RFK in a postwatergate environment.

[Glass Onion]

This is an idea that's been in my head for a few days, now granted there are elements of it which are terribly implausible due to butterflies and I apologize for that. With that said, I'm interested in how this scenario might look, even if it is extremely convergent in one major respect.

Anyway we begin with a rather cliched point of divergence. Robert Kennedy does not die in 1968, for any number of reasons. Now, he either doesn't get the nomination or loses to Richard Nixon. Key thing is he remains in the Senate during the time in question. Nixon being Nixon, he engages in the same sort of dirty tricks he did historically come 1972. One of these tricks is screwed up, the people involved are arrested, Nixon tries to cover it up ect. It may not be a Watergate break in, but it's something similar. The scandal essentially does what Watergate did historically, ending Nixon's Presidency and leading to the Presidency of Gerald Ford. As well as leading to any number of congressional investigations, the Freedom of Information Act ect. (Again I apologize for how convergent this is. I'm not saying that the watergate scandal was inevitable, I'm trying to create an interesting set of circumstances.)

With Senator Robert Kennedy alive, what might the 1976 election look like? I have a suspicion that he might run in such an election, despite having either lost either the nomination or the general election in 1968. If RFK can somehow get the nomination does he beat President Ford? If so what might a RFK Presidency that begins in 1977 look like?

Again I realize how convergent this is, it's just a scenario that's been in my head for a few days.

 

[RogueBeaver]

RFK would beat Ford easily in '76. In fact the GOP might want Reagan, as the only one who can match Bobby's charisma and star power. RFK would do well to pick Bentsen as his running mate: a Northern DLC Democrat and a fiscally conservative Texan. See my The Impossible Dream TL for an outline of Bobby's presidency.

 

[Glass Onion]

RFK would beat Ford easily in '76. In fact the GOP might want Reagan, as the only one who can match Bobby's charisma and star power. RFK would do well to pick Bentsen as his running mate: a Northern DLC Democrat and a fiscally conservative Texan. See my The Impossible Dream TL for an outline of Bobby's presidency.

Wouldn't there be significant differences between a Kennedy Presidency that begins in 1977 as opposed to 1969?

 

[Han]

Wouldn't there be significant differences between a Kennedy Presidency that begins in 1977 as opposed to 1969?

I don't really think so, except RFK doesn't have Vietnam on his shoulders. RFK may frame his arguments in a more small government light, as Americans distrusted their government more in 1977 than they did in 1968. In terms of direct policy though, I don't see an RFK Presidency being different.

 

[Han]

Now the question is, does RFK fall victim to Carter's downfalls? I'm thinking that he overcomes them, and wins re-election in 1980, but it won't be easy.

Of course, if RFK's Presidency ends up being Carter 2.0, then expect Reagan to beat him in 1980. If not, RFK'll win in 1980, giving 1984 for either Reagan or Bush.

 

[RogueBeaver]

Also, in 1976 his social conservatism will be much more apparent than in 1968, which will help the Dems in the culture wars. The arguments will still be made of bloated bureaucracy. You will see a carbon copy of Clinton's PWROR welfare reform bill (which Bobby advocated as early as 1965) within the first 100 days, plus a crime act like Clinton's VCCLA. What you are essentially getting is Clinton's OTL domestic legislation, with a modified healthcare plan as I outlined in TID. On foreign affairs, as a longtime advocate of covert operations he might rescind Ford's EO on assassinations, work closely to prevent problems in Iran and the Middle East generally. Being a superb negotiatior, he'll aim for an Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty like the OTL Camp David Accords and likely succeed. Afghanistan: supply the Muji. Economy: act like Clinton did, and keep Volcker following a monetarist course. If the economy holds up well enough he will win re-election, and if he defeated Reagan in '76 then he's a favorite for a second term in 1980.

On foreign affairs: Bobby will work very well with Margaret Thatcher when she comes to power in 1979, and it will be a revival of the special relationship "The Bobby and Maggie Show" as occurred under Reagan. Unlike Reagan this is a partnership of intellectual equals, and both are equally assertive, so there might be occasional tension. They'll dominate the G7, guaranteed.

