social safety net, and obviously Watergate.
marathag
Banned
Ted was still too toxic from Chappaquiddick for even the VP slot. It still was an albatross in '80 for him
Only way for Ted to be President, would for him to be the senior Senator at the Greenbrier Bunker after WIII wiped out everyone else in the chain of succession.
Democrats wins in 1968 and 1972 would mean the Democrats would have been in power nearly consistently since 1932, excluding Eishenhower's two terms. Surely voter fatigue would kick in at some point?
Reagan stays out in 1972 and wins in 1976 quite easily… though he might not have that much sense. Of course if Wallace is running again in ‘72 the choice is easy.
Not in 1968, given the timing of the crash.
Not in 1968, given the timing of the crash.
marathag
Banned
Can't see Triple H or Scoop Jackson going for some of the stuff Nixon did- on the Economy, people forget how far off the typical Republican( pr Democratic) Reservation he was.
In the same way that 'Only Nixon could go to China', only he could do Price Controls and go off the Gold Standard the way he did.
Haha! Agreed, Ted had the Kennedy charisma but not the ambition, confidence, or self-control of his brothers. That's why when people refer to the "Kennedy Brothers," they usually refer to Jack and Bobby. Ted was a great Senator, but he just wasn't right for the White House and he knew it. That's why when Roger Mudd asked, "why do you want to be President?" Ted just couldn't answer him. He didn't want to be President and he was never going to be.
I certainly think that only an anti-communist Republican like Nixon could have reached out to China and gotten away with it, but price controls and opposing the gold standard were actions that FDR took during the Depression. So a Democrat could have done those too. But it's great that you bring up China because since it wouldn't happen under a Democrat, the earliest the US recognizes China would be in 1977 when a Republican takes office. Can anyone think of major butterflies that would result from this?
Oh yeah, Bush would be a strong candidate, reach out to the South but still be more mainstream than Reagan.
Anyways, after sixteen years of Democrats, I think the Republican nominee would certainly be well placed to win 1976, especially if the economic problems of OTL are still there.
marathag
Banned
That's where Ted's habit of extramarital affairs caught up with him ending in that tragedy, but that behavior was ongoing in 1968.
Ted never got the same pass from the Press as his brothers got. Despite Hizzoner Daley's wishes, the rest of the smoke filled room at the DNC knew what Ted was up to, as did Nixon's squad, who hated all the Kennedys with a special passion. That dirt on Ted would have been dumped in Newsweek right after he was nominated.
"Some point" would be 1976. The GOP wins big with the Presidency and likely both Houses of Congress. After that they are going to be in power for a long, long time. I can see Republican control of the Presidency lasting until 1988 or 1992.
Can you clarify what you mean by this? The wording is odd. It sounds like you are saying that Reagan would win despite not being very smart.