1964: Romney is nomiated

[Mechaman]

281-199-57

With exception of the presence of a "states rights" 3rd party nominee, election is close to results of 1960. Romney makes gains over Nixon in Upper Midwest, while LBJ wins CA and Appalachia.

No way the election is that narrow. On Election Day 1964, LBJ had about a 65% approval rating. That translates to an LBJ landslide, at least in terms of the EV.

See also "sympathy votes".
Granted, Goldwater was considered an extreme candidate and Romney would be alot more moderate but a) economy is really kicking, b) Vietnam has yet to become unpopular, c) Civil Right passage under Johnson (Romney strongly supported it but LBJ would get credit for being the president under which it passed), d) Romney's Mormonism could bite him in the ass (like being Catholic bit Al Smith in the ass in 1928), sure an Irish Roman Catholic was elected just four years earlier but I believe that it would be hard to shake off the anti-black policies of the Mormon church (especially with LBJ, being the slick bastard that he is see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonism_and_race, even if Romney is strongly pro-civil rights I imagine it would be a hard thing to shake off, e)political inexperience of Romney (he would've been a governor for only a year if he ran in 1964 against former House Representative, former Senate Majority leader, and Vice President and current President LBJ), f) The infamous question of eligibility (he was born in Mexico), and g) KENNEDY!
LBJ, unless there is a Southern third party ticket, would win at least 400 electoral votes.

[Mechaman]

281-199-57

With exception of the presence of a "states rights" 3rd party nominee, election is close to results of 1960. Romney makes gains over Nixon in Upper Midwest, while LBJ wins CA and Appalachia.

No way the election is that narrow. On Election Day 1964, LBJ had about a 65% approval rating. That translates to an LBJ landslide, at least in terms of the EV.

See also "sympathy votes".
Granted, Goldwater was considered an extreme candidate and Romney would be alot more moderate but a) economy is really kicking, b) Vietnam has yet to become unpopular, c) Civil Right passage under Johnson (Romney strongly supported it but LBJ would get credit for being the president under which it passed), d) Romney's Mormonism could bite him in the ass (like being Catholic bit Al Smith in the ass in 1928), sure an Irish Roman Catholic was elected just four years earlier but I believe that (especially if LBJ, being the slick bastard he is, brings up the Mormon policies against blacks up in the campaign, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormonism_and_race, even if Romney is strongly pro-civil rights I imagine it would be a hard thing to shake off), e)political inexperience of Romney (he would've been a governor for only a year if he ran in 1964 against former House Representative, former Senate Majority leader, and Vice President and current President LBJ), f) The infamous question of eligibility (he was born in Mexico), and g) KENNEDY!
LBJ, unless there is a Southern third party ticket, would win at least 400 electoral votes.

I agree with your other points but I don't think that Romney's Mormonism will become an issue. It wasn't an issue for him when he ran in 1968 or for Mo Udall in 1976 when he ran. It only started becoming an issue once Evangelicals started getting more power and influence and became increasingly active in politics.

Pretty much, there is no way in hell Lyndon B. Johnson would've allowed the election to be close against ANYONE in 1964.

[Mechaman]

281-199-57

With exception of the presence of a "states rights" 3rd party nominee, election is close to results of 1960. Romney makes gains over Nixon in Upper Midwest, while LBJ wins CA and Appalachia.

No way the election is that narrow. On Election Day 1964, LBJ had about a 65% approval rating. That translates to an LBJ landslide, at least in terms of the EV.

Okay, a good approval rating overall, but where is it located? I may have given Romey a couple too many states, but still there's the Southern problem after the Civil Rights Act of 64.

LBJ probably had enormous approvals anywhere in the U.S. outside the Deep South in 1964. Thus, I think that he would win at least in a Clintonesque landslide in a worst-case scenario.

Approvals don't always translate directly into victory. They could feel the challenger is better, even if they like the incumbent well enough.

A one year governor whose legality to run would be a huge issue somehow beats the very popular incumbent president who at that time had 27 years of political experience. Yeah, I see many people finding the vastly more inexperienced challenger to be better than the very qualified officeholder.........
And don't even bring Obama into this, he was in office for at least 2 years before he was officially running.

[Mechaman]

LBJ 404 evs
Romney 81 evs
Southern Third Party 53 evs

[Mechaman]

281-199-57

With exception of the presence of a "states rights" 3rd party nominee, election is close to results of 1960. Romney makes gains over Nixon in Upper Midwest, while LBJ wins CA and Appalachia.

No way the election is that narrow. On Election Day 1964, LBJ had about a 65% approval rating. That translates to an LBJ landslide, at least in terms of the EV.

Okay, a good approval rating overall, but where is it located? I may have given Romey a couple too many states, but still there's the Southern problem after the Civil Rights Act of 64.

LBJ probably had enormous approvals anywhere in the U.S. outside the Deep South in 1964. Thus, I think that he would win at least in a Clintonesque landslide in a worst-case scenario.

Approvals don't always translate directly into victory. They could feel the challenger is better, even if they like the incumbent well enough.

A one year governor whose legality to run would be a huge issue somehow beats the very popular incumbent president who at that time had 27 years of political experience. Yeah, I see many people finding the vastly more inexperienced challenger to be better than the very qualified officeholder.........
And don't even bring Obama into this, he was in office for at least 2 years before he was officially running.

Obama was in elected office for ten years (1997-2007) before he decided to run for Prez in 2007.

I was just talking about his US Senate career, but thanks for bringing that up.
Definitely different.