Not really plausible...
Okay so will you guys give me a plausibility check on this:
The 1960's moderate GOP stays in control and the GOP is a centrist party. The Democratic Party retains control of the south and George Wallace is President by 1976.
Under these circumstances is there any chance the African American Senator Ed Brooke can win the GOP nomination and possibly the Presidency? How much social unrest would be needed to get this result? And how racist was the U.S in the 70's where states wouldn't vote for Brooke because he was black? Also, who may have been his VP? Because Goldwater was too racist, and I don't know If Reagan would of wanted to be VP.
This was just an idea I was throwing around while considering the future of my TL.
EDIT: Actually 1972, not 1976.
What you seem to be suggesting is a rapid party realignment along ideological lines from 1964 to 1972, with the Democrats emerging as a southern-dominated conservative populist party that is at least implicitly racist and the Republicans emerging as a northeastern-dominated moderate pro-business party that favors civil rights. This scenario was plausible (and more-or-less happened) in the 1860s and 1870s, but was not plausible in the 1960s and 1970s.
The GOP staying moderate thoughout the 1960s is plausible. It means that Goldwater is stopped in 1964, most likely by Rockefeller winning the California primary and being nominated at a contentious Republican Convention. Rockefeller loses to LBJ, who was a lock in 1964, but the loss would be far less severe than that of Goldwater to LBJ in OTL. Reagan never gets to make his televised 30-minute speech on behalf of Goldwater, which aired in October of 1964 as in OTL, so he is never recruited to run for Governor of California in 1966 and never launches a political career. Nixon and Goldwater are the leading candidates for the 1968 GOP nomination---Nixon wins because the Rockefeller faction backs him over Goldwater as being more moderate.
George Wallace being elected president as a Democrat (or anything else) in 1972 is not plausible. Wallace had no real chance in 1968 running as a third-party or independant--it was just a protest candidacy. If Humphrey was elected, then Wallace had no real chance of denying an incumbent Democrat the 1972 nomination. So, we must assume that Nixon or another centrist Republcian was elected in 1968. Wallace's past as a segregationist southern governor severely limited his appeal to Democrats outside the South and Border States. Against a crowded field of liberal opponents in 1972, Wallace could win Michigan and perhaps a few other northern and western states in 1972, but once the race was winnowed down to Wallace and only one liberal Democrat then Wallace would lose. Liberals Democrats simply would not vote for a Southern segregationist like Wallace for president, so his unlikely nomination would split the Democratic Party even worse than Goldwater split the Republicans in 1964 in OTL. Conservative Republicans outside the South were very unlikely to abandon the GOP, and especially an incumbent Republican President, to vote for a southern Democrat like Wallace. So, Wallace had no plausible chance of beating an incumbent Republican president in 1972.
Senator Edmund Brooke never actively sought the GOP presidential nomination in OTL, which presents a plausibility problem with him doing so in your contemplated TL. To be fair, there were incumbent Republican Presidents in both 1972 (Nixon) and 1976 (Ford) standing in Brooke's way in OTL. Brooke may have been stirred to run in 1976 if an odious segregationist Democrat like Wallace was in White House, but that possibility was very unlikely.