Bobby vs. Nixon 1968
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:43:52 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs?
  Past Election What-ifs (US) (Moderator: Dereich)
  Bobby vs. Nixon 1968
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Bobby vs. Nixon 1968  (Read 9250 times)
hawkeye59
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,530
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 10, 2010, 05:25:14 PM »
« edited: May 12, 2010, 01:46:13 PM by hawkeye59 »

What do you think would happen? Here's my map:

RFK: 285 43.41
Nixon: 207 43.41
Wallace: 46 12.85
Logged
hcallega
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.10, S: -3.90

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 10, 2010, 05:32:53 PM »

Swing Missouri and New Jersey for sure. Kennedy would have won over more ethnic catholics and blue collar whites. He simply appealed to them in a way HHH never could.
Logged
hawkeye59
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,530
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2010, 05:45:13 PM »

Swing Missouri and New Jersey for sure. Kennedy would have won over more ethnic catholics and blue collar whites. He simply appealed to them in a way HHH never could.
Ok. What about OH?
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2010, 06:06:27 PM »

I don't think he would have won Texas. Just a feeling.
Logged
hawkeye59
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,530
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2010, 06:07:12 PM »

You're right.
Logged
#CriminalizeSobriety
Dallasfan65
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,859


Political Matrix
E: 5.48, S: -9.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 10, 2010, 06:09:23 PM »

I don't think Nixon would lose Maine or CA.
Logged
hawkeye59
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,530
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 10, 2010, 06:11:28 PM »

Well, in this scenario, the ticket is RFK/Muskie. In California, the hispanic and blue-collar voters (there were a lot) go for Kennedy, who wins the state by about 500 votes.
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 10, 2010, 07:55:23 PM »

An all catholic ticket? I'd be more inclined to go with Kennedy/Sanford or Kennedy/Smathers.
Logged
hawkeye59
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,530
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: February 10, 2010, 08:10:58 PM »

An all catholic ticket? I'd be more inclined to go with Kennedy/Sanford or Kennedy/Smathers.
I forgot Muskie was catholic. Maybe Kennedy/Symington or Kennedy/Scoop or Kennedy/Proxmire or Kennedy/Gaylord Nelson.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: February 10, 2010, 10:00:59 PM »
« Edited: February 10, 2010, 10:02:49 PM by True Federalist »

Nixon will be bleeding votes to Bobby, but Bobby will be bleeding HHH votes to Wallace



Kennedy picks up CA, OH, and WI. (234 EV)
Nixon picks up MD and TX. (227 EV)
Wallace picks up NC, SC, and TN (77 EV)

Nixon gets a less than 1% plurality of popular vote.
Logged
hawkeye59
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,530
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: February 10, 2010, 10:29:38 PM »

Nixon will be bleeding votes to Bobby, but Bobby will be bleeding HHH votes to Wallace



Kennedy picks up CA, OH, and WI. (234 EV)
Nixon picks up MD and TX. (227 EV)
Wallace picks up NC, SC, and TN (77 EV)

Nixon gets a less than 1% plurality of popular vote.
IL to NIXON? Blue collar workers anyone?
Logged
Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl
Libertas
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,899
Finland


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: February 10, 2010, 10:34:26 PM »

Nixon will be bleeding votes to Bobby, but Bobby will be bleeding HHH votes to Wallace



Kennedy picks up CA, OH, and WI. (234 EV)
Nixon picks up MD and TX. (227 EV)
Wallace picks up NC, SC, and TN (77 EV)

Nixon gets a less than 1% plurality of popular vote.
IL to NIXON? Blue collar workers anyone?

Nixon only barely lost IL to JFK in 1960, and won it in both 68 and 72.

Logged
hawkeye59
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,530
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: February 10, 2010, 10:35:31 PM »

Yeah, but RFK could appeal to blue-collar workers better than HHH.
Logged
James Rivington
Rookie
**
Posts: 149
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.42, S: 3.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: February 10, 2010, 10:40:49 PM »

That would have been a truly awful election, I hate both Nixon and Bobby. I'd probably have to write in Eugene McCarthy.
Logged
hcallega
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.10, S: -3.90

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: February 10, 2010, 10:57:39 PM »

The ticket would be RFK/Southerner (Gore, Smathers, Yarborough)

And he would have won many of the midwestern states, though he would have done worse in the south. Plug for my TL dealing with this
Logged
hawkeye59
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,530
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 10, 2010, 10:59:36 PM »

The ticket would be RFK/Southerner (Gore, Smathers, Yarborough)

And he would have won many of the midwestern states, though he would have done worse in the south. Plug for my TL dealing with this
RFK/Gore is what I'm thinking.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: February 11, 2010, 12:55:50 AM »

Yeah, but RFK could appeal to blue-collar workers better than HHH.

Only if he abandoned his anti-war rhetoric and stopped reaching out to the colored so much.  HHH had to work hard to regain the white blue-collar workers who initially supported Wallace.  RFK would have had to work even harder and even then wouldn't have done as well.  Where RFK would have gained is from those who in the actual election supported Nixon in the belief that would be best able to end the war.  The two states I had going into the Nixon column from the real election had significant numbers of Wallace supporters and a narrow HHH victory.
Logged
Dancing with Myself
tb75
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,941
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: February 11, 2010, 11:48:52 AM »

Bobby would have done better than Humphrey did, because he was not associated with the Johnson administration. Also he had quite a following with the other races, which would have helped to swing a few states to Bobby.



Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: February 11, 2010, 02:54:14 PM »

Bobby would have done better than Humphrey did, because he was not associated with the Johnson administration. Also he had quite a following with the other races, which would have helped to swing a few states to Bobby.





There's no way Wallace picks up the Carolinas while Kennedy holds onto Texas.  For Wallace to gain the Carolinas, there has to be a major shift in voters who would voted for HHH in the real race but in this race vote for Wallace.  A similar shift would have to happen in Texas, giving the state to Nixon.

Replacing HHH with RFK will not cause any Nixon voters to support Wallace or Wallace voters to support RFK.  The two shifts will be Nixon voters to RFK and RFK voters to Wallace.  One could argue that the first effect will be more significant than the second, in which case you end up with a map like this.



RFK picks up AK, CA, DE, HA, IL, MO, NJ, OH, and WI. (330 EV)

Wallace picks up TN. (56 EV)

Nixon gains no states. (152 EV)

Personally I think the loss of voters to Wallace, in those states in which Wallace did reasonably well, would be the more significant effect in a number of States, which is why in my prediction earlier I had Nixon gaining MD and TX (but still losing CA, OH, and WI to Bobby and NC, SC and TN to Wallace, sending the election to the House.)
Logged
hawkeye59
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,530
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: February 11, 2010, 04:24:06 PM »

TEXAS?!
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: February 11, 2010, 07:34:32 PM »


The actual 1968 Texas vote was:

Humphrey: 41.14%
Nixon 39.87%
Wallace: 18.97%

If RFK replaces Humphrey, a shift of 4% D-> A and 1% R -> D yields

Nixon 38.87%
Kennedy: 38.14%
Wallace: 22.97%

Not a slam dunk for Nixon, but if, as I believe, Wallace would see gains of around 20% in his vote totals if he's facing RFK instead of HHH, then in close states where he did fairly well but was still solidly in third place, the effect would be to shift states to Nixon despite Milhous getting fewer votes.  That same effect would also make Pennsylvania and Washington State closer for Nixon, but Wallace didn't do as well in those states, so his drain of votes from Bobby wouldn't have cost the Democrats those two states unless the Kennedy campaign went into something like a complete meltdown a la McGovern in 1972.



42.00% PV 329 EV Nixon
37.52% PV 118 EV Kennedy
20.00% PV   91 EV Wallace

I wouldn't expect Kennedy to implode that much, but it wouldn't be impossible.
Logged
hawkeye59
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,530
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: February 11, 2010, 09:02:27 PM »


The actual 1968 Texas vote was:

Humphrey: 41.14%
Nixon 39.87%
Wallace: 18.97%

If RFK replaces Humphrey, a shift of 4% D-> A and 1% R -> D yields

Nixon 38.87%
Kennedy: 38.14%
Wallace: 22.97%

Not a slam dunk for Nixon, but if, as I believe, Wallace would see gains of around 20% in his vote totals if he's facing RFK instead of HHH, then in close states where he did fairly well but was still solidly in third place, the effect would be to shift states to Nixon despite Milhous getting fewer votes.  That same effect would also make Pennsylvania and Washington State closer for Nixon, but Wallace didn't do as well in those states, so his drain of votes from Bobby wouldn't have cost the Democrats those two states unless the Kennedy campaign went into something like a complete meltdown a la McGovern in 1972.



42.00% PV 329 EV Nixon
37.52% PV 118 EV Kennedy
20.00% PV   91 EV Wallace

I wouldn't expect Kennedy to implode that much, but it wouldn't be impossible.
Hello?LBJ?
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: February 11, 2010, 10:33:04 PM »


I hadn't figured that in, but since I doubt LBJ would give RFK the help he gave HHH, Kennedy likely does even worse in Texas that I had assumed. Make that a 5% D-> A shift instead of a 4%.

Thanks for pointing out my error.
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: February 11, 2010, 10:45:55 PM »
« Edited: February 11, 2010, 10:49:12 PM by Рошамбо »

Bobby wins.

Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: February 12, 2010, 12:51:30 AM »


Not with that map.  Bobby replacing HHH is not going to cause Nixon voters to support Wallace.  Given that Nixon won those states with very comfortable margins, the only way for Wallace to win the Carolinas is for Wallace to pick up a lot of Democratic votes, in which case Texas will be going for Nixon, since HHH barely won Texas as it was.  If you assume that Wallace doesn't gain much and that the only significant change is Nixon votes transferring to Bobby, the Carolinas go Democratic well before the decline in Republican votes causes them to go American.

Depending on your assumptions of how Bobby replacing HHH affects the race, Bobby winning Texas and Nixon winning the Carolinas makes sense, Nixon winning all three states makes sense, Bobby winning all three states makes sense, Nixon gaining Texas but losing the Carolinas to Wallace makes sense, but Wallace picking up the Carolinas and Bobby winning Texas does not.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
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 0.051 seconds with 13 queries.