Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
Posts: 25,715
|
 |
« Reply #3 on: January 29, 2022, 11:07:07 AM » |
|
If Wallace had run as a DEMOCRAT in 1968 he'd have been viewed much differently by the Democratic Party, and by Americans. He was a GOVERNOR, so short of the image of his "standing in the schoolhouse door" he could have recalibrated his image in any number of ways.
Despite his image and record, most black voters supported Lurleen Wallace for Governor in 1966 over Republican Jim Martin. Wallace, despite his "standing in the schoolhouse door" moment and his inaugural address, could have subtly worked to walk back some of his statements and assist in integrating Alabama. He could have run as a new George Wallace who saw a way forward on integration that Democrats could have reluctantly accepted. He HAD integrated the state somewhat during his first term as Governor, however reluctantly. (The first Governor of Georgia that brought meaningful integration to that state was, arguably enough, LESTER MADDOX!!!! He did so without rhetoric, so Wallace may have done that.)
The bigger problem for Wallace, besides race, was that he was hawkish on the Vietnam War. Wallace's position on the War is somewhat forgotten, but when he ran for President he picked Curtis LeMay as his running mate. LeMay was nowhere near the crackpot he was made out to be, but he was a guy who DID make the unforced error of talking about using nuclear weapons in Vietnam. Now Wallace was hawkish; he could have been the candidate who promised to carry on LBJ's policy on the war while coming to a position of "this is the law of the land" on Civil Rights.
On the other hand, Wallace made a big deal of resistance to Civil Rights in his 1962 campaign and as Governor. He wasn't able to take a Carl Sanders/Dan Moore/Robert MacNair position where they could say of Civil Rights laws "This is the law of the land!". He had too much rhetoric under his belt to walk back. The Democrats became the Civil Rights party in the 1960s. It's also not clear that Wallace, had he moderated in the early 1960s, would have had his constituency ripped out from under him.
The "What would the map look like" question for Wallace, the Democrat, in 1968, is kind of irrelevant in that the Wallace who gained the Democratic nomination would be a different Wallace than the one that ran for President. Wallace had changeling qualities as a politician, but he had locked himself into certain lanes by 1968 that made running as a Democrat tough. The question is not what states a Democratic Wallace would have carried in 1968 so much as what kind of party would the Democratic Party had become had Wallace been able to be considered part of their mainstream.
|
