Could Bobby Kennedy Have Won In 1968?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Bobby Kennedy was and is my idol...He was sui generis... I can remember my mom taking me to the front of a rope line in Rego Park, New York during his 1964 Senate race to shake his hand... I remember walking around with a transistor radio glued to my ear to see if he would survive Sirhan Sirhan's bullet... I sill have an autographed picture of him on my dresser drawer... He sent it to me when I wrote him a letter when I was ten years old... He wrote something to the effect that an "educated young people was their country's best hope for the future..." He was magical... Along with his martyred brother and Dr. King ,they were my heroes...

But could he have beat Dick Nixon...Don't forget that Nixon and Humphrey both got about 42% of the vote and Wallace got 15%... That 15% was presumably Nixon's because in the 72 election it all went to him when there was no Wallace on the ballot and he trounced McGovern 61% to 39%...Also, Humphrey carried Texas in 68... With the bad blood between RFK and LBJ he might not have carried Texas...

What if?

[annabanana]

1. He was gaining momentum... After California he could have

gone all the way.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. It Would Have Been A Hell Of A Convention Fight...

Counterfactual history makes me sad...

Because if there's no RFK assasination there's no Chappaquidick and the dimming of Ted Kennedy's presidential hopes...

How's that?

Because Ted Kennedy was at a party for the "Boiler Room Girls" who were RFK's secretaries... Plus RFK's assasination on top of JFK's assasination set him on somewhat of a self destructive path...

[pinto]

7. (aside) In Massachusetts - my home state - Ted was and is seen as a great voice in the Senate,

hitting many of the core Democratic principles, but not a great choice for Pres. We were proud to send him back to the Senate repeatedly and resoundingly, not so keen on a Presidential bid as was the case with Bobby.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. He Can Be Senator For Life...

I am kind of sad that Joe Kennedy Junior's career is in the dumpers...I remember when he was a strong gubernatorial candidate...

[liberalpragmatist]

12. I doubt Ted would have been president too

Three Kennedys is an awful lot of dynasty for the American people to take in one generation. Although stranger things have happened, so who knows? I'd say it's unlikely though. He might have tried, and maybe he would even have gotten the nomination, but he may well have lost.

[pinto]

3. Yeah, I think so.

[rsr1771]

4. the real question...

...is whether he could have gotten the nomination in '68. Back then, winning the primaries didn't guarantee you the nomination. The party bosses back then, from what I understand, were going to stand by Humphrey regardless of Kennedy's strength in the primaries.

If he had been denied the nomination in 68, and survived, he may have eventually won in '72 or '76. But who really knows?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. If There's No Chappaquidick Ted Kennedy Might Have Won In 72

Sadly, that tragedy might have saved his life...

[liberalpragmatist]

14. Ted Kennedy might have won in '68

Daley and several other bosses encouraged him to run in '68 as a stand-in for RFK following the latter's shooting.

[pinto]

9. Yeah, conventions were free for alls in those days and a lot of back room

maneuvering went on. I agree, if he didn't make the slate in '68 he would have been back in '72. A big loss, imho.

[KharmaTrain]

16. Bobby Had The Delegates

His win in California that fateful night all but put him on track for a first-round nomination in Chicago (and why he said, "it's on to Chicago and let's win there).

Yes, the party bosses had a lot more control on delegates in those days...and there were still many states that had either private caucuses or didn't have any primary at all...it was just the party elite who went. But we still have some of that system in place these days...many party aparachnik...but it wasn't certain that all would go along with Humphrey. One other '68 wildcard was the delegates Gene McCarthy had won...if RFK had lived and there had been a floor battle with Humphrey, I could see the McCarthy delegates making the ultimate difference.

I still look at Humphrey as a tragic character in that election...sucked into supporting LBJ's war despite having been one of the most progressive/liberal Senators at the time.

[Neecy]

61. points well made

I'm still not sure Kennedy could have prevailed in '68, though - the way the system was then Humphrey had the nomination in his back pocket. The corrupted nominating system fueled a lot of the anger in Chicago.

McCarthy didn't like Kennedy and his supporters despised him. I think it would have been a fascinating scenario had Kennedy lived to see how that convention played out.

