RFK vs Nixon '68

[Michael Z]

We've had this topic before, I think, but it's still worth contemplating. What if Robert Kennedy isn't assassinated and runs on the Democratic ticket. Who's his running mate? Does he beat Nixon?

[True Democrat]

Kennedy/Muskie vs Nixon/Agnew



Kennedy wins 326-167-45

[LINCOLN REPUBLICAN]

Robert Kennedy decides not to go with another northeastern liberal for Vice President, instead chooses experienced and respected Missouri Senator Stuart Symington.

Richard Nixon, realizing he is facing politically polished opponents, opts for former Pennsylvania Governor William Scranton, who was Governor 1963-1967, for Vice President.

In a close election, Kennedy wins California, Nixon's home state, and the scene of Kennedy's greatest primary victory, by a narrow margin, and Kennedy wins the election.

Sympathy for former President John Kennedy helps put Robert Kennedy over the top in some very close states.

Kennedy/Symington          269 EV
Nixon/Scranton                  224 EV
Wallace/LeMay                     45 EV   

[WalterMitty]

rfk wins easily, assuming wallace runs.

[Reignman]

RFK wins.

[afleitch]

Saying this as a Nixon fan, RFK wins (and I would have supported him) There is no Watergate and today there is a little less cynicism than there is now in politics and politicians.

[Rob]

RFK pwns (this is with Symington as running mate):

295-198-45

[MaC]

RFK wipes the floor with Nixon.

[kashifsakhan]

Saying this as a Nixon fan, RFK wins (and I would have supported him) There is no Watergate and today there is a little less cynicism than there is now in politics and politicians.

Agreed. And America would have been a better place today if that had happened.

[kashifsakhan]

Democrats: 324
Republicans: 169
Independent: 45

[johnpressman]

First, had RFK lived he would not have won the nomination.  Humphrey had the 1968 nomination sewed up after LBJ chose not to run.  There were fewer primaries in 1968 and RFK was NOT liked by the rank and file Democratic Party bosses.

Second, should RFK had somehow been the Dempcratic Presidential Candidate in 1968, he would have lost the race by a large margin.  In the wake of his victory in Chicago, the  party would have been worse than split, it would have been torn asunder.  Remembering those times, I believe that  the McCarthy supporters would have sat on their hands in the general election, as for the Johnson/Humphrey backers...forget about it!!

America was a much more conservative nation in those times.  There was a tremendous backlash against the counterculture, the urban race riots and the perception of lawlessness of the cities.  Kennedy would not have won California, The Democratic vote in the southern states would have dissapeared as the Wallace vote would have soared.  Texas would switch to Nixon. etc. etc. Nixon wins easily, the Wallace vote would have increased significantly.

[Secretary Polnut]

I agree and disagree.

We make the assumption that Humphrey who was absent from the primaries would have won the nomination if Kennedy had lived from the idea that Humphrey was the favoured of the party bosses.

But I do wonder given that Kennedy's candidacy was not incredibly strong until May and was in fact building momentum by the time he was killed, and if that had carried on the Convention where there would have been incredible pressure. Don't forget it was less than 5 years since JFK's assassination - I don't doubt that many many people would have voted for RFK for that reason alone.

Assuming RFK got the nomination - and the eventual result which wasn't close in the electoral college (but the popular vote shows that in a few states it wouldn't have taken much to swing it. Kennedy could've  run on his brother's legacy, and the anti-Vietnam ... it would've been close, but I think RFK would've won it in a sqeaker.

RFK - 278 (Winning WI, VT, NJ, IL, OH and DE extra)
Nixon - 215
Wallace - 45

[johnpressman]

You RFK supporters are living in a revisionist history fool's paradise. 

1. Humphrey had the Democratic Presidential Nomination sewed up following Johnson's decleration of his non-candidacy on March 31, 1968.   There were few primaries then, the liberal vote was split due to McCarthy's candidacy.  RFK was considered an opportunist, having refused to enter the race early and only jumping in after McCarthy's early success.  Kennedy was NOT liked by the party leadership.

2.  If SOMEHOW RFK had emerged from Chicago with the nomination, the Democratic party would have been torn to pieces.  The McCarthy supporters HATED RFK and the Johnson/Humphrey supporters (who controlled the party) would have worked against him or, at the very least, have sat on their hands.

3.  America was a MUCH more conservative nation in 1968.  While there were numerous protests against the war, the electorate, then over 21, were overwhelmingly in support of our effort in Vietnam and the backlash against the conterculture, race riots in the cities, etc.  produced a desire for a return to the "good old days" when "law and order" prevailed.

4. Kennedy would NOT have won Texas or California.  Humphrey squeaked by in Texas through LBJ's support.   LBJ HATED RFK and would have worked behind the scenes for his defeat.  California was a much more conservative state in 1968.

5.  Face it.  America was poised for a Nixon victory in 1968.  With RFK heading a fractured Democratic Party it wouldn't even had been close.  Many Southern States would have turned into  two-way contests between Nixon and Wallace.  RFK's vote in the South would have dropped way below Humphrey's totals and he would not have gained many votes from Nixon or Wallace in the Northeast.   How would RFK have gained votes over Humphrey?  Could you see many Nixon or Wallace voters switching to RFK???  Come on!

[True Federalist]

Here's how I see it.  Wallace is the main beneficiary of RFK getting the nomination in '68.



Nixon/Agnew 246
RFK/Symington 147
Wallace/LeMay 145

Symington easily defeats Agnew in the Senate (since LeMay is out of the running) but Nixon is easily able to covince enough Wallace Democrats to support him for President over RFK so we end up with the first P/VP split since Adams/Jefferson 172 years earlier.

[DownWithTheLeft]

RFK chooses Henry Jackson, the anti-communist Senator from WA

Nixon/Agnew 274
RFK/Jackson 196
Wallace/Thurmond 68

Wallace has a better showing, Jackson gets Dems WA, RFK picks up NJ and NH.

[johnpressman]

There you go, except Sen. Jackson was a HUGE hawk on Vietnam.  RFK could not have run with him.  Some Midwesterner whose views matched his would have been a more logical choice.  Also, Gen. Curtis LeMay ran with Wallace in 1968, not Thurmond.  LeMay's remarks after Wallace introduced him as his running mate sent Wallace's candidacy into free-fall. Before that press conference, the polls showed NIxon at 42%, Humphrey at 28% and Wallace at 21%.  The final total was Nixon 43% Humphrey 43% and Wallace 13%.  Not that I was a Wallace supporter, but he should have run alone!!!

[True Federalist]

Also, Thurmond was strong Nixon backer in 1968,  and would have been actively campaigning for him.  Indeed, assuming a 1968 that would be the same as OTL's except have Thurmond on the sidelines and Wallace wins South Carolina and has a decent shot at both North Carolina and Tennessee as well a second place finish in Florida instead of a third.  Nixon would still win, but with only 270 EV's he might have done a few things differently with the result being so close.