GI: I apologize if I came across as arrogant, but we're all familiar with the background and I didn't feel the end to expiate. If you have thoughts on Kennedy v. Rocky or Kennedy v. Reagan, feel free to air them.
I'm sorry if I came off as pedantic, but I've found in my years of posting here that you can't always assume that people are familiar with the background beyond a cursory level; I've seen a lot of misconceptions bandied about based on applying contemporary sensibilities to a historical scenario. My little classroom session wasn't really directed at you, rather it was for other participants who might benefit from a little more enumeration on the political climate of the time.
As for dealing with the OP, as much fun as it would be to have Reagan run against RFK, one thing that keeps hitching for me is Reagan's more hawkish tendencies. Nixon campaigned on a peace platform, and even Humphrey was in favor of continuing the talks started by LBJ. I'm just not sure that a Vietnam hawk would be able to get a lot of broad traction in '68, particularly against Rockefeller's more moderate stance. It is conceivable that Reagan might soften his position, but it would have to involve getting someone with more moderate sympathies into his inner circle.
Reagan does however, as you point out, have a lock on the South that Rockefeller just can't touch. The question then is, can Rockefeller take the nomination without the South?
If Reagan does take the nomination, I don't think he's going to be able to beat Kennedy. The war issue favors Kennedy, and regardless of Reagan's accusations of hypocrisy, RFK retains a rhetorical advantage on social issues. Reagan will give him a fight for California, but can he actually pull it out? If he can, would that be enough?
If Rockefeller takes the nomination, then the field becomes a lot more even. Moderate vs moderate makes it more difficult to really point fingers at each other, and both of them have the piggy banks for some serious campaigning. This one would be a lot closer, and I'm honestly not really sure how to call it.
My end analysis, I think Rockefeller v Reagan goes to Rockefeller, but the jury is still out on Rockefeller v Kennedy.