I like Humphrey, too. I recently saw a video of his acceptance speech in 1968 and it was the last truly liberal speech given by a Democrat at our convention.

[az chela]

5. absolutely!!No doubt in my mind

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. In My Heart I Think So...

But I'm reminded that the right -Nixon and Wallace got 57% of the vote to the left-Humphrey's 42% of the vote....

[pinto]

13. Humphrey was no RFK, though. Good guy, old school Midwestern populist base,

but RFK would have had the cities sewed up.

[frogcycle]

33. a lot of people opposed Humphrey for VN

he tried to distance himself from LBJ, but didn't really pull it off
Nixon got votes by promising a "secret plan" to end the war.

I know I voted on that one issue - for Nixon - to my everlasting shame

I would have voted for Bobby,

I think there were a lot like me. Like everyone under 30! (we didn't trust anyone over 30). Bobby was over 30, but we'd have taken him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5btZWbViPA">Fixin To Die Rag

[Left Is Write]

36. My dad was 29 in 1968....

I think he'd have slit his own throat before voting for Nixon.

[frogcycle]

40. did he vote?

I assume he did - but a whole lot didn't

Wallace's "there's not a nickel's worth of difference" resonated with many. Some voted for him; others just didn't vote, since he was even worse
I bet very few of those who protested at the dem convention voted. They would have climbed over each other to vote for Bobby.

We had pretty much concluded that "they" were all evil - killed Kennedy, cranked up a phony war, drafted 500,000 kids and sent them over to be killed; at the time of the election it was about 25,000 dead. The government had a "credibility gap." HA! now it's what, a credibility chasm?

[Left Is Write]

62. Yes, he did vote. He's always been very clear that voting is a citizen's duty.

I don't think he was your typical 1960s "under 30" guy, though. By age 29, he was married, had three children, and had been working as a computer programmer for seven years. He was raised on a farm in rural Minnesota.

You know, I've never asked him how he felt about Viet Nam or the protest movements of the 60s and 70s, and he never said anything to me about it.

I remember watching Nixon's resignation with him (I was 8 in 1974), and I knew that he strongly disliked the president.

[frogcycle]

63. I was younger

I voted "against the war" - not "for" Nixon. I bought his BS.

That is the problem with one-issue voting.

I was a "closet liberal" - gradually becoming more and more sympathetic to the protesters, tentatively joining in on the march on the Pentagon (proud to have been teargassed)

Humphrey got a raw deal - in hindsight he would have been good. Probably wouldn't have gotten us out of VN any faster than Nixon, but maybe would have inhibited the growth of the monster cabal we are dealing with now

[liberalpragmatist]

10. Maybe

A guy named Mitchell Freedman - an amateur historian and lawyer - has written about this before. He wrote an alternate-history book called "Disturbance of Fate" about RFK's presidency - it's pretty good but a little farfetched (he totally loses it in the epilogue, forseeing Jesse Jackson's election as a Republican and a second civil war - yikes!). In a more scholarly vein, he published an essay on Amazon.com, available for 49 cents, that analyzed the issue and was very well cited.

A lot of historians believe that given Humphrey's higher delegate counts and his support from several urban and state bosses, Humphrey would still have won. Still, RFK would probably have done more to support the ticket and might have ensured a more united Democratic Party and a Democratic victory in '68.

RFK still trailed in delegate counts at the time of his death, and he would probably have had to come from behind. He was embroiled in a nasty feud with McCarthy and its questionable whether he would have been able to get McCarthy's delegates. BUT, several historians have written that Mayor Daley was willing to throw his support to RFK. In fact, Daley actually tried to get Ted Kennedy to be drafted following RFK's death. Had Daley thrown his weight to Bobby, he might have encouraged other factions to jump to Kennedy, too. And if he could have kept Humphrey from winning on the first ballot, he may have been able to emerge as the nominee.

Freedman argues that Humphrey's support was relatively soft and that Humphrey's campaign largely stalled in the aftermath of RFK's death; several party leaders shopped around for an alternative and when none could be found save for McCarthy and McGovern, Humphrey got the nomination by default. Freedman believes RFK could have obtained the nomination. And, he thinks, a ticket of Robert Kennedy and Ralph Yarborough could have been very competitive and could have at least garnered RFK one or two Southern states. Freedman didn't mention him, but Al Gore, Sr. could have been another good RFK pick (I'm skeptical that even Yarborough could have held Texas for RFK, given the bad blood between LBJ and Bobby).

