WI: Humphrey wins 1968, loses in 1972?

In the 3 Humphrey wins in 1968 TLs that I know of (A True October Surprise, No Southern Strategy and that one TL by @magicmikey ), Humphrey wins in 1968 and reelection in 1972

So, what if Humphrey had won in 1968 and lost in 1972? Who would succeed him?
 
The only candidate I could see having a decent chance to unseat Humphrey in 1972 is Nelson Rockefeller. Though the chances of him receiving the GOP's nomination in 1972 seems unlikely.

The only way Reagan could secure a victory is if a Dixiecrat splits the vote in states like Ohio and Illinois. Which is how Nixon won those states in OTL 1968.

Though, I doubt the Dixiecrats are that stupid to pass up a gift like Reagan. That's why they didn't run a candidate in 1964.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
Didn't Humphrey only come as close as he did because of Wallace. It seems if a critical mass of Nixon and Wallace voters can rally behind the same candidate in a two candidate race, Humphrey can be unseated. Who could said voters have rallied under, quite possibly Reagan.

To some extent I think a Reaganite candidacy would fare best if South Vietnam has already fallen by the '72 election.

If South Vietnam has not fallen by the '72 election, his rhetoric, or that of his supporters will be too hawkish on Vietnam to win majority support.

However if South Vietnam has fallen so there's no chance of further fighting with North Vietnam, the electorate might feel safer voting for Reagan, because they know his Reagan's rhetoric condemning the Johnson-Humphrey record on Vietnam is just that, and does not portend an escalation.

Thoughts?
 
Didn't Humphrey only come as close as he did because of Wallace. It seems if a critical mass of Nixon and Wallace voters can rally behind the same candidate in a two candidate race, . . .
A good chunk of Caucasian citizens had resentment about civil rights, just straightup.

So, let's assume Governor Reagan wins in 1972.

He still most probably faces the 1973 OPEC oil embargo and the late '74, early '75 recession, which was serious.

Most probably a Democrat wins in '76.
 
The Democrat elected in '76 struggles with stagflation and the first dip in a double-dip recession in 1980.

A Republican is elected in 1980.

But in original timeline, 1982 was the second dip of the recession and the deeper one. And arguably we got lucky on domestic economics because Reagan had a lot of fervor in favor of tax cuts and military build-up. Someone who was more of a middle-of-the-roader and more directly in favor of Keynesianism for the sake of job creation, may not have been able to pull it off politically. And also giving Reagan some credit, he may have believed economic growth was the top domestic goal. So, without Ronnie Reagan himself (and with his '73-'77 tenure being viewed as somewhat of a failed presidency),

A Democrat is elected in 1984, and timelines rather start to branch (maybe!) . . .
 
Last edited:
Just out of interest, is there any reason that Nixon might not make a later comeback - still "no more Nixon to kick around" in 1968, but relenting & winning in 1972?
Possibly complete with Watergate.
 
But in original timeline, 1982 was the second dip of the recession and the deeper one. And arguably we got lucky on domestic economics because Reagan had a lot of fervor in favor of tax cuts and military build-up. Someone who was more of a middle-of-the-roader and more directly in favor of Keynesianism for the sake of job creation, may not have been able to pull it off politically. And also giving Reagan some credit, he may have believed economic growth was the top domestic goal. So, without Ronnie Reagan himself (and with his '73-'77 tenure being viewed as somewhat of a failed presidency),

Except that Reagan was a Keynesian in all but name- his deficit spending is classical Keynesian economics. Plus his tax cuts didn't last long when Reagan realized that the government was without revenue, he sought and successfully reversed the tax cuts.

Another thing to consider is that the tax "cuts" actually raised the taxes of the middle and working class, it was tax cuts for the wealthy only. That's how flat taxation works- lower taxes for the people who can afford to pay taxes and high taxes for people who can't afford to pay taxes.
 
Except that Reagan was a Keynesian in all but name- his deficit spending is classical Keynesian economics. Plus his tax cuts didn't last long when Reagan realized that the government was without revenue, he sought and successfully reversed the tax cuts.
Honest to gosh as I understand it, Reagan's 1982 tax increase only partially reversed his '81 tax cut.
 
http://www.financialpost.com/m/wp/n...nd-from-this-supply-shock-could-be-years-away

" . . . West Texas Intermediate, the U.S. oil benchmark, tumbled 69 per cent from $31.82 a barrel in November 1985 to $9.75 in April 1986 . . . "
Because OPEC members were squabbling in late '85, there was a worldwide drop in oil prices. This is what economists call a beneficial "supply shock." The supply curve shifts outward, and the equilibrium point ends up at a point of both greater GDP and somewhat lower prices.

And, any president running for re-election in 1988 is the recipient of this good luck!
 
So, one potential timeline:

Hubert Humphrey 1969-'73

Ronald Reagan 1973-'77

unspecified Democrat 1977-'81

unspec. Republican 1981-'85

unspec. Democrat 1985-1993 (rides to two terms on lucky economy)

Bonus points if one of these last three unspecified presidents is a woman.

========

So, yes, four one-term presidents in a row.

Higher Trajectory: The American public takes more of an interest in GDP, unemployment, trade, oil prices, alternative energy, etc, and pushes for better journalism.

Lower Trajectory: The American public doesn't and just blames whoever happens to be in office.
 

This is ABC News from March 1986 saying the price of a barrel of oil had fallen from about $30 to half of that. And per the previous source, it would keep falling to about $10 a barrel in April 1986.

And whoever's president during this time will benefit from this good luck.
 
Last edited:
Top