Divided We Stand

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Waiting to see how 1968 turns out. Good timeline so far, waiting for the butterflies to start popping up.

They will - though Nixon has already declined a bid in 68, so you'll know atleast one change.

I figured I'd try a much different format where I slowly build a storyline, draw readers in, and let the butterflies fan out and really start impacting years after.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Waiting to see how 1968 turns out. Good timeline so far, waiting for the butterflies to start popping up.

They will - though Nixon has already declined a bid in 68, so you'll know atleast one change.

That means that Rocky will most likely get the Republican nomination. However, it coulud be Reagan, Romney, or Rhodes (isn't it weird how they're all "R" names without Nixon?).

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

November 9th, 1966



Democrats battered in the midterms of 66!

The election of 1966, just a few days ago, proves encouraging to both Congressional Republicans and would-be Presidents. A number of interesting facts: John Paul Hammerschmidt, riding the wave, becomes the first Republican in one hundred years to represent a district in Arkansas. Republicans also netted the lone district in Alaska, and several in California, including olympic medalist Bob Mathias (R-CA). There was a shocking disparity between these and the Senate elections, where Republicans only netted 3 seats, as opposed to their 50 seat gain in the House. Nevertheless, Mr. Ford (R-MI) will remain in the minority.



A Rising Star on the Horizon



One of the notable winners was Republican Ronald Reagan (R-CA) whom unseated Governor Brown earlier this month. Having been an actor and Democrat for many years, Governor-elect Reagan disaffiliated himself with the Democratic Party in 62, then delivered a speech for Presidential candidate Barry Goldwater (R-AZ) that gained him much fame in the Republican Party. Mr. Reagan has been rising fast, and has even mentioned a possible bid in 1968.

Morris Udall announces a bid for Speaker!

After the dust settled from the 1966 elections, the Arizona Democrat announced he would be seeking the Speakership. This came following an earlier announcement from Majority Whip Hale Boggs (D-LA) also expressed interest. “May I remind you that Mr. Boggs is a signatory of the Southern Manifesto, and represents a state that voted for Mr. Goldwater? We must be a national party, not a party of the South. Senator Thurmond himself has already joined the Republican Party - I hope other Dixiecrats follow his example, and become Dixiecans.” Vice President McCarthy publicly endorsed Udall, while Johnson has declined to make a statement, though it is assumed he would prefer Mr. Boggs, a congressional ally of his.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Update?

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Update?

Potentially tomorrow. I have big plans on Tuesday, though.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

What's with the L-AZ stuff? Are you going Goldwater now instead of Baker?

[Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)]

What's with the L-AZ stuff? Are you going Goldwater now instead of Baker?

It's (probably) in honor of David Nolan, the founder of the Libertarian Party, who died yesterday. A lot of people on the forum change their avatars to honor recently deceased politicians. There were a lot of D-WV avatars among the regulars here after Robert Byrd died.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

What's with the L-AZ stuff? Are you going Goldwater now instead of Baker?

Vazdul answered the question, but...

I didn't have the R-MA for Baker - I had the R-MA because I actually am a Baystatist err... Baystater.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

December 12th, 1966

Lyndon Johnson below 50%!

Approve: 48%

Disapprove: 44%

Not too long after the midterm elections, Gallup Polling registers Lyndon Johnson at 48% - a stark contrast to his 61% of the popular vote in 1964, a little more than two years ago. Although this has been following a trend, and makes the situation look increasingly positive for the 1968 Republican Presidential Hopefuls, President Johnson is still in decent shape for re-election - right now. But with dampening poll results, and the situation open to change in Vietnam, who knows what will happen?

Udall to become Speaker of the House!



In a tight race with Representative Boggs (D-LA), the rather young Morris Udall (D-AZ) was narrowly selected by his fellow Democrats to succeed John McCormack as Speaker of the House. “This is an outrage!” remarked several Southern Democratic congressmen. “What are we, the party of college beatniks or your father’s Democratic Party? The man doesn’t even have any goddamn experience!” remarked one anonymous southern Democrat. When Udall heard these remarks, he told reporters “A rookie or a racist? My colleagues made the right choice, I think.” Udall indicated a starkly different speakership than his predecessor, specifically on the Vietnam War.

Nelson Rockefeller Announces White House Bid!



Last Friday, at a press conference in New York City, New York, Governor Nelson Rockefeller (R-NY) announced he would seek the Republican nomination for Presidency of the United States. Governor Rockefeller previously sought the nomination in 1964, losing by only a hair in the decisive California Primary, yet ending his bid. However, with a weaker field and seemingly discredited conservative movement, Governor Rockefeller may be poised much better to win the nomination this time around.

Republican Primary Polling:

Rockefeller: 38%

Romney: 22%

Reagan: 18%

Undecided: 22%

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

If the three R's are the only major candidates, then I'm rooting for Romney (better person than Rockefeller) or Reagan (I agree with him the most). With Udall, having around what, six years as Congressman, it should be interesting to see him as Speaker of the House. However, from what I know, with his family connections, he should be able to operate well.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

HEAD-TO-HEAD MATCHUPS

Key:

Safe Republican: >10%

Slight Republican: 5-9%

Tossup: 4% difference

Slight Democratic: 5-9%

Safe Democratic: >10%

Rockefeller vs Johnson

Reagan vs Johnson

Romney vs Johnson

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Didn't Romney originally run as "Rockefeller's candidate" because Rockefeller thought for soem reason that he couldn't win the nomination. It was only after Romney's "brainwashing" gaffe and his fall in the polls that Rockefeller said to the press, in Romney's presence that he would be eligible for a draft.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Didn't Romney originally run as "Rockefeller's candidate" because Rockefeller thought for soem reason that he couldn't win the nomination. It was only after Romney's "brainwashing" gaffe and his fall in the polls that Rockefeller said to the press, in Romney's presence that he would be eligible for a draft.