I think, if nominated, RFK might have been able to eek out a win over Nixon, by something like 44-43 or 45-42. Had he won, RFK may still have faced a stiff challenge from Ronald Reagan in 1972, who could have united both Wallace voters and most Nixon voters behind him.

So overall, I'd say a cautious "yes."

I'd recommend the essay - only 49 cents, like I said. And it's fairly persuasive, even though I think Freedman overestimates the scale of an RFK victory (he says RFK could have won a majority of the PV in '68 - I don't see it).

http://www.amazon.com/Bobby-Kennedy-Wins-1968-Election/dp/B000L21EKC/ref=sr_1_1/104-3421504-5465560?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1186884567&sr=1-1

[cmkramer]

19. One thing that probably would have helped him

Everyone remembers him as being very anti-Viet Nam War and pro-civil rights. But he was also "tough on crime". The perception that Democrats believed in mollycoddling criminals was something that both Nixon and George Wallace used to their advantage. If RFK had not been shot, that advantage might not have been so large.

[hang a left]

15. You know I couldn't answer that question....

I remember coming home from from the 3rd grade and my mom and aunt were crying. Now mind you I am from California. I was 8 years old.

However, recently I watched the US vs John Lennon online. I think he maybe could have.

[Totally Committed]

17. He wouldn't have been assassinated if they didn't think he'd win.

He would have won. I have no doubt about it.

TC

[stillcool]

20. yeah really...

..I suppose it's a wacko conspiracy theory to think something other than the Sirhan Sirhan government version.

[MuseRider]

21. That is the answer I believe as well.

That was one of the saddest things I can remember from my childhood. I was too young to know all that much about JFK, enough to be sad but not anything political. RFK and MLK were horrible losses for me.

The OP got to shake RFK's hand! Wonderful. I shook his son's recently and was moved by the experience.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

22. I Also Shook Al Gore's And Joe Lieberman's (-: Hand

Got to meet Tipper Gore who kissed my mom who was in her wheelchair...

[MuseRider]

23. Cool!

Well, maybe not Joe but the others are cool. The kiss is sweet, ahhhh.

I shook John and Elizabeth Edward's hand in Lawrence when they came.

I don't collect autographs but I do like meeting people and shaking their hands however I did get Kennedy to sign a book of his, I could not help myself. He is such a great speaker, good man.

Edit: I forgot. I also shook Wes Clark's hand. Last Presidential election we got so many candidates here and that is very unusual for them to come to Kansas.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. I Am Somewhat Of An Autograph Collector

I have Bobby Kennedy's, Ted Kennedy's , Bill Clinton's, Muhammad Ali's and Shaquille O'Neal's autographs...

[MuseRider]

29. Not a bad list!

I can't keep track of the autographs I have so I just quit. I always felt so bad if I lost them.

[Contrary1]

38. I got to shake his hand too!

Talk about a thrill. Those were the days when candidates actually went out to meet the people (real people, not hand-picked robots). Bobby had come to a major shopping center in Indianapolis to speak. His motorcade came up a hill, and my best friend and I broke through the cordoned off area, and ran to greet him. He was very gracious, even though we had broken the "rules".

The next night we went to a downtown hotel where he was to speak again. Believe it, or not...we got within 10 feet of his hotel room before we were stopped by the SS.

The next night he announced to the crowds that had come to see him in a predominately black area, that Martin Luther King had been assassinated. I think his being there helped a great deal, at a very tense time.

A few weeks later, we lost another great American, Robert Francis Kennedy. And I still wonder, what if...

[wundermaus]

18. He was going to win...

So they killed him.

[Catchawave]

25. But, Bobby was for the War before he was against it !

We should DU a poll :evilgrin:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

28. So Was George McGovern And All But One Or Two Senators

eom

[book_worm]

44. but Bobby was also one of the people who urged JFK to begin escalation into Vietnam

Sorry I don't only blame LBJ for Vietnam. JFK brought to Washington all those bright young Harvard educated men who urged the country into Vietnam, "The Best and The Brightest". My guess is that they would have given JFK the same advice they gave LBJ.

