1968 election poll

[Lincoln Republican]

If Robert Kennedy had not been shot in 1968, who wins the 1968 election?

Please vote and discuss.

[S019]

Still Nixon, he really cannot run away from Johnson without risking Texas, and Nixon would then toe him to Johnson

[dw93]

Nixon. RFK loses Texas as he and LBJ hated each other, while Wallace and Nixon still win the south. Also, a lot of blue collar "law and order " types that voted Nixon and Wallace in the Rust Belt would still do so.

[connally68]

Robert Kennedy wins by a razor thin margin because his running mate is still liberal Democrat Charlton Heston. He actively campaigned for him in 1968 in real life. He switched parties in 1972 over McGovern. He helps Kennedy pull off California by roughly 40,000 votes. Unlike Humphrey, Kennedy/Heston wins Los Angeles, and California.
Kennedy/Heston wins 286 electoral votes. Nixon/Agnew wins 207 electoral votes. Wallace/LeMay wins the same at 45 electoral votes. Heston also helps bring over Illinois, Missouri, Ohio by 26,000 votes, and New Jersey by 70,000 votes.

[Mr. Smith]

Kennedy.

Humphrey got as close as he did once he started to run away from LBJ over 'Nam. And RFK could point things back to JFK, which was a more peaceful and eloquent time...which takes away a lot of Nixon's appeal.

The "law and order" shtick would've been a less effective tactic too.

Texas and The South would be lost, but he'd hold The West where Humphrey couldn't, combined with NJ/DE, Alaska, Illinois and Missouri to make up for it.

[Sir Mohamed]

Still Nixon. He cheated by sabotaging the Paris peace talks. With some agreement in late October, the election would have swung to Humphrey or Kennedy. This probably the worst thing Nixon has done other than Watergate. If not worse.

[morgankingsley]

Kennedy.

Humphrey got as close as he did once he started to run away from LBJ over 'Nam. And RFK could point things back to JFK, which was a more peaceful and eloquent time...which takes away a lot of Nixon's appeal.

The "law and order" shtick would've been a less effective tactic too.

Texas and The South would be lost, but he'd hold The West where Humphrey couldn't, combined with NJ/DE, Alaska, Illinois and Missouri to make up for it.

I agree with this one the most because I do agree that Wallace would have a slightly expanded map. Not enough to make it insane, but enough to put him solidly into the 'good effort for a third party' group.

[One Term Floridian]

RFK would’ve sealed up the nomination, eased the divisions within the Democratic Party and likely would have picked a southerner as VP. I think Albert Gore Sr would have been a solid pick. His victory map would’ve interestingly looked like a fusion of the 1968 and 1992 maps IRL

[johnpressman]

IF RFK had lived he would not have won the Democratic Presidential Nomination much less the election.  Go on YouTube and you can see some prominent newsmen speculate, on the very day of RFK's victory in California, his slim chance to stop Humphrey who already had close to a majority of the delegates.

Also read "On To Chicago" by James Rogan for an interesting twist on 1968.

RFK's self-professed mission in 1968 was to convince delegates already pledged to Humphrey to switch to him.  Both McCarthy and President Johnson disliked Kennedy. He would not be able to unify the anti-war Democrats much less the rank and file party members.

The voting age in 1968 was 21.  Those voters against the Vietnam War were no more than a vocal minority, composed primarily of college professors and their students.  Every poll in 1968 showed popular support for continuing the war; George Wallace and Richard Nixon together totaled 58% of the vote.

If somehow, RFK won the nomination, LBJ and the establishment Democrats would work against his candidacy.  The only beneficiary of a Kennedy candidacy in 1968 would be George Wallace.

[brucejoel99]

I think RFK wins because he was more likeable than Nixon, had charisma, & carried the Kennedy family mystique.

[OSR stands with Israel]

I think Nixon still narrowly pulls it out but barely:

[johnpressman]

Watch this YouTube video showing some prominent newsman speculating on the slim to none chance of RFK winning the Democratic nomination.  Some of these clips were made on the very day that he won the California Presidential Primary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS-UYJ7NFpQ

2019 is not 1968!  RFK was a divisive not a unifying candidate.  Even the Left was severely divided, with the young, upper middle class kids being "Clean for Gene" and hating Kennedy as an opportunist, leading one writer to say that RFK had "come down from the hills to shoot the wounded".