 

[Glass Onion]

The economy probably is not going to be any better than it was historically. But President Kennedy will probably be better at getting legislation through congress than Carter was. And Kennedy probably wouldn't alter American foreign policy to the degree that Carter did historically. Which ironically enough, might mean relations with the Russians are better than they were historically. Moscow hated the Carter Presidency, they much preferred dealing with Nixonian/Kissingerian American foreign policy. Kennedy's policy will probably be at least slightly closer to that model than Carter's was. 1980 will certainly be very different in it's initial phase. Obviously Senator Edward Kennedy is not going to challenge his own brother for the nomination, however much he may disagree with him on policy in private. And if Edward Kennedy isn't the liberal challenger, it's tough to imagine anyone else mounting a campaign at all similar to the one Kennedy mounted against Carter IOTL

Of course, whether Kennedy's reelected depends on the two factors which IMO sunk Carter, whether he appears to be a competent enough President, and how he handles an Iranian crisis presuming that the Shah is still overthrown in 1979.

Reagan won't run in 1984. He's too old at that point to begin a first term, and he probably knows it. Bush vs. Bentson in 1984?

 

[hcallega]

I agree that Bobby would win, and then be somewhat of a New Democrat. He probably passes through a comprehensive anti-poverty program based around welfare reform, and he may also tackle education and health care. On foreign policy he probably dosen't shake things up too much from Ford/Nixon, though he probably puts a greater emphasis on human rights than his forebearers. Overall I agree with RB's assement, and I feel that the issue of greatest disagreement between the UK and USA would be NI, where Bobby would be sympathetic to the interests of the hunger strikers.

Whats funny is that Bobby's heart is very far to the left, in that his focus is on ending poverty and the war in Vietnam. And yet he is extremely pragmatic, which leads him to becoming much more of a European Style Christian Democrat. I think as an ex-President he would be a lot like Carter, only pro-Israel.

 

[Glass Onion]

Also, in 1976 his social conservatism will be much more apparent than in 1968, which will help the Dems in the culture wars. The arguments will still be made of bloated bureaucracy. You will see a carbon copy of Clinton's PWROR welfare reform bill (which Bobby advocated as early as 1965) within the first 100 days, plus a crime act like Clinton's VCCLA. What you are essentially getting is Clinton's OTL domestic legislation, with a modified healthcare plan as I outlined in TID. On foreign affairs, as a longtime advocate of covert operations he might rescind Ford's EO on assassinations, work closely to prevent problems in Iran and the Middle East generally.
.

The first part is interesting. I wonder where his social conservative inclinations will affect his policy. Presumably he'll be very tough on crime/drugs. And my guess is that he's a rather pro-life President. Still if there's a supreme court case like Roe vs. Wade, Kennedy probably won't be able to get it overturned. And he'll have enough problems to deal with in the economy to have an amendment to the constitution regarding it passed through. Could be wrong though.

The second part makes me wonder if Kennedy might suffer some political embarrassment in 1975 while the Rockefeller Commission and the Church Commission as well as any other assorted congressional investigations into domestic intelligence activity. If Kennedy's activities around Cuba are exposed to the degree they were in the same period historically, does that hurt RFK politically?

 

[RogueBeaver]

Of course not: RFK, the former COO of Mongoose, was a realist, not a naive moralist like Carter. He'd have Nixon's foreign policy, though he might move for closer ties with India over Pakistan. Like Reagan, his personal popularity and charisma will insulate him while the economy recovers. In 1984 it is Bush v. Bentsen, and the GOP would be favored to win, since RFK's personal popularity is non-transferrable.

Han: that's a ghastly insult. But if a Republican Congress is elected in 1978 it helps Bobby because like with Clinton, they're more ideologically compatible than the liberal wing of his own party. It's little-known that RFK and Tip O'Neill had been on bad terms since 1952, so expect some flare-ups there. In 1984 Reagan will be too old for a first term, so it would be Bush. I could see Bobby retaining Kissinger- they shared the same FP views and were much more compatible personally than Kissinger was with Nixon. Kissinger would operate in the same way given RFK's well-known penchant for secrecy and working in bilaterals or small groups rather than a full Cabinet.

 

[RogueBeaver]

I agree that Bobby would win, and then be somewhat of a New Democrat. He probably passes through a comprehensive anti-poverty program based around welfare reform, and he may also tackle education and health care. On foreign policy he probably dosen't shake things up too much from Ford/Nixon, though he probably puts a greater emphasis on human rights than his forebearers. Overall I agree with RB's assement, and I feel that the issue of greatest disagreement between the UK and USA would be NI, where Bobby would be sympathetic to the interests of the hunger strikers.