[shance]

26. In a landslide. That is why he was killed.

n/t

[TahitiNut]

27. Hard to say. George Wallace would've probably still sunk the Dems.

It's a myth that Wallace votes came from Nixon, imho. Perhaps a narrow majority, but many of the Dixiecrats were the "Blue Dogs" of the day - older 'New Deal' Southern Democrats. If anything, RFK would've pushed more of them to Wallace. (Worse than Minnesota was a Kennedy.)

It's not about the popular vote ... it's the electoral vote.

Nixon got 310 electoral votes, carrying 33 states
Humphrey got 191 electoral votes, carrying 13 states and D.C.
Wallace got 46 electoral votes, carrying 5 states

I'd have a hard time figuring out where RFK would've flipped a state that went for Nixon. Maybe New Jersey.

If RFK hadn't been assassinated, then there'd be the question of how much civil unrest would've been in the streets of Chicago and whether RFK would've had more influence over Daley's handling of it. Then there's the question of what kind of ticket they'd put up. I have a hard time thinking they'd kick Hubert to the curb and an even harder time thinking he and RFK would form a ticket with Bobby for VP.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

30. Are We Saying The Same Thing In A Different Way...

The Wallace voters were mostly conservative Democrats who were disillusioned with the party's emphasis on civil rights and the "chaos" ( we would call it a call for positive change) that had engulfed the nation...If Wallace wasn't on the ballot they would presumably have voted for the most conservative candidate in the race-Richard Nixon... That's where Kevin Phillips' Southern Strategy comes in when as a Republican adviser he helps Nixon form an agenda that appeals to disaffected white working class , southern Democrats and the Southern Strategy works to perfection in 1972 when he trounces McGovern... And it's worked ever since, except for Carter in 72 and Clinton in 92 and 96...

[TahitiNut]

31. The Southern Strategy wasn't in place in '68 and the Wallace voters ...

... were close to half-and-half, imho. What seems clear to me is that Wallace MIGHT have taken one more state if RFK headed the ballot. (That would be the bizzarre effect of shifting some D's to I's ... and flipping the state from R to I.) Hubert wasn't well-liked in the South ... but Bobby was hated far, far more. It's even possible that Texas would've gone R ... absent Hubert's "inheritance" of LBJ's approval. (LBJ didn't like Bobby, either.)

If Wallace weren't on the ballot - even less likely with RFK as the Dem nominee - I think it's possible that the Southern Strategy would've been a fait accompli in '68.

I can't begin to describe how much animosity I saw among southerners for JFK/RFK. I lived in Mobile in '63 and '64 - my father and his wife and daughter lived there. (He was a Wallace supporter, of course.) Both assassinations were openly celebrated. It was THAT bad.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

34. I Moved To Florida As A Young Boy In 1970

Having fairly liberal parents my political opinions were pretty well formed...I know my mom went as a Kennedy voter in 1980 to the Democratic caucus in Daytona Beach and was hassled (given a hard time) by the Carter Democrats...

My teachers, suprisingly for the most part were rather liberal except for the ones who insisted we say "Yes maam" and "Yes sir" which is not such a bad thing now that I'm older... A modicum of civility isn't a bad thing... Something that sticks with me to this day is my eighth grade science teacher, Ms. Wooten, who was the wife of the crew cutted phys ed teacher, Mr. Wooten railing about the illegality of Richard Nixon's mining of the Haiphong Harbor... Those were heady days with racial tension running rampant as Volusia County, Florida was ,I believe ,two years removed from a court ordered desegregation plan... I always gravitated toward my African American teachers... They would ell me of parents refusing or complaining about an African American teaching their kid...

Wow... Back in time...

[liberalpragmatist]

37. He might have carried California

It was Nixon's home state, but Nixon barely carried it against Humphrey (and barely carried it against JFK in '60, for that matter).

RFK could also have won Illinois; probably Ohio, Oregon and Wisconsin, too. And possibly New Jersey.

I'm not saying he would have - just saying he could have. And maybe he would have carried Texas if he had Ralph Yarborough as his running mate, or Tennessee if he had Al Gore, Sr. as his running mate. Granted, both Gore Sr. and Yarborough lost their reelection bids in 1970, so they were probably not the most popular figures.

