|
Title: 1948 and 1968 Post by: Democratic Hawk on June 02, 2005, 06:46:03 AM 1) Had Strom Thurmond not ran as State's Rights candidate, who do you think would have won the four states he carried?
Alabama Louisiana Mississippi South Carolina 2) Had George Wallace not ran as an American Independent, who do you think would have won the five states he carried? Alabama Arkansas Georgia Louisiana Mississippi Dave Title: Re: 1948 and 1968 Post by: True Democrat on June 02, 2005, 05:26:21 PM 1) Had Strom Thurmond not ran as State's Rights candidate, who do you think would have won the four states he carried? Alabama Louisiana Mississippi South Carolina 2) Had George Wallace not ran as an American Independent, who do you think would have won the five states he carried? Alabama Arkansas Georgia Louisiana Mississippi Dave Truman would have carried all of them. For Wallace, I think Nixon probably would have won all of them. Arkansas could possibly be Humphrey, but probably not. Title: Re: 1948 and 1968 Post by: minionofmidas on June 07, 2005, 06:24:29 AM 1948 - Dems, easy.
1968 - very much up in the air. Title: Re: 1948 and 1968 Post by: Democratic Hawk on June 07, 2005, 09:21:49 AM 1948 (pre-civil rights) - All states carried by Thurmond would have gone with Truman
1968 (post-civil rights) - All states carried carried by Wallace would have gone with Nixon with the possible exception of Arkansas; while, I believe that Wallace's candidacy helped Humphrey win Texas Of course, Wallace's candidacy still had an impact beyond the South. Some large states, like California, Illinois and Ohio (all carried by Nixon) might (and it's big might) have been won by Humphrey in the absence of a Wallace candidacy Dave Title: Re: 1948 and 1968 Post by: Lincoln Republican on June 08, 2005, 06:04:28 PM 1948
These 4 states would have gone for Truman. In 1948, the Democratic "Solid South" was not about to go for a Republican. 1968 These 5 states would have gone for Nixon. These states would not have gone for the very liberal Humphrey. As well, they would have liked Nixon's "law and order" stand in 1968. Title: Re: 1948 and 1968 Post by: A18 on June 08, 2005, 06:11:06 PM How do you think the Wallace vote would have split nationally had he not been in the race?
Title: Re: 1948 and 1968 Post by: Lincoln Republican on June 08, 2005, 06:17:32 PM How do you think the Wallace vote would have split nationally had he not been in the race? The Wallace vote would have split roughly 70% Nixon, 30% Humphrey. Title: Re: 1948 and 1968 Post by: PBrunsel on June 08, 2005, 06:18:30 PM 1948:
No question Truman would have carried them. 1948 was the last hurrah for the Solid South. 1968: Nixon would ahve won all of them, but Arkansas may have voted for Humphrey. Depends on the vote of the Unions. Also, Wallace's withdrawal or not running would help HUmphrey immensely with Union Workers and Blue Collar Americans. It would assure him Missouri at least, perhaps Ohio, Illinois, and New Jersey, and with that, the election. Title: Re: 1948 and 1968 Post by: minionofmidas on June 09, 2005, 05:30:43 AM Actually, 1968 depends very much on who Wallace would have supported, who local Dixiecrat worthies would have supported etc. A 70-30 or even 80-20 split for Nixon is feasible, but so is a 70-30 split for Humphrey. And that's just the South. I'm pretty sure Humphrey would have gained slightly more votes in the North.
|