PC: 1960 Electoral Map

So, I read somewhere that John F. Kennedy chose Lyndon B. Johnson as his VP in order to please the South. If he chose someone like Hubert Humphrey, with Nixon choosing Nelson Rockefeller (along with not making the same mistakes that he did IOTL), are these results possible?

genusmap-1.png


Richard Nixon | Nelson Rockefeller: 274
John F. Kennedy | Hubert Humphrey: 244
Harry F. Byrd |Strom Thurmond: 19
 
Perhaps though with a Catholic and the dreaded HHH the Dixiecrats would likely do better or Nixon could pick someone other than Rockefeller and make a play for the South.
 
He takes Georgia, Louisiana and Arkansas with HHH on the ticket???

I'd have thought Missouri and Illinois would also be doubtful.
 
If I remember correctly, the first three states were won heavily be Kennedy


They were won by Kennedy/LBJ. Kennedy/HHH would have been a totally different proposition, with both halves of the ticket obnoxious to the South, one on religious grounds, the other on political ones.
 
They were won by Kennedy/LBJ. Kennedy/HHH would have been a totally different proposition, with both halves of the ticket obnoxious to the South, one on religious grounds, the other on political ones.
Perhaps those three are all closer than normal, meanwhile Illinois and Missouri go Democratic? Is it possible that some Northern states don't go for Nixon that went for him IOTL?
 
First of all, if JFK can't get LBJ or doesn't want him, he is much more likely to choose someone like Symington or Scoop Jackson (both of whom were liberal on civil rights but not as offensive to the South as Humphrey). And Nixon did offer the second spot to Rockefeller who (as Nixon anticipated) turned it down.

But if it had been JFK-HHH vs. Nixon-Rockefeller, I don't think Nixon would have carried WV as he does on the map here. WV was not all that close (52.7-47.3) and did not share the racial obsessions of states further South (Robert Byrd's Klan background notwithstanding). It was a heavily unionized state where a lot of coal miners were still devoted to the New Deal. Its one reservation about JFK was his religion. If that wasn't enough to defeat him (and it wasn't, either in the primary or general election), having Humphrey on the ticket certainly wouldn't sink him there. (Indeed, many West Virginians admired Humphrey as a friend of labor and a New Dealer.)

It's even possible that JFK-Humphrey would carry California, where apparently a lot of Stevensonians in Los Angeles and elsewhere apparently refused to vote for JFK-LBJ.
 
First of all, if JFK can't get LBJ or doesn't want him, he is much more likely to choose someone like Symington or Scoop Jackson (both of whom were liberal on civil rights but not as offensive to the South as Humphrey). And Nixon did offer the second spot to Rockefeller who (as Nixon anticipated) turned it down.

But if it had been JFK-HHH vs. Nixon-Rockefeller, I don't think Nixon would have carried WV as he does on the map here. WV was not all that close (52.7-47.3) and did not share the racial obsessions of states further South (Robert Byrd's Klan background notwithstanding). It was a heavily unionized state where a lot of coal miners were still devoted to the New Deal. Its one reservation about JFK was his religion. If that wasn't enough to defeat him (and it wasn't, either in the primary or general election), having Humphrey on the ticket certainly wouldn't sink him there. (Indeed, many West Virginians admired Humphrey as a friend of labor and a New Dealer.)

It's even possible that JFK-Humphrey would carry California, where apparently a lot of Stevensonians in Los Angeles and elsewhere apparently refused to vote for JFK-LBJ.
I remembered that Scoop Jackson would have been more likely after I posted this. I was aware that Nixon offered it to Rocky, who turned it down. What other states may have switched one way or another?
 
I remembered that Scoop Jackson would have been more likely after I posted this. I was aware that Nixon offered it to Rocky, who turned it down. What other states may have switched one way or another?

In LA, the state Democratic committee only narrowly rejected endorsing unpledged electors rather than JFK. Without LBJ on the ticket, they would very likely have so decided, forcing the JFK Democrats to (in effect) run as a third parry in LA.
 
Perhaps those three are all closer than normal, meanwhile Illinois and Missouri go Democratic? Is it possible that some Northern states don't go for Nixon that went for him IOTL?

MO and IL did not go to Nixon OTL They went narrowly for JFK [1}. Are you confusing 1960 with 1968?

[1] Officially at least. I gather there's always been some suspicion abt the result in IL.
 
With Johnson on the ticket, Kennedy was guaranteed to be in a stronger position in certain areas electorally. It was not a guarantee he would win them, only that he was positioned better in regards to them. It would shore up support in Texas and the South. However, it must also be kept in mind that there were states that narrowly went for Nixon which Kennedy could have won, and therefore won the presidency regardless. California, for instance, looked like it was going to go for Kennedy. And Nixon actually came from behind as the campaign came to a close. For a while, it looked like Kennedy was going to win by a larger margin than he did, and had history gone differently, and had he kept that momentum or rather had Nixon failed to regain momentum (whichever way you look at it), Kennedy would have won rather comfortably. I say that for the purposes of making the argument that even without Johnson on the ticket, Kennedy could have won the presidency. Bringing other running mates into play would alter the dynamics, but nonetheless, Kennedy is not doomed or even necessarily in a terrible position without Johnson.
 
Top