1968 Party Nominations

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Ah, here we are in good ol' 1968, a year marred by war, domestic turbulence, and the death of a few well known American leaders. From a real life perspective, the situation is basically now reversed.

If you're a finicky voter, it's advised you read the specific stances of the candidates. However, as always, the success of certain folks will cause the situation to change.

While four years ago President Margaret Chase Smith was able to win re-election by a thin margin, her good will with the nation seems to have worn out its stay. The situation in Vietnam has only deepened since 1964 with continued escalation and an ever worsening view of the war. While a good number of Americans resent the "hippies" camped outside the White House, they too are uncomfortable with this war. With the constitution barring President Smith from seeking a third term, the field is wide open in both parties.

For the Republicans, Vice President Goldwater will have more than a hard time seeking the nomination. Despite continued gravitas among his core following, the fact that he has served under an administration that he has been at odds with is a sticky situation to be in. Nevertheless, his campaign has chosen the themes of a) continuing American prosperity, and b) a decisive and victorious end to the war in Vietnam. Meanwhile, prominent Republican Senator Richard Nixon, a foreign policy leader in the party, has chosen to seek the nomination, having long been denied a spot on the ticket despite his hard work and high visibility. He too is touting the phrase "Peace, With Honor" and is attempting to use blue collar discontent, both with the hippies and with the administration, to his advantage. Nelson Rockefeller is back again. He warns that the other contenders--Goldwater, Reagan, Nixon--associated with the Republican right wing, are unelectable. He instead proposes a continued moderate-to-liberal Republican path to victory like those pioneered by Eisenhower and Smith, and in doing so promises a "continued record of progress and triumph, both at home and abroad". For the first time, the issue of abortion is beginning to come up in national debate, as brought by some opponents of Rockefeller. Running as a "conservative alternative", California's favorite son Governor Ronald Reagan is testing the presidential waters. Depending on his and his opponents' success, he may act in his own interests or instead pledge his delegates to Goldwater. The man who sticks out of the field is Michigan Governor George Romney. While earlier having been ambiguous on Vietnam, he has now come out in favor of American withdrawal, taking a more dovish stance than straddlers like Nixon and Rockefeller. He is hoping to use this anti-establishment stance combined with his record as a successful industrial state governor to forge a path to the nomination.

The Democrats meanwhile have assembled a largely anti-war field in opposition to the Smith administration's policies. Senator Eugene McCarthy became the first of the anti-war legislators to hop into the race, upsetting potential front-runners Hubert H. Humphrey and Robert F. Kennedy. Humphrey, as in 1960, is running on economic issues and has taken a muddled stance on Vietnam that has left both sides unsatisfied. Meanwhile, Kennedy had only more recently taken the anti-war position, in time for it to hopefully help his candidacy catch fire. Kennedy, the brother of 1964 Vice Presidential nominee John F. Kennedy, instead originally made the focus of his campaign urban issues. Now having added the war to that list, Kennedy is hoping to steal minorities from Humphrey while winning McCarthy's dove vote. Senator George Smathers meanwhile is running as a conservative favorite son in his home state of Florida. McGovern is running his own favorite son campaign and is a vocal anti-war Senator in the vein of McCarthy.

**As always, voice your preference for VP. If I've left out descriptions of anyone you're interested in, or you want some clarification, don't be afraid to ask.**

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Cathcon, Smith isn't barred for serving another term.  She served less than half of Ike's last one.  This is why Johnson could run in 68, even though he dropped out.

The late President Eisenhower died in October, 1962.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

All right, I'll jump on the McGovern bandwagon...

Humphrey for veep, please!

Sorry dawg. That doesn't fly for a litany (or like two or three) of reasons.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Nixon/Hatfield!

I'm amused by how conflicting that ticket is. Hatfield was so principled, while Nixon was so go along to get along.

I think I chose them because of that. I just like Nixon, and in this timeline he hasn't lost an election to John Kennedy or made shadowy decisions while VP (I suppose he might be less paranoid thanks to that). Besides, just in the case he were to have a Watergate-Style scandal, Hatfield would a great choice to fill the post.

True, but back when he was Senator of California, the guy was very close to McCarthy territory, and he might've gotten bonked on that if he had more time in the Senate.

Nixon was a smart cookie who knew when to drop it, and if he didn't, he'd learn fast and get his act together. I figure by this point he's moved to the center on a number of domestic policy issues while broadening his foreign policy horizons. While denied a spot on the national ticket numerous times, he's risen as a potential appointee for Secretary of State. Meanwhile, without presidential aspirations, his paranoia has calmed somewhat, since he's not such a target and therefore has less to fear. However, Nixon will be Nixon. Not sure how far that would be taken. Depends.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Are the Republicans really considering the President who said, and I quote: "If the President does it, that means it is not illegal"? I don't care if he's less paranoid, I still wouldn't vote for him for dog catcher.

Also, he bombed Laos and Cambodia.

If Dems are willing to nominate LBJ, I don't see why not. I hate Nixon as a President, personally, but honestly.

Are you saying that LBJ is as bad as Nixon?

From my own perspective, I would say "not quite". Both definitely ran awful smear campaign against their opponents when going for re-election. Both basically concocted prosperity in time for re-election, but the late seventies taught us how that ended up. Johnson however was just lured into Vietnam while lying about it. Nixon stayed in Vietnam while lying about it and purposefully extended it to not just after 1968, but all the way to after the 1972 election. Quite a well played and malevolent political trick.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

I just realized that I accidentally forgot to include Reagan. No wonder he was performing so badly!