LBJ vs AuH2O '64: No JFK Death

[defe07]

Let's assume that LBJ faces off with JFK in the 1964 Presidential primaries and narrowly beats JFK in the delegate race. And Goldwater is still the Republican Presidential nominee. How does the 1964 Presidential race go?

[Lincoln Republican]

Johnson still wins a landslide victory.

I cannot see Goldwater gaining much traction as a Presidential candidate against Johnson in 1964 no matter the circumstances.

The Democrats would still have put fear into voter's minds about Goldwater that he would start a nuclear war. 

Johnson/Humphrey                       431
Goldwater/Miller                            107

[defe07]

Why would Johnson cruise to victory but not JFK?

[Lincoln Republican]

Why would Johnson cruise to victory but not JFK?

Kennedy would cruise to victory over Goldwater in 1964.

I made a map in 2008 showing a slightly smaller Kennedy victory over Goldwater, very similar to this map, but that was my best case scenario for Goldwater vs Kennedy, giving Goldwater the benefit of the doubt. 

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Johnson would not beat an incumbent, popular President for his own party's nomination.

Very true.

[Lincoln Republican]

Johnson would not beat an incumbent, popular President for his own party's nomination.

That is not the point of this thread.  The question as to whether Johnson would defeat Kennedy for the Democratic nomination in 1964, had Kennedy lived, is not the issue of this thread.  Whether or not LBJ would have defeated JFK for the Democratic nomination in 1964 is completely irrelevant for the purposes of this thread.

What is relevant is that, for the purposes of this thread, LBJ defeated JFK for the nomination in 1964, and the election is between LBJ and Goldwater.

If someone wanted to, they could create a thread stating that JFK had not died, and that Senator Jennings Randolph of West Virginia had defeated JFK for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1964.  The fact that, obviously, Randolph would not have defeated JFK for the nomination, would be completely irrelevant, and the issue of the thread would be Randolph vs Goldwater in 1964.

For that matter, if they wanted to, someone could create a thread in which Vermont Republican Senator George Aiken switched to the Democrats in 1963, defeated JFK for the 1964 Democratic nomination, and ran against Goldwater in the Presidential election, the issue being how would the 1964 election between Aiken and Goldwater turn out.  The issue would not be that Aiken would not switch parties and that he would not defeat JFK for the nomination.  The issue would be how the election between Aiken and Goldwater turns out.  Realistic?  No, of course not.  But that would be irrelevant.  What would be relevant would be the election between Aiken and Goldwater.   

This is the What-if section.  It is not the That Would Never Have Happened section.

So go along with the intent of the thread, and address the issues relevant to the thread, and do not find fault with scenarios raised in the thread, even though they may or may not be realistic.     

[defe07]

JFK was very popular and that's why I said what if Johnson is able to beat JFK in the primaries. If everything were so certain, we wouldn't need to what-if anymore.

[Lincoln Republican]

Johnson would not beat an incumbent, popular President for his own party's nomination.

That is not the point of this thread.  The question as to whether Johnson would defeat Kennedy for the Democratic nomination in 1964, had Kennedy lived, is not the issue of this thread.  Whether or not LBJ would have defeated JFK for the Democratic nomination in 1964 is completely irrelevant for the purposes of this thread.

What is relevant is that, for the purposes of this thread, LBJ defeated JFK for the nomination in 1964, and the election is between LBJ and Goldwater.

If someone wanted to, they could create a thread stating that JFK had not died, and that Senator Jennings Randolph of West Virginia had defeated JFK for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1964.  The fact that, obviously, Randolph would not have defeated JFK for the nomination, would be completely irrelevant, and the issue of the thread would be Randolph vs Goldwater in 1964.

For that matter, if they wanted to, someone could create a thread in which Vermont Republican Senator George Aiken switched to the Democrats in 1963, defeated JFK for the 1964 Democratic nomination, and ran against Goldwater in the Presidential election, the issue being how would the 1964 election between Aiken and Goldwater turn out.  The issue would not be that Aiken would not switch parties and that he would not defeat JFK for the nomination.  The issue would be how the election between Aiken and Goldwater turns out.  Realistic?  No, of course not.  But that would be irrelevant.  What would be relevant would be the election between Aiken and Goldwater.   

This is the What-if section.  It is not the That Would Never Have Happened section.

So go along with the intent of the thread, and address the issues relevant to the thread, and do not find fault with scenarios raised in the thread, even though they may or may not be realistic.     

Acknowledge the point...NO DEMOCRATIC CHALLENGER WAS GOING TO DEFEAT JOHN F KENNEDY FOR THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION IN 1964 HAD KENNEDY LIVED.

If somebody made a thread the subject of which was

Had JFK lived, would any Democratic challenger be able to defeat him for the 1964 Democratic Presidential nomination?

Or, if somebody made a thread the subject of which was

Had JFK lived, would LBJ have been able to defeat him for the 1964 Democratic Presidential nomination?

Then I would respond to that question.

However, in this thread, the author of the thread raised the issue of LBJ running against Goldwater in the 1964 Presidential election.  Therefore, with respect for the author, that is the issue I addressed.  I did not interject my own views on whether or not that scenario was realistic or not.