WI: Robert Kennedy in 1968

The ideas which are often regarded as well explored territory are much of the time rather undercovered in comparison to their prestige. This scenario is among them. Robert Kennedy ran for the Democratic nomination in 1968. While it is subject to debate whether he would have achieved the nomination in the race against Humphrey (and to a lesser degree McGovern), there is enough support that it was a possibility. The discussion with Mayor Daley is among the sources to support the idea. Kennedy also had the strength of unifying and inspiring many different factions and sectors of Americans. This is among the reasons his murder was so devastating to the public. Many young people who had seen the 1960s, who felt there was a chance to set right what they felt had gone wrong, who felt as if there were a destiny to history of returning to the right path, were now lost and uncertain with a deep anguish that can not be written in words, and can only be explained if it can be emotionally felt. However, Kennedy was not limited in appeal. He was a source of inspiration to poor Americans, Black Americans, and so many other people in American society.

In 1968, Kennedy would be facing an America that had fractured over the course of the 1960s. It was already fractured by 1968, and we have a clear guide in those times to what would follow. The Vietnam War had divided generations of Americans, and had called into question everything that had once seemed so certain. Civil Rights and many other social and political issues played a role as well. Robert Kennedy's assassination, along with Martin Luther King, played a major role in creating a mood that the order was basically good but needed to be reformed into a mood that the order was basically corrupt and needed to be completely torn down and replaced. This mood seemed to be coming into vogue already, but the absolute devastation and disillusionment of 1968 resulted in even more drastic militancy in the 1970s. The 1970s would prove to be a decade where Americans were lost. And Robert Kennedy was a glimmer of hope and normalcy that was blown out with wrenching sadness. The death of Robert Kennedy was the death of hope.

This is not a topic concerning if Robert Kennedy could secure the nomination in 1968, nor the race against Nixon being lost if he did. There is a habit recently of being lost in the woods in discussing everything leading up to a topic, or how a topic could never be, such , that it does not focus on the concerns of the topic. That is not to say that there cannot be discussion concerning it. To the contrary, 1968 and the vents leading up to November are fully open to discussion. However, it is a discussion on the concept of Robert Kennedy surviving, securing the nomination, and winning 1968, with all the many details therein ripe for discussion, as well as the history after that fact being ripe for discussion. The term or terms, the impact on America and the world, the impact on social and political forces and the identity of this nation, among many other areas of discussion. With that said, what if Robert Kennedy had lived, and gone on to the presidency in 1968?
 
-Vietnam goes very differently, possible withdraw as early as the summer of '69.
-Richard Nixon fades away into possible obscurity.
-Social programs to help the poor, to lift Black Americans, become much more the norm.
 

Deleted member 92121

The TL "All These Years of Progress" by @olavops entails an RFK '68 :)
Yes, "These Years of Progress" focus on Kennedy eventually winning agains't Nixon and the consequences. I try to to detail the broadstrokes of his presidency as well as world events, Vietnam, Prague Spring, Cultural revolution, Paris in 1968, etc. Although i chose to make it more into a story and less into a political description of alternate U.S. Politics.

-Vietnam goes very differently, possible withdraw as early as the summer of '69.
-Richard Nixon fades away into possible obscurity.
-Social programs to help the poor, to lift Black Americans, become much more the norm.

Indeed.
 
You know, everyone assumes he would have gotten the US out of Vietnam quickly--but not once in any of his speeches did he call for unilateral withdrawal, as even Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. acknowledges. https://books.google.com/books?id=5L-EeG9djO4C&pg=PA890 ("Whatever they may have thought privately, neither [Kennedy nor McCarthy] came out for unilateral withdrawal.")

I would argue that Kennedy's approach would have been a gradual but steady withdrawal, distinct from Nixon's approach of Vietnamization but expansion of the war. I cannot see Kennedy going into Cambodia. I can see an extension of the policy position taken by Johnson in exhaustion in 1968, which is one of negotiation and getting out of the situation, effectively accepting the conflict as closed. I would argue a similar position for a Humphrey administration.
 
That would suck for Nixon. You lose one of the closest elections in history and eight years later, you get beaten again by his brother.
 
I think '68 still would've gone to Nixon even if Kennedy was the nominee and that's a big if because LBJ could royally screw RFK out of the nomination. The only reason it wasn't a Nixon landslide OTL was because Wallace hurt Nixon in the south. Kennedy might've made it close, but I think he still loses.
 
People have a tendency to wank the might have been. The ones who were cut down in their prime always would gave been historically great while the ones who survived and give us actual results are typically mediocre, or are good for a time and eventually jump the shark.

I believe an RFK presidency would have been better than Nixon's, but far from a utopia. We got OSHA and the Clean Water Act from Nixon so those are victories we achieved anyway. We might have achieved universal healthcare since Ted Kennedy would be far less likely to undermine the early 1970s attempt with his own brother in the Oval Office. But there are no guarantees. We still don't have it. A better SCOTUS is likely based on butterflying Rehnquist away, but D appointees have repeatedly turned out to be disappointments. Kagan wrote the majority opinion in the horrible Kaley decision, and the liberal wing of the court gave us Kelo.

We also still have to deal with the oil crisis in 1973. That was going to happen no matter who was in the White House. The fall of Saigon is still going to be a blow to our national morale and international prestige, even if RFK invests less blood and treasure than Nixon.
 
Top