Allright, let's try for elections where the results might have been significantly affected. Here's how I'd see the 2-party voting between the two frontrunners.
1948 :
2nds prefs from Wallace go overwhelmingly to Truman, and Thurmond voters go in majority for Truman but with many exhausted ballots. In the end, Truman recovers the "solid South" despite the reticence of Thurmond voters, and Wallace's support make him gain ground over Dewey (even though only in NY this is enough for him to flip the State.
Truman : 54%, 389 EVsDewey : 46%, 142 EVs1960 :
No change, except that Mississippi reluctantly goes to Kennedy and unpledged Louisiana voters increase his margin of victory. Kennedy wins the PV by a slightly bigger margin (0.3-0.5 points), but it remains a tossup.
Kennedy : 50%, 317 EVsNixon : 50%, 220 EVs1968 :
Wallace voters in the Deep South overwhelmingly choose Nixon against the candidate of Civil Rights and of the incumbent LBJ administration. Elsewhere in the country, the movement isn't as massive, but a majority of Wallace voters nonetheless choose Nixon, allowing him to break 60% in heavily Republican West, to flip Maryland and Washington and to considerably increase his margin in swing States.
Nixon : 53%, 391 EVsHumphrey : 47%, 147 EVs1976 :
Eugene McCarthy voters in their majority back Carter, but this is enough to make a difference only in Oregon and Main (district 1 still goes to Ford). McBride voters are enough to push Ford over 60% in AK and ID.
Carter : 51%, 306 EVsFord : 49%, 232 EVs1980 :
No major change. Anderson voters go in majority to Carter, as they are scared by Reagan's conservatism, but it's a tiny majority which makes a difference only in MA and the closest southern States. Meanwhile, the support of Libertarian voters helps Reagan receiving commanding percentages in the west.
Reagan : 55%, 459 EVsCarter : 45%, 79 EVs1992 :
Perot preference go in majority to Bush, but by a relatively tiny margin (except in the West, where they support him overwhelmingly). It's sufficient to flip a few battleground State, but not enough to change the dynamic of the race.
Clinton : 52%, 317 EVsBush : 48%, 221 EVs1996 :
Perot is mostly ininfluent outside of the west. What's left of his voter give only a small advantage to Dole and a fair share of them simply abstains.
Clinton : 54%, 359 EVsDole : 46%, 179 EVs2000 :
It's pretty clear. Of course every single Nader voter wouldn't bother preferencing Gore, but even in the most generous hypothesis it's impossible to have Bush win Florida. His 500-votes lead would never survive to the nearly 100,000 Nader votes of the State. There is a fair chance Gore would have won NH, though I chose to be careful and leave it to Bush. Bush would however benefit from high Buchanan/Browne votes to increase his already commanding percentages in the West (though the
margin of victory would stay unchanged).
Gore : 50.5%, 292 EVsBush : 49.5%, 246 EVs
