Atlas Throwback: 1965 edition

[Thunderbird is the word]

So who do you think will run in 68? Obviously the real battle will be on the Republican side. I wouldn't count out a Rocky-Goldwater rematch though everyone knows that whoever they nominate will lose badly to LBJ once he conquers poverty. They can't even pull the "who lost China" nonsense on him since we will have utterly decimated the commies in Indochina by then.

[VPH]

I'm so mad about Mike Gravel winning that primary last year...

[OSR stands with Israel]

I think George Romney

[Clark Kent]

I'm a fan of California Governor Ronald Reagan. He might have a chance against Johnson.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I'm a fan of California Governor Ronald Reagan. He might have a chance against Johnson.

Are you predicting Reagan to win the California Governor race in 1966 then run and then win against LBJ in 1968 lol. He may win the governor race but he's even more right wing then Goldwater and we saw how that turned out.

[Clark Kent]

I'm a fan of California Governor Ronald Reagan. He might have a chance against Johnson.

Are you predicting Reagan to win the California Governor race in 1966 then run and then win against LBJ in 1968 lol. He may win the governor race but he's even more right wing then Goldwater and we saw how that turned out.

Of course Reagan will be elected Governor. Goldwater lost because Johnson gained sympathy votes from Kennedy's assassination. I bet he would've done a lot better if he was running against Kennedy instead.

OOC: My bad. I thought Reagan was already governor by this point.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I'm a fan of California Governor Ronald Reagan. He might have a chance against Johnson.

Are you predicting Reagan to win the California Governor race in 1966 then run and then win against LBJ in 1968 lol. He may win the governor race but he's even more right wing then Goldwater and we saw how that turned out.

Of course Reagan will be elected Governor. Goldwater lost because Johnson gained sympathy votes from Kennedy's assassination. I bet he would've done a lot better if he was running against Kennedy instead.

OOC: My bad. I thought Reagan was already governor by this point.

Even then he will only have been governor for less then 2 years, and is to inexperienced to beat someone like LBJ. I think 1972(IF LBJ wins) or 1976(If the GOP wins) would be the better year for him to run

[NeverAgain]

RFK will probably run against LBJ as the liberal alternative. It all depends how LBJ handles the build-up in Vietnam. If he continues his path of hawkishness, RFK will win the dove vote and quite possibly the nomination. I think that Pat Brown may make a run at the nomination if he wins next year. I think the GOP will run someone establishment because of the awfulness of Goldwater... Maybe Romney or Rockefeller. I'd say the likely tickets are Romney/Rockefeller vs. RFK/Sanford or LBJ/Humphrey.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

After the Vietnam war wraps up in early 1967, LBJ could be looking at matching his showing from last year. He'll have destroyed poverty, racism, and the Viet Cong.

[OSR stands with Israel]

After the Vietnam war wraps up in early 1967, LBJ could be looking at matching his showing from last year. He'll have destroyed poverty, racism, and the Viet Cong.

I dont think poverty and racism will go away but the war will have been won  which means LBJ will win in 1968

[Clark Kent]

Why would Kennedy run? I know that he and Johnson didn't get along when they were both part of his brother's administration, but the war seems to be going along fine. I don't like Johnson, but you can't hold the war against him.

[NeverAgain]

Why would Kennedy run? I know that he and Johnson didn't get along when they were both part of his brother's administration, but the war seems to be going along fine. I don't like Johnson, but you can't hold the war against him.

If either LBJ doesn't run or gets bogged down if the war turns sour. He obviously wants to run and LBJ doesn't want to be a Kennedy "placeholder". I think that either we win the war within the next year and then there is an economic slump or we get bogged down by Southeast Asia, those are the only ways LBJ doesn't run. I think if there is enough support against the war in two years against the war within the party, Kennedy will run as liberal alternative, and he just might win.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Why would Kennedy run? I know that he and Johnson didn't get along when they were both part of his brother's administration, but the war seems to be going along fine. I don't like Johnson, but you can't hold the war against him.

