1968: Ted Kennedy v. Nelson Rockefeller v. George Wallace (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 02, 2024, 07:10:31 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs?
  Past Election What-ifs (US) (Moderator: Dereich)
  1968: Ted Kennedy v. Nelson Rockefeller v. George Wallace (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 1968: Ted Kennedy v. Nelson Rockefeller v. George Wallace  (Read 7100 times)
#CriminalizeSobriety
Dallasfan65
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,859


Political Matrix
E: 5.48, S: -9.65

« on: July 01, 2010, 09:15:56 PM »

Rockefeller wins.
Logged
#CriminalizeSobriety
Dallasfan65
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,859


Political Matrix
E: 5.48, S: -9.65

« Reply #1 on: July 01, 2010, 10:32:13 PM »

Wallace seems to really overperform in some of these maps.

Rockefeller could probably hold on to TN/KY by tenuous margins, maybe even Texas.
Logged
#CriminalizeSobriety
Dallasfan65
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,859


Political Matrix
E: 5.48, S: -9.65

« Reply #2 on: July 02, 2010, 03:06:10 PM »

http://


I can't imagine 3 worse candidates running in the same year. My vote is for Wallace because I wouldn't be able to stand those types of Republicans. Ted Kennedy was not electable in any election year ever. I hesitated to give him Hawaii and West Virginia, but I think he'd break through.

You realize Wallace wanted to double the Great Society, right?
Logged
#CriminalizeSobriety
Dallasfan65
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,859


Political Matrix
E: 5.48, S: -9.65

« Reply #3 on: July 02, 2010, 04:19:09 PM »

http://


I can't imagine 3 worse candidates running in the same year. My vote is for Wallace because I wouldn't be able to stand those types of Republicans. Ted Kennedy was not electable in any election year ever. I hesitated to give him Hawaii and West Virginia, but I think he'd break through.

You realize Wallace wanted to double the Great Society, right?

I mean yeah, Rockefeller is on my political sh*t list, but Wallace?
I think I might just go for the self inflicted gunshot wound to the head in this one.....

lol.. or just not vote. Tongue
Logged
#CriminalizeSobriety
Dallasfan65
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,859


Political Matrix
E: 5.48, S: -9.65

« Reply #4 on: July 02, 2010, 04:26:14 PM »

Logged
#CriminalizeSobriety
Dallasfan65
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,859


Political Matrix
E: 5.48, S: -9.65

« Reply #5 on: November 21, 2010, 10:04:59 PM »

You realize Wallace wanted to double the Great Society, right?


Please advise on your source for the above.

Admittedly a quite dated post, but.

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Logged
#CriminalizeSobriety
Dallasfan65
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,859


Political Matrix
E: 5.48, S: -9.65

« Reply #6 on: November 21, 2010, 10:18:04 PM »

You realize Wallace wanted to double the Great Society, right?


Please advise on your source for the above.

Admittedly a quite dated post, but.

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

To be fair, so did the platforms of both Humphrey and Nixon.  But it's nevertheless true that Wallace wasn't anything remotely resembling a conservative in the "modern" sense.

Too true.

I remembered discussing with Libertas how I wish I had been around back then, to have experienced the politics back then - the collapse of the New Deal coalition, etc, to which he responded "We may have been New Dealers ourselves."
Logged
#CriminalizeSobriety
Dallasfan65
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,859


Political Matrix
E: 5.48, S: -9.65

« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2010, 10:35:20 PM »

You realize Wallace wanted to double the Great Society, right?


Please advise on your source for the above.

Admittedly a quite dated post, but.

Quote from: Restricted
You must be logged in to read this quote.

To be fair, so did the platforms of both Humphrey and Nixon.  But it's nevertheless true that Wallace wasn't anything remotely resembling a conservative in the "modern" sense.

Too true.

I remembered discussing with Libertas how I wish I had been around back then, to have experienced the politics back then - the collapse of the New Deal coalition, etc, to which he responded "We may have been New Dealers ourselves."

I'd hate to have been around for the 1968 election - talk about the worst selection of candidates around.  Really, 1964-68-72 would have been an awful triple whammy to someone of our views.  But I do agree that it's intriguing to think about how my own political beliefs would have evolved had different events happened or had I been alive at different times.  I think I've worked out that a Dole '96 victory would make me an uberliberal, Gore 2000 the same as I am now, but probably a partisan Republican, and Kerry 2004 either a moderate liberal or the same as I am now, depending on his Iraq policy.

You don't like Barry Goldwater? And you don't like Bob Dole either?

I think he meant 68-72-76.

Anywhom, good point Wormy - as my father once told me, "The times make the men - the men do not make the times."
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.033 seconds with 13 queries.