Not sure about that - though this is just "potential candidates", Rockefeller is the only one who's officially declared.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

(Just for fun, I decided to do some more. Enjoy!)

HEAD-TO-HEAD MATCHUPS

Key:

Safe Republican: >10%

Slight Republican: 5-9%

Tossup: 4% difference

Slight Democratic: 5-9%

Safe Democratic: >10%


Lodge vs Johnson

Scranton vs Johnson

Hatfield vs Johnson

Nixon vs Johnson

[tpfkaw]

Nixon?

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Nixon?

Sure. Just a minute.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

HEAD-TO-HEAD MATCHUPS

Key:

Safe Republican: >10%

Slight Republican: 5-9%

Tossup: 4% difference

Slight Democratic: 5-9%

Safe Democratic: >10%


Tower vs Johnson

Brooke vs Johnson

Goldwater vs Johnson

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Brooke seems like a pretty weak candidate.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Brooke seems like a pretty weak candidate.

Yes.

Just a note: While Johnson is under 50, he is still relatively healthy polling-wise. (Compare it to Obama leading Republicans despite being under 50.) This is only 66-67, so the maps will change as Johnson's approval waxes (or wanes.)

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Brooke seems like a pretty weak candidate.

Yes.

Just a note: While Johnson is under 50, he is still relatively healthy polling-wise. (Compare it to Obama leading Republicans despite being under 50.) This is only 66-67, so the maps will change as Johnson's approval waxes (or wanes.)

It would actually be pretty funny to see Brooke win the nomination and give Johnson an even bigger landslide than in 1964. It'd be hilarious to have Johnson winning a fifty state landslide against Brooke the second time he runs for re-election.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Brooke seems like a pretty weak candidate.

Yes.

Just a note: While Johnson is under 50, he is still relatively healthy polling-wise. (Compare it to Obama leading Republicans despite being under 50.) This is only 66-67, so the maps will change as Johnson's approval waxes (or wanes.)

It would actually be pretty funny to see Brooke win the nomination and give Johnson an even bigger landslide than in 1964. It'd be hilarious to have Johnson winning a fifty state landslide against Brooke the second time he runs for re-election.

Heh.

Well, one thing I can assure you: Nobody will see the actual match-up coming.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Brooke seems like a pretty weak candidate.

Yes.

Just a note: While Johnson is under 50, he is still relatively healthy polling-wise. (Compare it to Obama leading Republicans despite being under 50.) This is only 66-67, so the maps will change as Johnson's approval waxes (or wanes.)

It would actually be pretty funny to see Brooke win the nomination and give Johnson an even bigger landslide than in 1964. It'd be hilarious to have Johnson winning a fifty state landslide against Brooke the second time he runs for re-election.

Heh.

Well, one thing I can assure you: Nobody will see the actual match-up coming.

Give us a hint: Is the Republican nominee one of the candidates listed in the maps?

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Brooke seems like a pretty weak candidate.

Yes.

Just a note: While Johnson is under 50, he is still relatively healthy polling-wise. (Compare it to Obama leading Republicans despite being under 50.) This is only 66-67, so the maps will change as Johnson's approval waxes (or wanes.)

It would actually be pretty funny to see Brooke win the nomination and give Johnson an even bigger landslide than in 1964. It'd be hilarious to have Johnson winning a fifty state landslide against Brooke the second time he runs for re-election.

Heh.

Well, one thing I can assure you: Nobody will see the actual match-up coming.

Give us a hint: Is the Republican nominee one of the candidates listed in the maps?

No hints.

The butterflies are (admittedly) a bit lagging... I need to keep you guys interested somehow!

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

In the next issue of... Divided We Stand!

A key administration official breaks with White House orthodoxy! Who will it be...?

Stay tuned, for tomorrow's episode of... Divided We Stand!

(This is my way of saying there is an update tomorrow. 0:)

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

(Instead of a REAL update...)

CBS

Walter: This is Walter Kronkite, with a special edition of Election 1968. Today I'm here with Democratic Strategist Peter Brower, of Michigan. Hello, Peter Brower. Hello, Mr Brower!
Peter: Good to be with you, Walter.
Walter: You are well known for being a fervent defender and supporter of the President, betting several grand with Republican strategists that he would win re-election by an even larger margin.
Peter: Yes. No incumbent President since Herbert Hoover has lost re-election. Based on this, I am comfortable in projecting that the election of 1968 will be a re-election of Lyndon Johnson, by an even larger margin.
Walter: What about the fact that he already won in 1964 with 61% of the vote, and based on the polling map President Johnson would lose or barely beat most Republican candidates?
Peter: Much can happen in the next year - and will. He still has a ~48% approval rating, and all Presidents with that approval win re-election. I brought a map with me.

This is, based on current polling, how I think the election of 1968 will play out - Lyndon Johnson versus Nelson Rockefeller. The safe states are solid, the lean states are a lighter shade. Pure toss-ups are gray. An Eisenhower-style re-election for Lyndon Johnson.

Walter: Not only is that map very unlikely, but is a much larger scale than Eisenhower's victory.
Peter: Oops.
Walter: We'll be back with more after this break... Up next, another Democratic Strategist, Dennis 0816!