No Vietnam War: Who Will Humphrey Pick as VP in '68?

  • Edmund Muskie

    Votes: 4 10.3%
  • John Connally

    Votes: 14 35.9%
  • George McGovern

    Votes: 4 10.3%
  • Robert F. Kennedy

    Votes: 4 10.3%
  • Edward M. Kennedy

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Ralph Yarborough

    Votes: 7 17.9%
  • Other

    Votes: 6 15.4%

  • Total voters
    39

Wallet

Banned
Without Vietnam, race and Civil Rights will be the big issue, along with the issues raised by the Great Society programs (of course there'll be economic issues in one manifestation or another).

Was there a Southern governor with a reputation as a moderate on race?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buford_Ellington#

He was the governor of TN. He started his career supporting segregated school but eventually forced Tennessee schools to abide by Brown vs Board. He appointed the first black to the governor's cabinet. He then spoke against segregation
 
wish he would have tried to win over people left, right, and center to economic progressivism, perhaps talking about how of course we want education and jobs for all Alabamans

But this would have been a very different George Wallace.

Yeah, as a Southerner, a moderate on racial issues, and an economic progressive, a social conservative that can appeal to Evangelicals, This different George Wallace could have kept the New Deal Coalition together.

Indeed. But without his racism, he would need to gain national prominence in some other way. Maybe he supports the March to Selma, or a Democratic President visits his place, then a racist tries to assassinate the two, but Wallace gets the bullet but he lives.

d9f6d3db7cf1c778ebfa31be8171b508.jpg

(change the date)
 
Last edited:
He needs a Southerner to balance the ticket, but one who's moderate on civil rights. Possibly Hale Boggs or John McKeithen (who ran for governor as a segregationist but became an accomodationist as soon as he took office). Big Jim Folsom might be a possibility, bit he'd been out of office for 10 years by then. Al Gore Sr. is another possibility.
 
He needs a Southerner to balance the ticket, but one who's moderate on civil rights. Possibly Hale Boggs or John McKeithen (who ran for governor as a segregationist but became an accomodationist as soon as he took office). Big Jim Folsom might be a possibility, bit he'd been out of office for 10 years by then. Al Gore Sr. is another possibility.

Robert McNair of South Carolina too, and I read his info on Wikipedia and he may be good (a moderate who tried to defuse tensions in integrating public schools).
 
wish he would have tried to win over people left, right, and center to economic progressivism, perhaps talking about how of course we want education and jobs for all Alabamans

But this would have been a very different George Wallace.

Basically the pre-1958 Wallace.

He refused to join the Dixiecrat walkout at the 1948 convention. As a judge, he required opposing counsel to address J.L. Chestnut as Mr. Chestnut. He was a disciple of Folsom and ran exactly the type of campaign you mentioned.

After losing to John Patterson, he said, "John Patterson out(black)ed me and I'll never be out(black)ed again." Except of course he didn't say black.
 
Basically the pre-1958 Wallace.

He refused to join the Dixiecrat walkout at the 1948 convention. As a judge, he required opposing counsel to address J.L. Chestnut as Mr. Chestnut. He was a disciple of Folsom and ran exactly the type of campaign you mentioned.

After losing to John Patterson, he said, "John Patterson out(black)ed me and I'll never be out(black)ed again." Except of course he didn't say black.

I gained some ideas from that (I started the thread so I'm uncomfortable with this, but here they are):

So make him win in 1958 (Patterson gets an accident or no immediate NAACP endorsement of Wallace, AFAIK it hurt him), so he wins the 1958 Democratic Gubernatorial Primary.

IMO, this could cause a great split within the Alabama Democratic Party, as it would still be filled with racists. Pattersonian Democrats would be wary of his moderate stance on Civil Rights.

It's like the Texas Split in the Democratic Party when John Connally was elected governor, only that the Governor Wallace here is moderate-to-liberal instead.

Because of that, party tensions escalate, and maybe Kennedy visits Alabama instead of Texas on November 22, 1963 so he lives.

But let's go the scenario that JFK does get assassinated. LBJ replaces him afterwards.

ITTL, there's no Stand in the Schoolhouse Door, so Wallace has to gain national prominence in some other way. His racism did it, but he was so opposed by the Democratic Party establishment because of it. Here, he has the favor of the Democatic establishment, but hasn't gained national prominence, just some moderate governor in the Deep South (like Jimmy Carter).

In 1964, Johnson wins in a landslide against Goldwater. The Wallace/Folsom machine manages to swing Alabama to the Democratic column.

In 1968, LBJ bows out due to health reasons, and HHH gets the nomination. He has Southern VP choices: John Connally, Al Gore, Sr., etc. and George Wallace.

HHH may choose Wallace for economics and appeal, and coming from the Deep South, he could swing the South to HHH. Maybe he gets the "national prominence" there.
 
. . . He refused to join the Dixiecrat walkout at the 1948 convention. As a judge, he required opposing counsel to address J.L. Chestnut as Mr. Chestnut. . .
I like Chestnut's book Black in Selma. He talked a little how he didn't feel entirely comfortable owning a gun nor not owning a gun, a little about his drinking problem, and about his own experiences with political activism which were often slow-going and frustrating. The fact is, most people in general don't think it's worthwhile to expend energy to try to change the system, which I guess is okay. And then sometimes they do.
 
I like Chestnut's book Black in Selma. He talked a little how he didn't feel entirely comfortable owning a gun nor not owning a gun, a little about his drinking problem, and about his own experiences with political activism which were often slow-going and frustrating. The fact is, most people in general don't think it's worthwhile to expend energy to try to change the system, which I guess is okay. And then sometimes they do.

Black in Selma was really, really good.
 
Top