WI Nixon forgoes '68 run?

P.S.: Please don't lecture me on something which I am known to specialize in on this Board.
It was not my intent to do so. Not really sure where you're getting that from. If your own expertise is so respected, however, then there is clearly no need of me here.
 
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.

Getting back to the OP, does anyone disagree with the maps? How about Rocky v. Kennedy? Apart from setting all-time spending records...
 
Last edited:
WI Rocky is the GOP nominee? Here's what I see...

Kennedy

Pros: Same as previously. Cons: same as previously.

Rockefeller

Pros: Moderate, uber-competent, uber-wealthy, highly experienced, excellent public speaker, moderate on Vietnam.

Cons: Hated by the South, hated by conservatives. If Rocky can't win enough Southern states, Kennedy swings California into the Democratic column (inevitable without Nixon or Reagan leading the GOP), which results in Kennedy's election, either directly or via the Democratic-controlled House in January.
 
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.
 
Re Rocky: No, he can't touch the South, because Rocky's a civil rights flaming race liberal. In 1968, the South forms the largest voting bloc (roughly 20% of the delegates). Reagan had Clif White, and since IOTL Nixon had all the Goldwaterites except White (including Goldwater) on board, they'd go for Reagan ITTL.

On social issues Kennedy and Reagan see eye to eye. Since the 1968 CRA had been passed, race would not become an issue like Nixon made it IOTL. Against Rocky, both are equally pro-CR, so that's defused. Wallace has a field day in the South running against two Empire State liberals.

California: Robert Kennedy's OTL operation was basically the same as Rove's '04 Ohio operation, but without the robo-calls. GOTV made the difference between a win and a politically fatal loss. That's one of the reaons why RFK is known as a Dem logistical guru.

As for Rocky v. Kennedy...

genusmap.php


(D) Robert F. Kennedy/ J. Terry Sanford: 279 EV, 45.1%
(R) Nelson A. Rockefeller/ Gerald R. Ford: 220 EV, 44.6%
(AIP) George C. Wallace/Curtis E. Lemay: 39 EV, 8.6%

President-elect: Robert Kennedy (D)
 
Just curious, but why would Nixon not running secure RFK's survival? Woulnd't their still be a assassination attempt?
 
One possible butterfly is that presidential candidates will not have mandated Secret Service protection. IOTL that legislation was hurriedly rammed through after Kennedy was assassinated. Not that the candidates can't hire their own plainclothesmen...
 
I do not know all the internal factors but given the heavy defeat of Goldwater in 1964 I am guessing that someone as conservative as Reagan would probably not have been nominated.
 
All my secondary and primary sources indicate that had Nixon faltered, Reagan would be the beneficiary. Nixon was, in the media's eyes, the centrist compared to the liberal Rocky and the conservative Reagan. The South would go to Reagan: that's nearly 20% right there. He picks up Nixon strength in the West with Goldwater helping out. Then the nomination becomes very close.
 
Wasn't Reagan considered pretty much a right-wing nut back then? If so, I doubt it's very likely that be able to win...
 
Wasn't Reagan considered pretty much a right-wing nut back then? If so, I doubt it's very likely that be able to win...


Oakvale,

Try looking at the maps Rouge Beaver has posted.

He isn't saying Reagan is going to win the national election, he's saying Reagan will win the GOP nomination.


Bill
 
Right-wing extremism doesn't seem so bad when it seems "normal". They didn't call Reagan a benign demagogue for nothing. To emphasize: if Bobby Kennedy had the same speaking style (and volume) as Gene McCarthy, a good deal of polarization he created would disappear. If Gene had RFK's speaking style, all but New Leftists would jump ship.

Oakvale: up to a point, you're right. Let's say Reagan is asked in the debates whether he supports the privatization of Social Security, as both he and Goldwater did in 1964. Either he lies and gets called out for it, or Reagan self-nukes on live national TV.

For everyone: here's a transcript of the debate (and a partial clip)which I mentioned earlier. Reagan was judged (correctly, IMO) to have flattened Bobby in that debate by the media.
 
Wasn't Reagan considered pretty much a right-wing nut back then? If so, I doubt it's very likely that be able to win...

Never stopped Goldwater...

I'm with Roguebeaver on this one. Too much of the base is going to be too opposed to Rockefeller, and will want an alternative. Reagan (or romney, but he doesn;t have the best personality) seems the best choice available to them. He's already becoming the darling of the right, and the right is growing in strength...

The general election is another question (and this is 1968, so a lot is possible...), but Reagan getting the nomination is certainly feasible.
 
Basically, that clip shows a New Leftist, anti-American British reporter being an NVA apologist. Reagan wipes the floor with him. Kennedy, surprisingly, doesn't verbally manhandle the asshole like Reagan did. But both were cool under fire and tried to teach the reporter to act less like Glenn Beck by feeding him facts.
 
Last edited:
Reagan vs HHH

Right-wing extremism doesn't seem so bad when it seems "normal". They didn't call Reagan a benign demagogue for nothing. Let's say Reagan is asked in the debates whether he supports the privatization of Social Security, as both he and Goldwater did in 1964. Either he lies and gets called out for it, or Reagan self-nukes on live national TV.

For everyone: here's a transcript of the debate (and a partial clip)which I mentioned earlier. Reagan was judged (correctly, IMO) to have flattened Bobby in that debate by the media.
RogueBeaver, I've learned to respect your opinion, but I'm seeing a recurring problem with this thread. Everybody seems to either want to see Rocky get the Repub nom of his party and/or a Surviving Bobby get the Dem nod. How about you doing one of those brilliant Electoral College maps of your creation with Reagan against HHH? Bobby dies as in OTL. Sorry.:(
 
Last edited:
Top