WI: Humphrey in 1972

Hubert Humphrey ran for the Democratic nomination in 1972. Like Muskie, he was an establishment candidate -- someone to ideally stop George McGovern. However, he failed to win California by a narrow margin, and fell just short of McGovern in delegates, despite having the popular vote in the primaries.

What if Humphrey won the nomination?
 
Hubert Humphrey ran for the Democratic nomination in 1972. Like Muskie, he was an establishment candidate -- someone to ideally stop George McGovern. However, he failed to win California by a narrow margin, and fell just short of McGovern in delegates, despite having the popular vote in the primaries.

What if Humphrey won the nomination?

He would perform far better than McGovern. In actuality, their campaigns would be very similar (both having campaigns centred around ending the Vietnam War), but Humphrey was able to nearly win 1968 with so much factoring against the Democrats. This demonstrates just how effective of a campaigner he was.

An establishment Democratic candidate may mean that Wallace makes a presidential run. If Wallace runs, I think Humphrey would win, but if not, with the South supporting Nixon, I would say Nixon wins.
 
Humphrey would lose again and be remembered as another Adlai Stevenson or a republican Equivalent to Thomas Dewey, granted the election would be MUCH closer than 1972 OTL, but Nixon would still win. You would need a major butterfly to make Humphrey beat Nixon in '72, not because Nixon did a great job or was hugely popular, but mostly because the Democratic party was a mess from the late '60s to the early '90s, at least with Presidential elections.
 
Humphrey would lose again and be remembered as another Adlai Stevenson or a republican Equivalent to Thomas Dewey, granted the election would be MUCH closer than 1972 OTL, but Nixon would still win. You would need a major butterfly to make Humphrey beat Nixon in '72, not because Nixon did a great job or was hugely popular, but mostly because the Democratic party was a mess from the late '60s to the early '90s, at least with Presidential elections.

But Humphrey was an amazing campaigner. He was nearly able to win in 1968. I think Humphrey has a real chance to win in 1972.
 
But Humphrey was an amazing campaigner. He was nearly able to win in 1968. I think Humphrey has a real chance to win in 1972.

I'm not saying he wasn't a good campaigner , he was and I think if anyone other than Humphrey or, if he lived, Bobby Kennedy got the Democratic nomination in '68, Nixon would've won in a landslide. It's just that in my opinion, you need something to go horribly wrong for Nixon between 1969 and election day 72, and a more united Democratic party to defeat Nixon in '72. Even if Wallace ran, I don't think he'd exceed his performance of '68, nor do I think he hurt the Democrats as much as some her think, if at all (plus wasn't Wallace shot in 1971 and wounded...).Humphrey as the nominee will make 1972 much closer, but in my view, "Nixon's the one" that has the advantage.
 
I'd say if Wallace runs*, he'll do about as well as in 1968; with a competent Democratic challenger, I'd say that makes Nixon vulnerable, at the very least; and if we allow earlier post 1968 PoDs, that makes it even more possible.

*(via preventing his assassination attempt, which admittedly means an earlier PoD)
 
Top