1964 if Goldwater supported the CRA

[Alcibiades]

I presume he would have still got beaten handily, while doing better outside of the South and and a third party ticket winning the Deep South. What does the map look like?

[Alben Barkley]

He probably wins more of the West (though likely not the coast) and maybe parts of New England. (Not MA or anything, but possibly VT/NH.)

LBJ still cleans up the Midwest, Mid-Atlantic, and Upper South. (And of course Texas.) Might even win some of the Deep South outside of AL/MS.

Although, Goldwater lost the Northeast so badly only in part because of Civil Rights. LBJ successfully portraying him as an unhinged lunatic who would cause WW3 was an even bigger factor. So he might still get wiped out in most of the country. Although I imagine he might at least win at least a few western states.

[Alcibiades]

He probably wins more of the West (though likely not the coast) and maybe parts of New England. (Not MA or anything, but possibly VT/NH.)

LBJ still cleans up the Midwest, Mid-Atlantic, and Upper South. (And of course Texas.) Might even win some of the Deep South outside of AL/MS.

Although, Goldwater lost the Northeast so badly only in part because of Civil Rights. LBJ successfully portraying him as an unhinged lunatic who would cause WW3 was an even bigger factor. So he might still get wiped out in most of the country. Although I imagine he might at least win at least a few western states.

Yeah, you could argue the Daisy ad and such insinuations about him starting a nuclear war hurt him more among Middle America than his opposition to the CRA.

[brucejoel99]

He's Barry Goldwater. Something like this can't just be posited without an explanation. For Goldwater to support it would be totally out of character & would likely cost him the support of the conservative movement, thereby potentially leading to enough of a floor fight among his delegates at the RNC to make it a contested convention, which could very well have deprived him of the nomination.

If - for some strange reason - Goldwater supported the CRA & still ended up being the GOP nominee, though, then having done so would obviously alienate Dixiecrats, so you'd probably see another round of "uncommitted" elector slates like in 1960. At the same time, such a position on the CRA would be less toxic outside the South, so while he'd still lose, it might not be as much of a national wipeout as it was in real life.

[Alcibiades]

He's Barry Goldwater. Something like this can't just be posited without an explanation. For Goldwater to support it would be totally out of character & would likely cost him the support of the conservative movement, thereby potentially leading to enough of a floor fight among his delegates at the RNC to make it a contested convention, which could very well have deprived him of the nomination.

If - for some strange reason - Goldwater supported the CRA & still ended up being the GOP nominee, though, then having done so would obviously alienate Dixiecrats, so you'd probably see another round of "uncommitted" elector slates like in 1960. At the same time, such a position on the CRA would be less toxic outside the South, so while he'd still lose, it might not be as much of a national wipeout as it was in real life.

Considering the socially liberal positions he took later in his life, it was not inconceivable. The Buckleyites were not too keen on civil rights, but the majority of the party clearly supported them.

[HisGrace]

Opposing the CRA helped him in the South. It was the nuclear ad and his attacks on Social Security that hurt him everywhere else. He might do slightly better in the PV but even worse in the EV.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

George Wallace runs and wins most of the IRL Goldwater states. Obviously Goldwater still wins AZ and probably wins some non IRL states.

[Agonized-Statism]

President Lyndon Johnson (D-TX) / Senator Hubert Humphrey (D-MN) ✓
Senator Barry Goldwater (R-AZ) / Congressman William Miller (R-PA)
Fmr. Governor Ross Barnett (I-MS) / Congressman Bob Sikes (I-FL)

Still gets wiped out in the Midwest with the Daisy ad and his opposition to farm subsidies, but improves in the West somewhat.

[diptheriadan]

LBJ achieves a 50-state landslide.

Wallace probably runs in this scenario, taking the South from him. Arizona IOTL was decided by less than a point, and by my estimation Goldwater is unlikely to win over enough LBJ voters to make up for depressed conservative turnout.

[BigVic]

A 49-1 sweep

[The Right Honourable Martin Brian Mulroney PC CC GOQ]

He's Barry Goldwater. Something like this can't just be posited without an explanation. For Goldwater to support it would be totally out of character & would likely cost him the support of the conservative movement, thereby potentially leading to enough of a floor fight among his delegates at the RNC to make it a contested convention, which could very well have deprived him of the nomination.

If - for some strange reason - Goldwater supported the CRA & still ended up being the GOP nominee, though, then having done so would obviously alienate Dixiecrats, so you'd probably see another round of "uncommitted" elector slates like in 1960. At the same time, such a position on the CRA would be less toxic outside the South, so while he'd still lose, it might not be as much of a national wipeout as it was in real life.

Considering the socially liberal positions he took later in his life, it was not inconceivable. The Buckleyites were not too keen on civil rights, but the majority of the party clearly supported them.

Not just later in life. Goldwater voted for the 1957 CRA, the 24th amendment, and supported the 1960 CRA but missed the vote. He was also a member of NAACP. He thought the 1964 CRA was overly intrusive, but that's a matter of drawing lines, not a flat-out opposition to civil rights. So it's not impossible to imagine him having supported the 1964 CRA.

"State's rights" as a reason for opposing civil rights legislation was a thinly-veiled racist dogwhistle in most cases. But in Goldwater's case, I think it was completely genuine. Goldwater's overall record doesn't suggest that he supported segregation, quite the contrary in many cases. But in his most historically significant vote, the 1964 CRA, his staunch small government principles won out.