If either LBJ doesn't run or gets bogged down if the war turns sour. He obviously wants to run and LBJ doesn't want to be a Kennedy "placeholder". I think that either we win the war within the next year and then there is an economic slump or we get bogged down by Southeast Asia, those are the only ways LBJ doesn't run. I think if there is enough support against the war in two years against the war within the party, Kennedy will run as liberal alternative, and he just might win.

America has never lost a war though

[NeverAgain]

Why would Kennedy run? I know that he and Johnson didn't get along when they were both part of his brother's administration, but the war seems to be going along fine. I don't like Johnson, but you can't hold the war against him.

If either LBJ doesn't run or gets bogged down if the war turns sour. He obviously wants to run and LBJ doesn't want to be a Kennedy "placeholder". I think that either we win the war within the next year and then there is an economic slump or we get bogged down by Southeast Asia, those are the only ways LBJ doesn't run. I think if there is enough support against the war in two years against the war within the party, Kennedy will run as liberal alternative, and he just might win.

America has never lost a war though

I didn't say we'd lose it. North Vietnam is a weak country by itself but with the help of the Ruskies and China we could be stalemated there.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Why would Kennedy run? I know that he and Johnson didn't get along when they were both part of his brother's administration, but the war seems to be going along fine. I don't like Johnson, but you can't hold the war against him.

If either LBJ doesn't run or gets bogged down if the war turns sour. He obviously wants to run and LBJ doesn't want to be a Kennedy "placeholder". I think that either we win the war within the next year and then there is an economic slump or we get bogged down by Southeast Asia, those are the only ways LBJ doesn't run. I think if there is enough support against the war in two years against the war within the party, Kennedy will run as liberal alternative, and he just might win.

America has never lost a war though

I didn't say we'd lose it. North Vietnam is a weak country by itself but with the help of the Ruskies and China we could be stalemated there.

Maybe China but I dont think Russia would risk WW3 over this

[NeverAgain]

Why would Kennedy run? I know that he and Johnson didn't get along when they were both part of his brother's administration, but the war seems to be going along fine. I don't like Johnson, but you can't hold the war against him.

If either LBJ doesn't run or gets bogged down if the war turns sour. He obviously wants to run and LBJ doesn't want to be a Kennedy "placeholder". I think that either we win the war within the next year and then there is an economic slump or we get bogged down by Southeast Asia, those are the only ways LBJ doesn't run. I think if there is enough support against the war in two years against the war within the party, Kennedy will run as liberal alternative, and he just might win.

America has never lost a war though

I didn't say we'd lose it. North Vietnam is a weak country by itself but with the help of the Ruskies and China we could be stalemated there.

Maybe China but I dont think Russia would risk WW3 over this

We shouldn't either. We already know that Russia is supporting them, and China is doing so wholeheartedly. We should have our troops come home, there's nothing there but unsuccessful nation-building. I mean what's the point of going over there to have to then prop up an unstable regime in the name of "democracy". (OOC: I really just love hindsight)

[Kingpoleon]

I'm going to assume it will be Rockefeller/Ford against a McCarthy/Kennedy ticket. LBJ will want to wait until 1972 or be appointed to the SCOTUS, depending on who wins.

[Phony Moderate]

My insane prediction of the decade: Nixon will run again. Won't win of course, but he has a large enough ego to do so. Will drop out way before the convention o/c.

Btw, what do you guys make of Mr. Enoch Powell, a no-hoper in the British Tory leadership election? Apparently he favors legalising abortion and homosexuality. I'd agree with both positions; I mean I don't for one second suggest that abortion should be publicly funded or that (God Forbid!) homosexual 'relationships' should be recognised as acceptable in any way, but let's live and let live. Hah, both Mr. Powell and I would be too liberal for even much of the hippy movement over there.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

The GOP has a great field of potential candidates to run in '68.  Rockefeller, Scranton, Romney, Volpe, any one of them would be great.  Even if Johnson is popular, we could still in theory beat him.  But I'm betting he won't run; I don't think he wants to be president for nearly ten years of his life.

I still wish Nixon would've won in 1960.  Too bad it looks like his political career is over.