1965-1969 without Vietnam

[DevotedDemocrat]

Let's say either one of the following happens:

Vietnam falls to Communism.
LBJ does a quiet withdrawal from Vietnam in 1965.
LBJ continues the Eisenhower-Kennedy policies in Vietnam and does not escalate the conflict.

Basically, let's say the US doesn't get bogged down in Vietnam in any way that effects the nation in any real way. How do the '60s, from 1965 onward, go? Does the Great Society become even bigger? Does LBJ run for a third (second elected) term in 1968? What does his Presidency look like without Vietnam?

Long term, how does the US look politically? Does a drastic shift to the right still occur as it did in the '80s? Does the cultural revolution of the 1960s still happen?

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Even without Vietnam, Johnson still has to deal with race riots, controversy over open housing, etc. Still, Johnson's life does get a bit easier, as Johnson himself agonized over Vietnam. Despite a Dixiecrat uprising, Johnson may be able to secure a third term, though narrowly. Nixon's long march towards the presidency may be slowed if not stopped altogether. '72 should be interesting, especially given the economic problems Nixon faced in those years.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

A lot of the economic problems Nixon inherited from Johnson came from the government trying to buy both guns and butter.  If the US doesn't get bogged down in Vietnam then it is only having to worry about the butter.  However, if the US isn't distracted in Vietnam, it's likely to get involved elsewhere to a greater degree than it did, say for example intervening against the coup that deposed King Idris of Libya in 1969.