1968: Kennedy/Hearnes vs. Reagan/Case

[Del Tachi]

United States presidential election, 1968

Senator Robert F. Kennedy (D-MA)/Governor Warren E. Hearnes (D-MO)
Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA)/Senator Clifford Case (R-NJ)

Due to Ronald Reagan being considerably more conservative than Nixon, George Wallace is unwilling to get involved in the race and perhaps unintentionally help Kennedy (who is viewed much more dis-pleasingly than Humphrey among the Democrats' Southern wing).

Who do you vote for and who will win?

When imagining this scenario, I tried to think of a matchup that would produce an electoral map most similar to the one we have now.

Discuss w/ maps!

[MATTROSE94]

I think that Ronald Reagan would have won by a fairly close margin (probably similar to the map below):

Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA)/Senator Clifford Chase (R-NJ): 276 Electoral Votes
Senator Robert Kennedy (D-NY)/Governor Warren Hearnes (D-MO): 262 Electoral Votes

The popular vote is a bit tricky to determine, but I would imagine that it would be something like 51% Reagan 47% Kennedy and 2% for minor candidates.

[Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez]

The South was more Democratic in 1968 and unions had more power.  A Kennedy/Hearns ticket would have won enough Southern states to prevail over the inexperienced Reagan.  I also think that a number of voters would have voted for Kennedy to make right 11/22/63.

[Del Tachi]

The South was more Democratic in 1968 and unions had more power.  A Kennedy/Hearns ticket would have won enough Southern states to prevail over the inexperienced Reagan.  I also think that a number of voters would have voted for Kennedy to make right 11/22/63.

Umm...

The American South in 1968 is not going to be friendly territory for RFK even if Hearnes is on the ticket.  Everything that the South disliked about the national Democratic Party during the later 1960s would be amplified and magnified by a Kennedy candidacy.  Reagan, on the other hand, is just the kind of Republican that the South would go for in 1968 - strong on law enforcement, unquestionably conservative, and muted on the Civil Rights issue.  Robert is not the political operator that his brother once was; his message is far to the left of the mainstream Democratic party in 1968, and Reagan would have a field day painting RFK as a liberal radical who was soft on crime and communism.

As far as voters wanting to elect RFK as some sort of retribution for the tragedy that occurred in Dallas, its important to remember that John Kennedy didn't really assume the aura of celebrity and divinity that surrounds him today until the 1980s.  IIRC, I don't even think this his memory was frequently evoked at the 1968 convention because he was still a very controversial figure at that time.  In fact, I seriously doubt that swing voters would be persuaded to vote for RFK just because of the elder Kennedy's demise; however, I could see that Kennedy constantly evoking his brother's memory and parading around Jackie would actually turn some voters off to his campaign. 

In short, Reagan wins by a larger margin than Nixon did in 1968 due to he having a solid base of support in the South.

Reagan/Case - 449
Kennedy/Hearnes - 89

[President Johnson]

I see no way for Reagan to win in 1968. The mood was not conservative enough. RFK wins the election:

Senator Robert F. Kennedy (D-MA)/Governor Warren E. Hearnes (D-MO) 305 EV. 50.9%
Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA)/Senator Clifford Case (R-NJ) 233 EV. 47.2%

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

I see no way for Reagan to win in 1968. The mood was not conservative enough. RFK wins the election:

Senator Robert F. Kennedy (D-MA)/Governor Warren E. Hearnes (D-MO) 305 EV. 50.9%
Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA)/Senator Clifford Case (R-NJ) 233 EV. 47.2%

Because, after all, 1968 was definitely a liberal year.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Both candidates run against LBJ in different ways. RFK calls for a quick negotiated settlement in Vietnam, and calls for reform in the War on Poverty.  Reagan calls for a more muscular approach both to war and crime, and a more radical critique of the welfare state - while avoiding many of the pitfalls Goldwater had run into four years earlier.  Reagan is well to the right of the electorate, but his campaign skills and the dissatisfaction in the country allow him a win.

Reagan/Case 51% 342
Kennedy/Hearnes 48% 196

[Prince of Salem]

I see no way for Reagan to win in 1968. The mood was not conservative enough. RFK wins the election:

Senator Robert F. Kennedy (D-MA)/Governor Warren E. Hearnes (D-MO) 305 EV. 50.9%
Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA)/Senator Clifford Case (R-NJ) 233 EV. 47.2%

Because, after all, 1968 was definitely a liberal year.

It wasn't, but take into account that most liberals didn't have a candidate they could identify with that year, so the hardcore ones would vote for Pigasus or just skip the election. RFK would've had better traction among them, far better than Humphrey. Could make it a liberal year, or a less conservative one.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

I see no way for Reagan to win in 1968. The mood was not conservative enough. RFK wins the election:

Senator Robert F. Kennedy (D-MA)/Governor Warren E. Hearnes (D-MO) 305 EV. 50.9%
Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA)/Senator Clifford Case (R-NJ) 233 EV. 47.2%

Because, after all, 1968 was definitely a liberal year.

It wasn't, but take into account that most liberals didn't have a candidate they could identify with that year, so the hardcore ones would vote for Pigasus or just skip the election. RFK would've had better traction among them, far better than Humphrey. Could make it a liberal year, or a less conservative one.

Eh, I can see your point. What I'd rather dispute is you giving Maine and Virginia to Kennedy. Virginia was one of the notably Republican (on the presidential level) Southern states starting in 1952. It only broke rank with the GOP once between then and 2008, and that was 1964. I see no reason why it would prefer Kennedy over Reagan. And while Kennedy might be a better fit overall for Maine, it was still a Republican state then and Muskie isn't on the ballot for VP, unlike real life.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I see no way for Reagan to win in 1968. The mood was not conservative enough. RFK wins the election:

Senator Robert F. Kennedy (D-MA)/Governor Warren E. Hearnes (D-MO) 305 EV. 50.9%
Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA)/Senator Clifford Case (R-NJ) 233 EV. 47.2%

Because, after all, 1968 was definitely a liberal year.

It wasn't, but take into account that most liberals didn't have a candidate they could identify with that year, so the hardcore ones would vote for Pigasus or just skip the election. RFK would've had better traction among them, far better than Humphrey. Could make it a liberal year, or a less conservative one.

Eh, I can see your point. What I'd rather dispute is you giving Maine and Virginia to Kennedy. Virginia was one of the notably Republican (on the presidential level) Southern states starting in 1952. It only broke rank with the GOP once between then and 2008, and that was 1964. I see no reason why it would prefer Kennedy over Reagan. And while Kennedy might be a better fit overall for Maine, it was still a Republican state then and Muskie isn't on the ballot for VP, unlike real life.

Maine wasn't a steadfastly Republican state, though it still tended to lean that way. The one thing it was in the 60s-80s was incredibly swingy.   Virginia on the other hand is almost certainly going to be one of Reagan's best states.

[Del Tachi]

Also there's no way that Kennedy wins Texas in 1968 seeing as it was LBJ's machine that was able to pull out a Humphrey win in the Lone Star state, and RFK and LBJ absolutely hated one another.