I don't think Nixon would pick Romney. They never had a good relationship and he'd be a lead necklace in the South. Agnew helped bring in Southern states for Romney (even LBJ told Nixon so privately). He was triangulating on the war and civil rights, picking Romney nukes that strategy. Nixon in 1960 would pick someone like Romney. Not Nixon in '68. But if Big Labor doesn't go in for HHH then Nixon can win a landslide... at one point HHH was below 30% nationally, 43-28-21.
And one final thing... a Southern-acceptable Veep was absolutely key to Thurmond holding the Southern delegates for Nixon. Nixon's first ballot majority was only 25 delegates. If the deal's off then Nixon wins only a plurality which could lead to a Reagan nomination since the Southern delegates' hearts were with Reagan.
Not only was Agnew pro-civil rights, but he had defeated a segregationist Democrat, George Mahoney, for governor of Maryland. Mahoney's slogan had been, "Your home is your castle--protect it!" (http://www.wnd.com/2002/12/16477/
) . And the Southern delegates' hearts were with Reagan? Reagan had once said, "I favor the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and believe it should be enforced at gunpoint if necessary." Even if he opposed it later, he initially supported it. (A Call to America
, p. 204.)
OK, here's a good one: what if George Romney had been Nixon's running mate in 1968 instead of Agnew? Note that I didn't include Wallace--I figured nobody would say they would have voted for him!!!
It seems rather bigoted and presumptive to say that no one here would've voted for Wallace.
What I meant is that hardly anybody nowadays would ever admit to voting for George Wallace, even though he had a change of heart (which is largely forgotten.) Make no mistake: George Wallace was a nasty guy, and I sure wouldn't have voted for him, no matter what.