Which 1972 Democratic candidate would have performed the best against Nixon?

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

I don't think any of the plausible candidates could have won outright. Humphrey and Muskie would have had performances akin to Humphrey '68 minus Texas and with Nixon sweeping the South, while the crazy scenario of a Wallace nomination has both major upshots and major downshots, but I don't think he'd win many states outright outside of the South and MA/RI.

[Blow by blow, the passion dies]

Jackson would have been the strongest, as he'd appeal to the white working class and Dixiecrats, but the New Left would likely stay home. I agree with your point about Humphrey and Muskie.

Sanford was a pro-civil rights Southerner with a clean record, as was Wilbur Mills, who had not gotten in a scandal yet.

[Pres Mike]

Ted Kennedy without Chappaquiddick

[Agonized-Statism]

His problems aside, McGovern was kinda pointing in the right direction in that the South was a lost cause in the path to an electoral majority- inb4 Carter, the difference between '76 and '72 being widespread distrust in government making a moralizing outsider appealing to the electorate and conservative backlash to Ford, and Clinton's wins were more due to improvements in the suburbs nationwide. That's not to say Muskie or Humphrey wouldn't have a better map, but they would only have improved marginally trying to run a campaign the old New Dealer way. I suspect even without Chappaquiddick that Ted Kennedy wouldn't be able to recapture his brother's quintessentially early '60s magic. It's too early to pivot to the right, so Jackson loses both the New Left activists and organized labor while failing to improve in the South.

Conventional wisdom seems to be Muskie and that's probably accurate. Absent Nixon's scandals catching up with him earlier, which fundamentally changes 1972, a really good Muskie campaign that goes on the offense and distracts Northern Democrats from their divisions exhibited during the Hard Hat Riot probably maxes out here, give or take Pennsylvania:


President Richard Nixon (R-CA) / Vice President Spiro Agnew (R-MD) ✓
Senator Edmund Muskie (D-ME) / Senator Walter Mondale (D-MN)

[Pres Mike]

His problems aside, McGovern was kinda pointing in the right direction in that the South was a lost cause in the path to an electoral majority- inb4 Carter, the difference between '76 and '72 being widespread distrust in government making a moralizing outsider appealing to the electorate and conservative backlash to Ford, and Clinton's wins were more due to improvements in the suburbs nationwide. That's not to say Muskie or Humphrey wouldn't have a better map, but they would only have improved marginally trying to run a campaign the old New Dealer way. I suspect even without Chappaquiddick that Ted Kennedy wouldn't be able to recapture his brother's quintessentially early '60s magic. It's too early to pivot to the right, so Jackson loses both the New Left activists and organized labor while failing to improve in the South.

Conventional wisdom seems to be Muskie and that's probably accurate. Absent Nixon's scandals catching up with him earlier, which fundamentally changes 1972, a really good Muskie campaign that goes on the offense and distracts Northern Democrats from their divisions exhibited during the Hard Hat Riot probably maxes out here, give or take Pennsylvania:


President Richard Nixon (R-CA) / Vice President Spiro Agnew (R-MD) ✓
Senator Edmund Muskie (D-ME) / Senator Walter Mondale (D-MN)

Didn't Nixon fear Muskie the most? Hence his campaign writing the fake "Canuck" letter to destroy his 1972 primary campaign

The Humphrey-Muskie of 1968 was probably the strongest ticket Democrats nominated from 1948-2008.