1968 election today: Would Wallace win the South?

[old timey villain]

George Wallace won 5 southern states in the 1968 election. His criticism of liberalism and integration was appealing to white southerners at a time when the region felt the issue had been forced upon them.

Let's say George Wallace is running today. Obviously his platform is different, retrofitted to a more 21st century style of thinking. He's no longer an ardent segregationist, but he's still a rogue cultural conservative, railing against abortion, gay marriage, affirmative action and liberal ideas.

In the 1968 election he wins pluralities in Georgia, Louisiana and Arkansas while winning strong majorities in Alabama and Mississippi.



Let's say in the future, we have a situation similar to 1968. Sweeping changes, turmoil and a three way race. The Democrat is too liberal for the south while the Republican inspires no confidence in the region. George Wallace 2.0 comes into the picture. Can he still win the same southern states?

Here's my prediction. Wallace still wins Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana but by a much lesser margin, due to the large black vote. He wins Arkansas by a stronger margin this time around. What's different is that he wins Tennessee, Kentucky and maybe West Virginia this time around. Still, he doesn't win Georgia. The minority vote combines with the 25% of the white Democrats in Georgia, and their support for the Democrat overpowers the other 75% of whites who are split between Wallace and the Republican.

I'll try to post a map later on.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Humphrey wins in a landslide, given how hated Nixon is today and how blatantly racist Wallace is. Thanks to vote-splitting, Humphrey would also sweep the South. Perhaps something like:

[old timey villain]

Humphrey wins in a landslide, given how hated Nixon is today and how blatantly racist Wallace is. Thanks to vote-splitting, Humphrey would also sweep the South. Perhaps something like:

I'm not saying that Nixon and Humphrey are also running. The Rep and Dem candidate are different. It's only George Wallace's candidacy that's the same.

[Goldwater]

So George Wallace is basically the Constitution Party? I think the map would look like something along these lines:

Or it could look something like this, if Wallace also campaigns outside of the south:

[lincolnwall]

I think the Wallace-oid would stand a chance of winning Mississippi and Alabama, and would come close in Louisiana, Idaho and Utah. But realistically, the affect of his candidacy would split the conservative GOP vote and throw some of what are thought of as GOP strongholds to the Dems. Think Nader but a stronger effect in more states. The Dem would win easily.

I'll post a map when I'm able.

[TDAS04]

If Wallace ran as the Republican nominee, absolutely.  (He would basically be a Huckabee-type Republican).  However, I don't see him getting very far as a third-party candidate.  White Southerners have mostly become loyal Republicans, which they certainly were not back in 1968.  If the Republican candidate was especially liberal, that would be one thing.  However, in a matchup between a mainstream Republican (such as Nixon) and a mainstream Democrat (such as Humphrey), I see the South basically ignoring any third-party candidate, and it would provide most (if not all) of its electoral votes to the typical (if uninspiring) Republican.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Humphrey wins in a landslide, given how hated Nixon is today and how blatantly racist Wallace is. Thanks to vote-splitting, Humphrey would also sweep the South. Perhaps something like:

This is assuming that Wallace is no longer a racist or segregationist (which he wasn't after the assassination attempt).