[On the Road]

41. So For RFK To Have Won

He would have had to get 119 additional electoral votes. Since Wallace won five southern states outright, I am assuming it would have been hard for RFK to win other southern states such as NC, SC, or TN.

Let's say RFK won the following states outside the Deep South:

CA 40
MO 12
OH 26
NJ 17
FL 14

That's still only 90 votes. I can see how difficult it would have been for ANY Democrat to overcome the Wallace candidacy.

[TahitiNut]

45. RFK's chances of getting Ohio then was nil, imho.

Really. It was only two years before Kent State. Rhodes was the (powerful) Governor of Ohio who had a hiccup after Kent State - and served from 1963 to 1971 and then AGAIN from 1975 to 1983! The GOP had a lock on Ohio ... picked by Gilligan (Dem) for only 4 years.

As for California ... how soon we forget that Roanld Reagan became Governor of California, succeeding Pat Brown, in 1967 ... and won reelection(!), serving until 1975. No way in hell California was going for RFK at that time.

When folks, looking at the states narrowly won by Nixon, forget the 'sympathy vote' stemming from the assassination of RFK and don't factor that OUT by the hypothetical of RFK not being shot, they come up with conclusions that don't honestly take the whole hypothetical into account.

In Illinois, the "Daley machine" was behind Hubert. It's tough to know how the election would shake out with RFK on the ticket.

[book_worm]

46. It's doubtful that RFK would have carried Florida--even JFK lost FL in '60

RFK probably would have lost Texas as well, which went to HHH narrowly--thanks to LBJ. What states could RFK have turned around? California, I think is the one most likely. He may also have won Oregon, New Jersey and maybe Ohio. I don't think he would have taken Missouri. I think it's possible that a Nixon/RFK/Wallace race might have gone to the House.

[liberalpragmatist]

49. Missouri only went for Nixon by 1%

Against Humphrey. It may well have gone to RFK, who, remember, generally had some support among blue-collar, working class Whites (at least outside the South).

He could well have won Illinois, Missouri, Wisconsin, New Jersey and California. Yes, California was Nixon's home state, and yes, the governor was Reagan. But Nixon barely carried the state against a nonexistent Humphrey campaign.

Texas is iffy; Humphrey carried it, but without support from the LBJ machine, it might well have swung to Nixon. OTOH, maybe Johnson would have grudgingly made an effort in the closing days for RFK out of party unity. And maybe had Sen. Ralph Yarborough joined Kennedy's ticket, he might have carried the state.

I agree Ohio would have been difficult, though.

Keep in mind that if RFK had won the national popular vote by something like 44-42 or 45-42, he would probably have won the EC; if the PV margin is more than 1 point, the electoral votes usually swing towards the PV winner.

Had the election gone to the House, would RFK have won? Probably, given the Dem majority, but a lot of Southern Dems would probably have voted for Nixon or Wallace in the House.

[On the Road]

56. No Clear Electoral Winner is an Interesting Possibility to Consider

There are several ways that could have happened:

1) If Wallace had taken 37 electoral votes from Nixon, no candidate would have had a majority. This could have been achieved by Wallace winning additional southern states on the theory that RFK was less appealing to Southerners than Humphrey. For example, Wallace might have picked up:

NC 12
SC 8
TN 11
+VA 12, KY 9 , or OK 8.

2) RFK might have taken CA from Nixon (although Nixon was a favorite son).

3) Or RFK and Wallace together might have taken from Nixon a combination of smaller states equaling 37 electoral votes.

More likely, none of this would have happened and Nixon still would have won. The electoral math is really astounding. LBJ knew what he was talking about when he said his civil rights bills would hand control to the Republicans for the next generation.

It also makes the Democrats' return to majority status all the more remarkable and shows how tenuous that majority is. It is a good thing to keep in mind when comparing politics now to anytime before 1968.

[book_worm]

43. Wallace hurt Nixon far more than he hurt Humphrey

None of the states that Wallace won would have gone for Humphrey. Nixon and Wallace were both competing for the same voter the law and order blue collar guy who hated the peaceniks, redneck types of guys.

[TahitiNut]

47. But that's NOT the question.

The question is what would've happened if RFK hadn't been shot and was on the Dem ticket. So, we must attempt to assess whether Wallace would've harmed RFK more than he harmed Hubert, NOT whether he harmed Nixon more than Hubert.

