Ralph Yarborough vs. Nelson Rockefeller 1976

[Bo]

RFK is not assasinated in June 1968. At the Democratic Convention, party leader decide to back him since they feel he is the only candidate who can defeat Nixon. RFK defeats Nixon in 1968 and wins reelection in 1972. In 1976, Democrats nominate RFK's VP, Ralph Yarborough. Republicans nominate Nelson Rockefeller. In foreign policy, RFK pursues a policy of detente towards the USSR but does not establish relations with Communist China out of fear of appearing weak. Everything else stays the same (oil embargo, high inflation, and high unemployment still occur). The unemployment rate on election day is 7.3% and the inflation rate is 3.9%. Discuss, with maps.

[Bo]

Nelson Rockefeller/Ronald Reagan-383 EV-54.46% PV
Ralph Yarborough/Daniel Patrick Moynihan-155 EV-43.32% PV

[hcallega]

I would think unemployment would be lower. RFK was a believer in Keynesian and New Deal style economic policies, including large public works projects. However inflation may have been higher. I would assume that Yarborough would loose in a simmilar way that you proposed.

[Bo]

I would think unemployment would be lower. RFK was a believer in Keynesian and New Deal style economic policies, including large public works projects. However inflation may have been higher. I would assume that Yarborough would loose in a simmilar way that you proposed.

Nixon was also a Keynesian and a believer in the New Deal and the Great Society. BTW, I made unemployment in this scenario lower on election day than in RL. In RL, unemployment was 7.8% on election day, while in this scenario it is 7.3%. I doubt unemployment would have been much lower unless the timing of the Yom Kippur War would have been different, since I think RFK was also likely to save Israel from destruction and thus face the wrath of Arab states with an oil embargo, which would increase unemployment (and inflation for a time). Also, on my map, I gave most of the Deep South to Yarborough since despite being liberal, he is a native Southerner in contrast to Rockefeller, who was a liberal Yankee. I figured if there was no third party candidate running, in an election between two liberals, the native son (Yarborough) would win most of the South and especially the Deep South.

[Psychic Octopus]

Unlikely scenario. RFK could never win at the convention, and the party leaders, especially LBJ, HATED him. Yarborough would never be chosen, either, they would have gone with Sanford or Smathers. Still, in 1976, Rockefeller demolishes everything in his path.

[Bo]

Unlikely scenario. RFK could never win at the convention, and the party leaders, especially LBJ, HATED him. Yarborough would never be chosen, either, they would have gone with Sanford or Smathers. Still, in 1976, Rockefeller demolishes everything in his path.

I've seen much more unlikelier scenarios on this Forum. In this scenario, LBJ has a change of heart and allows RFK to win the nomination at the Convention. Also, RFK picks Yarborough as VP since he is one of the few prominent Southern liberals that are still around.

[The Age Wave]

Nixon wasn't Keynesian or a New Dealer, in fact, I don't think he was anything on economics.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

Two liberals seeking the presidency? Please. A conservative third party, quite possibly led by Jesse Helms, would enter the race and take a significant proportion of the South, thus causing a Rockefeller landslide, in spite of a record low voter turnout.