1968...the other rockefeller.

[WalterMitty]

during a republican convention, the republicans turn to progressive governor winthrop rockefeller of arkansas.  win rockefeller is little known to the country as a whole.   however, his brother nelson rockefeller immediately withdrawls his name from consideration once his brother's name is offered for nomination.

for his running mate, rockefeller chooses fellow progressive spiro agnew of maryland

the democrats nominate vice president hubert humphrey.  humphrey lets the convention choose his running mate.  after 46 grueling ballots, arkansas senator william fulbright is nominated for the number 2 spot.  it is widely suspected that humphrey, a long time civil rights supporter, is unhappy with the choice of fulbright, who had a long history of supporting segregation.

the selection of fulbright also angered some jewish democrats who suspected he was an anti-semite.

george wallace tries to mount a third party candidacy, but eventually backs out.  saying he is pleased by the selection of fulbright, although they disagreed on the vietnam war, wallace reluctantly endorsed the humphrey/fulbright ticket.

discuss w/ maps the race between:

winthrop rockefeller/spiro agnew (R)
hubert humphrey/william fulbright (d)

[True Democrat]

Humphrey was better known, so Rockefeller would have a hard time.  Wallace does better in the South (except in Arkansas).



Humphrey elected by the House probably

Electoral is won by Humphrey 245-235-58

[WalterMitty]

Humphrey was better known, so Rockefeller would have a hard time.  Wallace does better in the South (except in Arkansas).



Humphrey elected by the House probably

Electoral is won by Humphrey 245-235-58

re-read the story.  wallace wasnt running

[WalterMitty]

here is my best guess:

winthrop rockefeller/spiro agnew (r) 50%, 304 EVs
hubert humphrey/william fulbright (d) 48%, 207 EVs
unpledged electors: 1%, 27 EVs

[True Democrat]

Oops, then I think the South is split, with extremely low turnout among whites.

Assuming unpledged electors is not an option:



Humphrey wins 297-241 (he would win even without Texas)

[WalterMitty]

you think humphrey would win new york?  against a progressive winthrop rockefeller? (whose brother was popular in the empire state)

keep in mind, william fulbright was unpopular amongst the jews.

[True Democrat]

you think humphrey would win new york?  against a progressive winthrop rockefeller? (whose brother was popular in the empire state)

keep in mind, william fulbright was unpopular amongst the jews.

Hmm, I think most of Walllace's support in NY would go to the other pro-labor candidate: Humphrey.  It would be close, but I think Humphrey would pull it out.

[Dr. Cynic]

HHH would pull it out. By balancing his ticket on the Vietnam War, he shows that he's willing to end the conflict, a popular move.

Rockefeller would suffer from lack of recognition, as well as no split vote, which helped Nixon out.

Rockefeller may be progressive, but I don't think it would shift NY from Democrats who still "love" HHH.

(I say love because of a true story in which HHH was in California during the 1972 primary, and a woman wearing a McGovern button came up to him, and said "We love you." He responded by "But, you're voting for McGovern." She replied by putting her had on his shoulder, and said "But we love Hubert Humphrey."

I don't think the addition of Fullbright would really hurt a whole lot in the long run.

[Lincoln Republican]

This turns out to be one of the closest Presidential elections in history.

The south, with the exception of Texas, which Humphrey wins of his own accord, goes for the transplanted southerner, Winthrop Rockefeller.  Rockefeller had incredible good luck in the fact that George Wallace takes a pass in this election.  

Another big electoral state, California, without Nixon on the ballot, goes to Humphrey.

In an election so close, every state counts.  Normally Democratic Maryland this time opted for the Republican, due to the fact that Maryland Governor Spiro Agnew was the VP candidate.  Rockefeller wins Maryland by the razor thin margin of 1.6%, which is one of the factors spelling the difference between victory and defeat for Rockefeller.

Democratic Vice Presidential nominee J. William Fulbright helped Humphrey somewhat in the south, although not enough to move any southern states to Humphrey.          

In a key to Winthrop Rockefeller's victory, brother Nelson, popular Governor of New York, goes all out in his home state and stumps the state from one end to the other campaigning non stop for Winthrop.  This is credited as the reason for Winthrop winning New York state by the extremely narrow margin of 1.8%.

Humphrey regrets the selection of Fulbright as his running mate, and believes this cost him crucial votes in the very close, normally Democratic states of New York and Maryland, and thus, costing him the election.

The key to Winthrop's victory lie in the solid show of support from the south, in the big electoral state of New York, where his brother is Governor, and in his narrow win in Maryland, with VP candidate Spiro Agnew making the difference.        

Another key to the Rockefeller victory lie in the fact the Democrats had already been in power for 8 years, the Vietnam was was not being handled well, and there was a mood for change in the country.

Winthrop Rockefeller/Spiro Agnew            270 EV  49.0% PV  
Hubert Humphrey/J. William Fulbright        268 EV  48.5% PV
Others                                                           0 EV    2.5% PV

[Dr. Cynic]

I disagree Winfield. New York would vote for Humphrey. He was pro-Labor, popular among the residents of Manhatten, and I doubt his VP selection would have cost him votes.

[True Democrat]

HHH would pull it out. By balancing his ticket on the Vietnam War, he shows that he's willing to end the conflict, a popular move.

Rockefeller would suffer from lack of recognition, as well as no split vote, which helped Nixon out.

Rockefeller may be progressive, but I don't think it would shift NY from Democrats who still "love" HHH.

(I say love because of a true story in which HHH was in California during the 1972 primary, and a woman wearing a McGovern button came up to him, and said "We love you." He responded by "But, you're voting for McGovern." She replied by putting her had on his shoulder, and said "But we love Hubert Humphrey."

I don't think the addition of Fullbright would really hurt a whole lot in the long run.

Every time I talk politics with my liberal Jewish grandmother from New York, she always talks about how great Humphrey would have been.

[Lincoln Republican]

I disagree Winfield. New York would vote for Humphrey. He was pro-Labor, popular among the residents of Manhatten, and I doubt his VP selection would have cost him votes.

Actually, I agree with you.

My scenario is somewhat fanciful, in order to make for an interesting election outcome.

While Winthrop Rockefeller would have won most of the states I gave him credit for, in reality, with an election between Hubert Humphrey and Winthrop Rockefeller, I have little doubt but what Humphrey would have won the election.

Humphrey would have carried New York, and would likely have carried Maryland, thus giving him a comfortable win. 

As it was in 1968, it took a candidate the stature of Richard Nixon to defeat Humphrey, and that narrowly, at least in the popular vote.  Nelson Rockefeller may well have defeated Humphrey, and George Romney, minus the "brainwashing" episode, may well have defeated Humphrey.  Beyond those three, I don't know of any other Republicans of sufficient stature of the day who would have defeated Humphrey.

Winthrop Rockefeller was in reality not of sufficient stature politically to have defeated Vice President Hubert Humphrey at the time.  It does, nevertheless, make for an interesting "what-if" scenario.       

[Dr. Cynic]

I'm not saying it wasn't interesting, Winfield... It was actually one of the many well done scenarios you've done... The outcome of some of the states just doesn't make sense to me, though.

All in all, still a good job.