1968 without Wallace

[darklordoftech]

How would the Wallace states vote if he didn't run? Was Wallace a spoiler in any of the states that he didn't win?

[dw93]

Nixon still wins. He narrowly carries the Deep South States that Wallace carried, while one or two of the rust belt or north eastern states Nixon carried go to Humphrey.

[MillennialModerate]

I THINK Nixon still wins because of white backlash.

I think Ohio might go Humphrey as Wallace got a huge percentage of Democrats in OH.

But most of the South goes Republican would be my guess

But this is one of the more interesting “What If’s”

[Mikestone8]

I THINK Nixon still wins because of white backlash.

I think Ohio might go Humphrey as Wallace got a huge percentage of Democrats in OH.

But most of the South goes Republican would be my guess

But this is one of the more interesting “What If’s”

Texas also goes Republican if most of the Wallace vote there transfers to Nixon.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Nixon/Agnew 340
Humphrey/Muskie 198

[Cold War Liberal]

I ran this through President-elect '88 (not scientific of course):

Nixon/Agnew: 340, 51% of the vote
Humphrey/Muskie: 198, 48% of the vote

[Lechasseur]

Wallace was taking a substantial number of Democrats earlier in the campaign. However, by election day he had bled most of these to Humphrey. Wallace did best among political independents, and wasn't performing that much better among Democrats than he was among Republicans when you control for state. (Indeed, in a number of states, such as Utah, Wallace was doing better in traditionally Republican areas than Democratic areas)

I recall seeing an estimate of how the Wallace vote would have split in a Condorcet winner paper from an university political science course. I believe the split was 70-30 in favor of Nixon.

Obviously if that is taken uniformly, Nixon wins in a landslide, taking all of the Wallace states, Texas, Maryland, and Washington. 391 EV to 147.


However, I doubt that breakdown would be equal everywhere. I imagine Wallace voters in the South would have broken heavier to Nixon than Wallace voters in the North.

About half of Wallace's votes came from the 11 states of the Old Confederacy. Let's be as uncharitable to Nixon's chances in the rest of the country as we can, and assume Southern Wallace voters would break 100% to Nixon. That would mean Wallace voters in the rest of the country would have broken 60-40 Humphrey.

Under this formula, Nixon gains Texas and the Wallace states. Humphrey picks up Ohio with a margin of victory under 0.1%.

Humphrey narrowly gains Missouri (but given Missouri's arguable status as "peripheral South", and Wallace's strong performance in the Bootheel, the most culturally Southern part of the state, this one is really debatable)

Nothing else flips. For Illinois to flip, Wallace supporters would have had to break over 2:1 for Humphrey. Not that it would have mattered if it did flip to Humphrey, since that would only put him at 230 EVs.

Considering Nixon would probably have a PV lead of 6% or so, it's hard to see how Humphrey wins. As for the map, my guess is that all things considered Nixon probably holds all of his states, takes all of the Wallace States and Texas. Some Northern States tighten, but it's not enough to matter on its own.

Good analysis. I agree