1968 Nixon/Finch v Humphrey/Muskie

[Lincoln Republican]

The only difference in this election from the actual election in 1968 is that Richard Nixon's running mate is his good friend, Lieutenant Governor Robert Finch of California.  Nixon was resident in New York state in 1968, so residency would not be a problem.

Finch was Nixon's first choice for Vice President, but Finch turned down the offer.

How does this 1968 election turn out?

Republican
Former Vice President Richard Nixon (NY)
Lieutenant Governor Robert Finch (CA)

Democrat
Vice President Hubert Humphrey (MN)
Senator Edmund Muskie (ME)

Please discuss, using maps if you wish.

[pragmatic liberal]

Does Wallace still run?

If that's the case, I highly doubt there'd be any significant difference. Maybe overall, Nixon would have added a few votes -- maybe a point at most -- to his total, due to Agnew losing some votes. But although those shifts might have flipped a state or two, I'm hard pressed to think of any state that would definitely have switched.

So no difference in the end, other than the fact that Robert Finch becomes president in 1974 instead of Gerald Ford (assuming Watergate doesn't get "butterflied" out).

[Lincoln Republican]

Thank you for your most interesting input.

Good point about Wallace.  He certainly would be running, with LeMay as his running mate.  They would have won the same states they won, regardless of who Nixon's running mate was.

I agree there would not be any significant difference in the election outcome.  Nixon and Finch would win the electoral vote by a comfortable margin, as in the actual election, and with Finch instead of Agnew, I believe Nixon would have received a slightly larger share of the popular vote.  Many voters were unsure enough about Agnew to vote for Humphrey.   

Finch would not have created the skepticism and the derision that the Agnew candidacy generated, and Finch would have been taken more seriously as a credible Vice Presidential nominee than was Agnew.

With Finch as the running mate, there is a possibility that Texas and maybe Washington would have been won by Nixon.

Thoughts about this analysis?

[pragmatic liberal]

Thank you for your most interesting input.

Good point about Wallace.  He certainly would be running, with LeMay as his running mate.  They would have won the same states they won, regardless of who Nixon's running mate was.

I agree there would not be any significant difference in the election outcome.  Nixon and Finch would win the electoral vote by a comfortable margin, as in the actual election, and with Finch instead of Agnew, I believe Nixon would have received a slightly larger share of the popular vote.  Many voters were unsure enough about Agnew to vote for Humphrey.   

Finch would not have created the skepticism and the derision that the Agnew candidacy generated, and Finch would have been taken more seriously as a credible Vice Presidential nominee than was Agnew.

With Finch as the running mate, there is a possibility that Texas and maybe Washington would have been won by Nixon.

Thoughts about this analysis?

Would Finch really have been more credible? I confess I know next to nothing about Robert Finch. Agnew was off-putting in a way Finch may not have been, but would people really feel that a two-year Lieutenant Governor was qualified to be a heartbeat away from the presidency?