Whats funny is that Bobby's heart is very far to the left, in that his focus is on ending poverty and the war in Vietnam. And yet he is extremely pragmatic, which leads him to becoming much more of a European Style Christian Democrat. I think as an ex-President he would be a lot like Carter, only pro-Israel.

Let's stick to the DLC please, and I will ignore the bolded, because that seriously annoys me. One seems to forget the reason he wore that skullcap in Oregon, which Sirhan claimed triggered him to buy an ammo box, is because the media had been insinuating he was anti-Israel for quite some time. Not that different from GHWB.

Why would he be sympathetic to terrorists in NI? To the contrary, he would shut down the pipeline from the Irish-American community much as Reagan did. He would also be somewhat sympathetic to Thatcher's breaking of the unions, given his 1950s experiences with Hoffa.

 

[theReturner]

I wonder how RFK would handle things with Iran, assuming the Shah is still over-thrown and their is still a hostage crisis.

 

[RogueBeaver]

The first part is interesting. I wonder where his social conservative inclinations will affect his policy. Presumably he'll be very tough on crime/drugs. And my guess is that he's a rather pro-life President. Still if there's a supreme court case like Roe vs. Wade, Kennedy probably won't be able to get it overturned. And he'll have enough problems to deal with in the economy to have an amendment to the constitution regarding it passed through. Could be wrong though.

The second part makes me wonder if Kennedy might suffer some political embarrassment in 1975 while the Rockefeller Commission and the Church Commission as well as any other assorted congressional investigations into domestic intelligence activity. If Kennedy's activities around Cuba are exposed to the degree they were in the same period historically, does that hurt RFK politically?

He'll try to limit abortion as much as possible, and if AIDS comes out a bit earlier than OTL don't expect much, if any action.

Cuba: would anyone remember? After all, Ford was the one who pardoned Nixon. It would be spun, something the Kennedys had been doing for years.

 

[RogueBeaver]

I wonder how RFK would handle things with Iran, assuming the Shah is still over-thrown and their is still a hostage crisis.

By 1977 it is too late for the Shah. RFK will be pressuring him to make concessions and become a constitutional monarch but it is too late. Once things get bad he will order an evacuation of the embassy during the winter of 1978, thus preventing a hostage crisis. The manager of the CMC knows the procedures in such a scenario, unlike Carter. Without a hostage crisis he will turn to Saddam's Iraq as a counterbalance to Islamist Iran. Bush would continue that, and you may very well see an ATL Iran-Contra down the line.

 

[theReturner]

Hmm...

1976: Robert F. Kennedy (D)
1980: Robert F. Kennedy (D)
1984: George H.W. Bush (R)
1988: George H.W. Bush (R)
1992: William J. Clinton (D)
1996: William J. Clinton (D)
2000: John Ellis "Jeb" Bush (R)
2004: Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (D)
2008: Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (D)

Just something I made for fun. I have no idea how possible it is.

 

[RogueBeaver]

Very plausible, and I'm happy you realized that while everyone prefers John, it is actually Bobby Jr. who is the presidentiable (and was from 1968 to 1983 IOTL) if his father lives, because the criminal record is butterflied.

 

[theReturner]

Very plausible, and I'm happy you realized that while everyone prefers John, it is actually Bobby Jr. who is the presidentiable (and was from 1968 to 1983 IOTL) if his father lives, because the criminal record is butterflied.

Considering that's from you, I'll be happy to take that as a compliment.
I do prefer John myself, but I don't know if he ever really had much of an interest in politics during his life.

 

[Glass Onion]

What does Kennedy do in his post-Presidency? I think there's a chance he might help Clinton if Clinton still runs for President, but then again he might want to maintain a distance from the political arena in retirement. From what I know about his health, he probably lives just as long if not longer than his brother in terms of age, which means at the very earliest former President Kennedy dies around 1998.

 

[RogueBeaver]

RFK would be alive today most likely- he'd only be 85 and was in excellent health and shape his entire life. Post-presidency he'd be in retirement or consultancy- no need of money. By 1992 he anoints Clinton his successor at the DNC and his son in 2004.

 

[glenn67]

What does Kennedy do in his post-Presidency? I think there's a chance he might help Clinton if Clinton still runs for President, but then again he might want to maintain a distance from the political arena in retirement. From what I know about his health, he probably lives just as long if not longer than his brother in terms of age, which means at the very earliest former President Kennedy dies around 1998.

RFK would probably not be content to stay retired from politics. If Al D'Amato is still elected to the Senate in 1980, he would probably run for the Senate in 1986.