In order to get there, we must look at the disaffection of Southern Dems from the Democratic Party as represented by Hubert. That's the only reason to examine the Wallace constituency. That they were mostly disaffected Dems is inarguable, imho. So, the question is whether that disaffection woudl be even more for RFK. I contend that it would have been.

[book_worm]

51. In '68 Wallace and Nixon were competing for the same vote

blue collar voters who were for law and order and the war and disliked liberals and peaceniks. I doubt that RFK would have picked up many more Wallace voters than HHH did. In '72 without Wallace in the race, Nixon gained virtually all of the Wallace vote--and then some due to the lousy campaign that McGovern ran.

My belief is that 1) RFK probably would not have been nominated in '68 even with his narrow victory in the CA primary because in '68 primaries didn't have the importance they have today. After all, HHH didn't compete in the primaries and was leading in the delegate count because the unions and bosses still controlled most of the delegates which is how HHH got most of the delegates in states like Pennsylvania and Michigan. With the southern bloc, unions, and bosses I still think HHH would have prevailed. 2) If RFK had been nominated he probably would have lost Texas, which went narrowly for HHH. But he may have gained California and possibly New Jersey. There is a possiblity that rather than winning an electoral victory, the presidential race might have been decided in the house.

[Yupster]

48. Great map

Here's some 1968 primary numbers

Total popular votes

1. McCarthy 2.9 million
2. RFK 2.3 million
3. unpledged .7 million
4. Young .5 million
5.
6.
7.
8. Humphrey .2 million
9. Wallace .03 million


Take a look at this though

Total Popular votes

1. Reagan 1.7 million
2. Nixon 1.7 miillion

Apparently primaries didn't mean a whole lot back then.

Here's who won each state

New Hampshire LBJ
Wisconsin McCarthy
Pennsylvania McCarthy
Massachusetts McCarthy
DC RFK
Indians RFK
Ohio Stephen Young
Nebraska RFK
West Virginia unpledged
Florida George Smathers
Oregon McCarthy
New Jersey McCarthy
South Dakota RFK
California RFK
Illinois McCarthy

[TahitiNut]

50. The primaries were almost meaningless, particularly in 1968.

Not only did LBJ choose not to run AFTER the NH primary (which he won narrowly), candidates didn't even bother to announce prior to primaries. Candiates were recruited byt the insider power brokers. Indeed, the change in Party rules to rely on primaires was an outgrowth of the 1968 election season ... resulting in rules changes in 1971, in time for the 1972 election.

So, 1968 was the LAST "smoke-filled room" candidate selection process.

[AngryOldDem]

32. I think he could have

And how would things have turned out if he did?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

35. Who Knows

If you read Jack Newfield's book :


http://www.amazon.com/RFK-Memoir-Jack-Newfield/dp/1560255315

America is a kinder and gentler place and we live happily everafter... There is no Watergate for sure...

[book_worm]

39. Primaries in '68 still were not enough. RFK may not have been nominated

even with his narrow (yes narrow) victory against McCarthy in California. Remember VP Humphrey didn't compete in the primaries in '68. The unions and bosses still controlled most of the delegates. That is how Humphrey won most of the delegates in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania. The unions, on the most part, supported Humphrey as did most of the party bosses. It would have been a fight at Chicago, but with the southern bloc, unions and bosses behind him I think HHH still would have been nominated. He then, however, probably would have asked RFK to run with him and I think the narrow HHH loss in '68 would have turned to a victory. Then Bobby would have been his heir apparent in '76.

But who knows for sure?

[DaveinMD]

42. if he got the nomination

He would have won the general election fairly easily IMO.

[johnnydrama]

52. RFK

The repurcussions of RFK winning in 1968 might have been huge.

No watergate, no Vietnam escalation? no Ford, No Carter?, No Reagan?, and no GHWB? and probably no W.

If all that happened, it's possible that Clinton might have won in 1992, because although he won primarily because
of the economy, he still was very well liked.

