How would the election of 1964 turned out had Goldwater voted for the CRA? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 06, 2024, 08:46:15 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  How would the election of 1964 turned out had Goldwater voted for the CRA? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: How would the election of 1964 turned out had Goldwater voted for the CRA?  (Read 3461 times)
Ebowed
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,596


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: 2.09

WWW
« on: July 12, 2013, 05:29:50 AM »

It would have been closer all around the U.S. The south would have been closer but still broken for Goldwater in every southern state. Goldwater would've also won the traditional Republican states such as ND, SD, NE, KS, OK, MT, WY, ID, UT, at the time CO and NM, his home state of AZ, and narrowly won CA. Indiana and Illinois may have also gone for Goldwater. As for Johnson, he was very popular following the Kennedy assassination and would have still won. The country wasn't ready to change leaders for the 3rd time in 14 months. Goldwater wasn't really a hardcore segregationist either. He simply supported the states' rights to decide if they want to have segregation the same as Wallace did in 1968. They weren't as bad as Stevenson, Thurmond, or Byrd.

Stevenson wasn't a segregationist?
Logged
Ebowed
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,596


Political Matrix
E: 4.13, S: 2.09

WWW
« Reply #1 on: July 13, 2013, 10:08:07 PM »

It would have been closer all around the U.S. The south would have been closer but still broken for Goldwater in every southern state. Goldwater would've also won the traditional Republican states such as ND, SD, NE, KS, OK, MT, WY, ID, UT, at the time CO and NM, his home state of AZ, and narrowly won CA. Indiana and Illinois may have also gone for Goldwater. As for Johnson, he was very popular following the Kennedy assassination and would have still won. The country wasn't ready to change leaders for the 3rd time in 14 months. Goldwater wasn't really a hardcore segregationist either. He simply supported the states' rights to decide if they want to have segregation the same as Wallace did in 1968. They weren't as bad as Stevenson, Thurmond, or Byrd.

Stevenson wasn't a segregationist?

I'm saying he was.

Right, I figured that much, I'm just wondering if you have any evidence for that.

Edit: To clarify, I assume we're discussing Adlai Stevenson.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.024 seconds with 12 queries.