No LBJ , 1964
- Thread starter Duke 4
- Start date
The key candidates in '60 had been Kennedy, Humphrey, Johnson and arguably Stevenson. With Kennedy and Johnson out of the running, Humphrey's a strong heir apparent and I can see Johnson giving him his full support, which'd be enough to cruise through. Stevenson's Ambassador to the UN so he's pretty covered even ignoring his health issues. Without them, I see Terry Sanford, Eugene McCarthy or George Smathers emerging as possibilities. RFK wasn't ready to go for the presidency yet, IMO.
The Republican field could widen a bit, but I think it's largely similar, besides Goldwater picking a different vice presidential candidate, probably someone who'd pander to the moderate base. If Goldwater doesn't win the nomination, Nixon'll be back for another shot, but I don't see Lodge or Rockefeller making it.
The Republican field could widen a bit, but I think it's largely similar, besides Goldwater picking a different vice presidential candidate, probably someone who'd pander to the moderate base. If Goldwater doesn't win the nomination, Nixon'll be back for another shot, but I don't see Lodge or Rockefeller making it.
For the GOP I think Goldwater would've still been nominated. Without a sitting President to rally against, the GOP would've been bolder and nominated him by a wider margin than OTL. I doubt Nixon would've run- he was still reeling from two consecutive defeats and he didn't want any time on the national stage too soon.
For the Democrats, expect everything that JVM said to hold. I think Humphrey's the most likely nominee, especially if he gets support from Johnson.
Goldwater would've still lost because he was a right-wing conviction politician running at the zenith of postwar liberalism. It would have been much closer though, not as close as 1960, but closer to that than OTL's 1964.
If the CRA is still being passed as in OTL(which it almost certainly is) then expect Goldwater to win the Deep South(The Deep South voted Goldwater for exactly one reason, and it wasn't his Social Security reform plan), Mountain West, and Great Plains(except one or both of the Dakotas, HH being an Upper Midwesterner).
For the Democrats, expect everything that JVM said to hold. I think Humphrey's the most likely nominee, especially if he gets support from Johnson.
Goldwater would've still lost because he was a right-wing conviction politician running at the zenith of postwar liberalism. It would have been much closer though, not as close as 1960, but closer to that than OTL's 1964.
If the CRA is still being passed as in OTL(which it almost certainly is) then expect Goldwater to win the Deep South(The Deep South voted Goldwater for exactly one reason, and it wasn't his Social Security reform plan), Mountain West, and Great Plains(except one or both of the Dakotas, HH being an Upper Midwesterner).
Last edited:
Humphrey is liable to be the Democratic nominee, though I see others like Senator Joseph Clark entering the race. Wallace is liable to win Florida unless Smathers is on the ballot as a favorite-son, though he wasn't in OTL and technically Wallace wasn't on the ballot there either (possibly fearing a defeat against Johnson, who was).
Nixon ain't running; he certainly made some noise to that regard in the background and there were draft efforts, but following the death of Kennedy there is going to be a lot of negative press about how he declared only after Kennedy was dead, comparisons to a vulture. Won't be strong, but it will exist as an element. Other candidates are possible but..............well the only ones that stand out are Everett Dirksen and Milton Eisenhower, and I don't either would run.
Nixon ain't running; he certainly made some noise to that regard in the background and there were draft efforts, but following the death of Kennedy there is going to be a lot of negative press about how he declared only after Kennedy was dead, comparisons to a vulture. Won't be strong, but it will exist as an element. Other candidates are possible but..............well the only ones that stand out are Everett Dirksen and Milton Eisenhower, and I don't either would run.
There is nothing wrong with saying RFK could have tried for the nomination. It's not a slur on him as some inhuman monster. It's the simple balance of possibilities.
Of course Robert Kennedy was most only ever going to supplant LBJ after Dallas in the event of Johnson failing to take charge from day one, with an administration falling into some bad Truman- or Carter-esque political impotence.
So, if Kennedy tries to seize the moment, this is not the time it will work: because, presumably the PoD is that moment when Johnson IOTL considered dropping out (convention eve!); so LBJ's amassed a pretty strong record of accomplishments with Civil Rights, the taxcut, the war on poverty, plus the simple fact of his ability to connect to the US public via the congressional addresses; ergo, he's a politically dominant POTUS. And he's a politically dominant leader of the party with a respected putative heir in Humphrey.
Oh, and he hates Bobby with the heat of a thousand suns.
But remember, Kennedy tried to seize the moment in 1968, when it also didn't look like it would work (though for different reasons).
Of course Robert Kennedy was most only ever going to supplant LBJ after Dallas in the event of Johnson failing to take charge from day one, with an administration falling into some bad Truman- or Carter-esque political impotence.
So, if Kennedy tries to seize the moment, this is not the time it will work: because, presumably the PoD is that moment when Johnson IOTL considered dropping out (convention eve!); so LBJ's amassed a pretty strong record of accomplishments with Civil Rights, the taxcut, the war on poverty, plus the simple fact of his ability to connect to the US public via the congressional addresses; ergo, he's a politically dominant POTUS. And he's a politically dominant leader of the party with a respected putative heir in Humphrey.
Oh, and he hates Bobby with the heat of a thousand suns.
But remember, Kennedy tried to seize the moment in 1968, when it also didn't look like it would work (though for different reasons).
The 1964 Democratic Convention was held in late August to coincide with the president's birthday. (The 1968 convention also coincided with his birthday, which had serious unintended consequences for the Democrats.)
William Manchester wrote that LBJ was terrified that the 1964 convention, which was dominated by Kennedy delegates, would go against his wishes and put RFK on the ticket. LBJ wound up making a statement in which ruled out every member of his Cabinet. He waited until the convention to announce his choice of Humphrey.
William Manchester wrote that LBJ was terrified that the 1964 convention, which was dominated by Kennedy delegates, would go against his wishes and put RFK on the ticket. LBJ wound up making a statement in which ruled out every member of his Cabinet. He waited until the convention to announce his choice of Humphrey.