Wasn't 1992 a realigning election?

[phk]

Well certain states that hardly ever voted Democratic went Democratic for the first time like California, Vermont, Connecticut, New Jersey, Maine, Delaware, New Hampshire and seem to have stuck that way. Which is somewhat realigning, I suppose. 

I think many of the trends that manifested itself were slowly getting their start in 1992 with NoVA, Bay Area burbs, Philly burbs, So. FL becoming more and more D.

The Southern eV's were totally won on personal appeal however.

[phk]

You don't freakin get it.

No, you don't get it.  Outside of the Deep South, Wallace got his support from Labor, blue collar workers, immigrants, etc.  These groups were always strong backers of Hubert Humphrey.  They would have gone in large numbers to Humphrey, swinging multiple states.  In the South, these voters would have gone slightly to Nixon, maybe 40/30, with the remaining 30% or so just staying home.  You're attempting to relate anything in 1968 with 2008 is foolish, and makes little sense.  The states have changed drastically over the last 40 years, and saying that a state voted someway in 1968 because it is liberal/conservative now is just pointless.

Hmm...I was always under the impression that most of those labor, blue collar workers would've gone to Nixon without Wallace in the picture. I understand that they were Democrats, but they were socially conservative, and I think without Wallace, Nixon's law-and-order platform would've been appealing to them, especially during the turmoil of the sixties. I'm not saying that all Wallace voters would've gone toward Nixon, but I think a majority of them would have.