[DaveinMD]

60. our entire history would be different

the racial divide might have been eliminated because Bobby had the ability to unite people across racial lines. I am confident we'd have national health care and that poverty would have been greatly reduced. His death was such a tragedy.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

53. I remember Eugene McCarthy, the first to put it on the line against LBJ.

[dailykoff]

54. Why kill him otherwise?

LBJ managed to put up with him for five years, and I'm sure the conspirators would have kept Bobby alive as long as they had all the power.

But if he had won in 68, as he surely would have, the gig would have been up, and he would have exposed and prosecuted the domestic conspiracy (including LBJ of course) that killed his brother. So they killed him first.

[Richard Steele]

55. Obviously, SOMEONE thought so. nm

[RFKHumphreyObama]

57. Interesting question -although I am speaking as one who wasn't born in 1968

I think it would have been hard for him to secure the Democratic nomination. Even if Kennedy could have persuaded Democratic Party luminaries like Mayor Daley to throw their wait behind his nomination bid, I still think that ultimately LBJ still had tremendous influence on the party as the incumbent President and would have done everything within his power to ensure RFK was not nominated -the intense mutual dislike between President Johnson and Kennedy was so intense that I think Johnson would have fought tooth and nail to deprive Kennedy of the presidential nomination. And, if Kennedy had got the nomination, I think Johnson would have done everything within his power to undermine his candidacy. I've read -was it in Robert Dallek's biography of Johnson or was it in a biography of RFK -that, had Kennedy's winning streak in the primaries continued, Johnson was preparing to release information that would have allegedly discredited him.

As to whether he would have run against Nixon, I don't know. Kennedy would probably have performed well in the Northeast and the Midwest but Wallace would definitely have siphoned off crucial votes from him in the Southern states and Nixon would have probably sought to woo disillusioned conservative Democrats who had sided with Johnson and thought Kennedy too radical -although the amount of success he would have had is up for debate. I would like to say with definitive confidence that RFK would have won but I can't I think the race would have been very close

As for RFK vs. Nixon in '72' -you can rest assured that CREEP would have been doing its utmost to discredit and destroy Kennedy from 1968-72 (look what they did to Muskie and even to Wallace, if you believe the conspiracy theories about his shooting). You would probably have seen all the usual allegations of RFK's marital infidelity, his wiretapping of Dr King and JFK's marital infidelity being bandied around during the first term of the Nixon presidency. But if anyone could have withstood all the nonsense and smears that Nixon peddled, I think it would have been RFK.

None of this should be interpreted as meaning that I wouldn't have liked an RFK presidency for America. I have a feeling that, had RFK been President, the world would be a much better place today. You only have to listen to that speech that he gave after Martin Luther King's assassination to realize the amount of courage, vision, insight and compassion that he had as a human being. If those qualities had been applied to the presidency, the world would have been a much better place for it.

[dailykoff]

58. Humphrey didn't have a brother named JFK

and neither did Johnson and neither did Nixon. He was home free once he'd beat McCarthy in California after a late start and hatred for Johnson was what he was running on anyway, so I don't think LBJ could have hurt him except maybe in the South.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

59. Yes...

And my parents would have voted for him, even though they loved HHH because he was a very strong supporter of labor, and we were a union household.

But they also loved JFK and recognized the inevitability of RFK - felt his charisma, knew he could jinx Nixon (who they really, really hated) just by being a Kennedy. My parents also hated what the Teamsters had done to the image of organized labor, so Bobby was well-favored for prosecuting Hoffa.

However, they thought it was kind of bad form the way he announced before LBJ declined to run, and they worried that a schism would split the Democratic vote. They had not decided who they would support at the time Kennedy was killed; afterwards, they were glad Humphrey got the nomination because even though they were against the war, they didn't like McCarthy.

If Bobby had lived, a tidal wave of emotion-driven support would have swept him into office, fueled by those who favored him personally and those who still mourned the loss of his brother. Wallace's numbers would have been higher but Nixon's would have been lower.

...You know, we couldn't believe it when that fucker Dick Nixon won. But it was Ronald Reagan who killed my father, with union-busting policies that undid the good Dad had worked so very hard to achieve for the rank and file he represented. And yet, I am so very grateful that neither of my parents lived to see their country dismantled. We thought Nixon was the worst. Man. To have those days back again...

[B Calm]

64. No question that he was heading for a landslide victory. That's why

they shot him!