Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 23, 2019, 02:40:45 am
News: 2019 Gubernatorial Predictions are now active

  Atlas Forum
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Torie)
  How would 1972 have fared with George Wallace as the VP nominee?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: How would 1972 have fared with George Wallace as the VP nominee?  (Read 304 times)
North Fulton Swing
mollybecky
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 841


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: July 09, 2019, 05:24:21 am »

What do you think?

Following a thread with Wallace as the potential presidential nominee in 1972--apparently, there was talk around the time of the convention for a Hubert Humphrey-George Wallace ticket to stop George McGovern.  Wallace discussed this in later interviews, and some Humphrey operatives talked about it as well.

For many reasons, it was likely never to work, and even so, it's highly doubtful that they would have won in November.  However, it may have been the strongest ticket coming out of Miami that year.  Wallace had been shot and there was a considerable amount of sympathy (I remember this in my 3rd grade parochial school in Nashville where prayers were said for him).  There would have been a chance to pick up some of the states in the South.  Plus, the strong union vote would make states like Ohio, Illinois, Michigan highly competitive for the Democrats.   

They couldn't have done worse than the eventual result. 
Logged
LastMcGovernite
Ringorules
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 454
Singapore


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: July 12, 2019, 08:18:43 am »

Wasn't Wallace recovering from a paralyzing gunshot wound in 1972?

Anyway, Wallace wasn't exactly a team player for the Democrats, and I doubt he'd serve as running mate to the single senator most responsible for the Civil Rights Act. Balance is good, but a Humphrey-Wallace ticket has too much cognitive dissonance.

Also, Tom Eagleton had electroshock therapy multiple times, and I still think he was saner and more grounded in reality than George Wallace.
Logged
Some of My Best Friends Are Gay
Enlightened_Centrist 420
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,731


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: July 12, 2019, 11:06:37 am »

Well, McGovern would probably perform drastically better in the South, but worse everywhere else. he may lose all 50 states in spite of this.
Logged
RoboWop
AMB1996
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,598
United States


Political Matrix
E: 2.06, S: 5.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: July 12, 2019, 11:35:24 am »

Well, McGovern would probably perform drastically better in the South, but worse everywhere else. he may lose all 50 states in spite of this.

Massachusetts was one of Wallace's best states outside the South. He won Boston in 1976. I don't think he would have cost McGovern many votes to Nixon in '72.

I think we all naturally underrate Wallace's popularity at the time given our current historical moment. He would not have gained many states for McGovern, but I think he would have narrowed the gap in a hopeless race.
Logged
TDAS04
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 14,671
Nepal


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: July 12, 2019, 02:40:32 pm »

Well, McGovern would have lost my vote.  I would have abstained in such an election.
Logged
brucejoel99
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,943
United States


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -3.30

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: July 12, 2019, 07:31:31 pm »

I- I just can't rationalize the ticket of George McGovern & George Wallace, at all.

That isn't to say there wasn't come crossover between McGovern & Wallace voters. Indeed, polls taken throughout the primaries showed that there was a strong correlation where a significant number of Wallace voters would've picked McGovern as their 2nd choice & vice-versa, but a lot of that had to do with the anti-establishment vibe that both men presented. Among that segment of voters, it might've worked, but outside of that, the ticket would've been seen by voters as schizophrenic; African-Americans would've felt betrayed & turnout would've dropped to catastrophic levels, impacting Democratic candidates at every level; that is, unless you don't end up with an African-American ticket which would better represent their issues as was discussed during the Carter years. Liberals would despise Wallace & always be worried about the potential of him becoming President; conservatives would despise McGovern & be convinced that Wallace would have little real leverage over McGovern.

I mean, can you imagine the kind of platform they'd have to push through to run on for the campaign? What kind of compromise could be hashed out on the vital issues of the day where they might've been on opposing sides?

And that's not to mention that there's no doubt whatsoever that, at the convention, the McGovern & Wallace delegates would revolt & opt to vote for other candidates, or might end up siding with Humphrey instead.

This is one of those concepts that just... it wouldn't work.
Logged
North Fulton Swing
mollybecky
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 841


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: July 12, 2019, 08:26:19 pm »

There was never any consideration for a McGovern-Wallace ticket, but as the story goes, the Humphrey-Wallace pairing came up to stop McGovern at the convention.  McGovern came into the convention with a near majority of the votes (he had won a winner-take-all primary in California), but the anti-McGovern forces came up with a resolution to invalidate the winner-take-all (which was defeated).

You would have to look at this situation from the eyes of 1972.  Wallace is seen today viewed in the light of his first term activities as governor and his 1968 campaign (though his mea culpas and later years as governor should also be considered--and in the 1982 governor election, he received all of the black vote).  But in 1972, the busing issue truly catapulted him as a serious candidate--not only in the South (he won Florida by a big margin) but running very strongly in primary states like Wisconsin and Massachusetts (!).   

We'll never know how many additional states a Humphrey-Wallace pairing would have picked up, but there would have been a significant increase in the popular vote (after all, the Humphrey-Wallace combination vote in 1968 was 57%).
Logged
morgankingsley
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,238
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: July 12, 2019, 08:36:05 pm »

There was never any consideration for a McGovern-Wallace ticket, but as the story goes, the Humphrey-Wallace pairing came up to stop McGovern at the convention.  McGovern came into the convention with a near majority of the votes (he had won a winner-take-all primary in California), but the anti-McGovern forces came up with a resolution to invalidate the winner-take-all (which was defeated).

You would have to look at this situation from the eyes of 1972.  Wallace is seen today viewed in the light of his first term activities as governor and his 1968 campaign (though his mea culpas and later years as governor should also be considered--and in the 1982 governor election, he received all of the black vote).  But in 1972, the busing issue truly catapulted him as a serious candidate--not only in the South (he won Florida by a big margin) but running very strongly in primary states like Wisconsin and Massachusetts (!).   

We'll never know how many additional states a Humphrey-Wallace pairing would have picked up, but there would have been a significant increase in the popular vote (after all, the Humphrey-Wallace combination vote in 1968 was 57%).

I would say at least Minnesota, Alabama and Missippi go democrat. Which is enough to give them 43 electoral votes and push Nixon under 500. Humphrey and Wallace could work some magic to flip Wisconsin which is another 11, so 54 there as a result. Wallace absolutely decimated Humphrey and Nixon in Georgia and Lousiana, so those 22 might go to them, which is 76. Rhode Island might flip, which is 4, so 80. Say they decided to steal a electoral vote from Maine, which is on paper allowed now, that would give them 81.

This map I can actually see feasibly happening, minus maybe Maine second district. On a best case map, I can see West Virginia and Arkansas flipping, for 93 electoral votes. A clear defeat, but still by comparison to the 17 we had, a much closer race.
Logged
Truth Hurts
tara gilesbie
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,703
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: July 12, 2019, 09:20:50 pm »

How would a Shirley Chisholm/Larry McDonald ticket poll?
Logged
buritobr
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,132


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: July 16, 2019, 09:22:34 pm »

Wallace could have made an aliance between the republicans and the conservative democrats in the Congress in order to impeach McGovern and become the president.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC