Jump to content
270soft Forum
vcczar

1968 Election: Poll

This election takes place amid the protests of the Vietnam War. LBJ was elected in a popular landslide, but his foreign policy has forced him out of the race for the presidency.   

27 members have voted

  1. 1. Which candidate do you support in the 1968 election?

    • Richard Nixon - NY - moderate Republican (supports some of the Great Society programs, vows to handle Vietnam War better, balance business with labor, rebuild urban slums and rural areas, hard on crime, fund NASA)
    • Nelson Rockefeller - NY - liberal Republican (supports most of the Great Society programs, critical of Vietnam, balance business with labor, fund NASA)
    • Ronald Reagan - CA - conservative Republican (opposes most of the Great Society programs, vows to be more aggressive with Vietnam and Communist countries, pro-business, limited government, fiscal conservative, hard on crime)
    • Hubert Humphrey - MN - liberal Democrat (support the Great Society, more or less in line with LBJ on Vietnam, pro-labor, fund NASA)
      0
    • Robert F. Kennedy - MA - progressive Democrat (supports the Great Society, opposes Vietnam War, pro-labor, focusing on Civil Rights and anti-poverty legislation, reform elections, Fund NASA)
    • Eugene McCarthy - MN - progressive Democrat (supports the Great Society, strongly opposes Vietnam War, pro-labor, favored by intellectuals, reform elections, fund NASA)
    • George McGovern - SD - liberal Democrat (supports the Great Society, somewhat opposes Vietnam War, pro-labor, reform elections, fund NASA)
      0
    • George Wallace - AL - States Rights American Independent (opposes most of the Great Society--especially Civil Rights, segregationist, supports Vietnam War--vows to be more aggressive with the possibility of using nukes, limited government, states rights)
  2. 2. As a member of Congress, what is your view on the Vietnam War strategy?

    • We should be more aggressive, escalating the war, possibly using nukes.
    • We should be more aggressive, escalating the war, but we should not use nukes.
    • We should keep the war going, but not escalate it any further, and not use nukes.
      0
    • We should slowly withdrawal from the War and cobble together a dignified peace.
    • We should immediately withdrawal and admit our mistake for entering the war.
  3. 3. As a member of Congress, did you support the military draft?

    • Yes, if we cannot get enough volunteers for our excursions, then we should always draft our citizens for war.
    • Yes. Although, not until we appeared to be losing the war.
      0
    • No. However, I do support a military draft in the cases of defense, since our country is in peril. This draft was uncalled for. People died when they didn't want to fight.
    • No. We get one life and people shouldn't be forced to put their lives in peril if they don't want to. I never favor a draft, even in self-defense.


Recommended Posts

Here's 1968. 10 votes and I go to 1972. Past polls are in the forum.

Note: I incorrectly titled the 1944 poll as 1844. I can't edit the title, unfortunately. Please vote in that poll if you haven't done so. 

Also, I've started the semester, so the rest of these might not be as detailed as the previous polls, since I'll be spending about 10 minutes on them instead of 15 to 30 minutes. Also, I may only post one poll every day or two. I'll try to keep up with the 10 votes though. 

The next poll might not be posted until Wednesday evening/night or later. 

@vcczar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Reagan and then Nixon in the general (I would not vote using hindsight because I do not like any of the other choices, but this is assuming that I am a person in 1968)

2. Slowly withdraw

3. No, self defense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1)Wallace 1968!

Image result for george wallace 1968 logo

2)Nuke'm

3)2nd No

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Ronald Reagan - my platform shares most of his, although I'd be more critical of Vietnam and I would support some Great Society programs.Nixon in the general.

2) Option 4

3) Option 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was Reagan's stance on the NASA funding. I guess he wasn't in favor of funding it, but am I right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

What was Reagan's stance on the NASA funding. I guess he wasn't in favor of funding it, but am I right? 

yeah he was definitely more conservative on NASA funding but because of the whole USSR vs. USA thing reaching its apex in the mid-80's yet that Space Race effectively being won, we spent just enough to get the Soviets to spend themselves into a death spiral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

21 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

1)Wallace 1968!

Image result for george wallace 1968 logo

2)Nuke'm

3)2nd No

You do know that Wallace was a flip-flopper himself. When he first an for Governor of Alabama in 1958 (I think), he was the more left-wing, "let's build up this destitute wreck of a state" candidate. He was endorsed in that election by the NAACP, his opponent was endorsed by the KKK. He lost that one badly. Then he, as his biographer put it, "made a Faustian bargain with the racist, White supremacist, pro-segregationist, etc." establishment and won the next election. Though he never did say specifically if he really believed in, or had true conviction for, his new platform, he said quotes that intimated it may have been purely out of expediency and nothing else, like his famous one, "When I talked about building roads, schools, electricity, and that, they didn't give a damn. But when I talked about n****rs, they, stomped the floor."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

 

You do know that Wallace was a flip-flopper himself. When he first an for Governor of Alabama in 1958 (I think), he was the more left-wing, "let's build up this destitute wreck of a state" candidate. He was endorsed in that election by the NAACP, his opponent was endorsed by the KKK. He lost that one badly. Then he, as his biographer put it, "made a Faustian bargain with the racist, White supremacist, pro-segregationist, etc." establishment and won the next election. Though he never did say specifically if he really believed in, or had true conviction for, his new platform, he said quotes that intimated it may have been purely out of expediency and nothing else, like his famous one, "When I talked about building roads, schools, electricity, and that, they didn't give a damn. But when I talked about n****rs, they, stomped the floor."

 

I actually hadn't heard that story but me in 1968 wouldn't have cared and maybe I would have even voted for Reagan in the primaries and Wallace in the general but he certainly seemed to give off like he believed what he was saying nd I will ask "Why run for President under a platform you know you can't or don't want to follow up on?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being an African American,I never bring my race into things but I will say this Wallace was a SCUM

and even role playing a character doesnt make any sense this is based of our views and your just coming off as racist @Reagan04 now I could see going for the ultra conservatives race issue canidate once or twice because you truly like them,but don't support there racist views. Its disturbing at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

Being an African American,I never bring my race into things but I will say this Wallace was a SCUM

and even role playing a character doesnt make any sense this is based of our views and your just coming off as racist @Reagan04 now I could see going for the ultra conservatives race issue canidate once or twice because you truly like them,but don't support there racist views. Its disturbing at this point.

 

I agree he's terrible but vcczar is doing this to gauge the will of the country and I will do my part and be an ultraconservative southerner. I'm not going to lie as my Father drilled it into me that that is the worst thing to do much worse than being racist or anything else and I'm telling you that if I were of age in 1968 I would have voted Wallace and his policies and that's God's honest truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with @TheMiddlePolitical it's pretty disturbing. I can't see why you would just toe the line of a racist Southerner, as if you can't think beyond your region or your ancestry. We all know how people voted back then, but what is more interesting is how we thought we might have voted back then. @Reagan04 Do you really think in 1968, that the majority of Americans would not have effected your opinions on race? Would you still be that provincial? Maybe it's easier for me, since I have no slaveholding ancestors (mostly Massachusetts, Ohio and Pennsylvania out of American ante-bellum ancestors). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see we're getting into some of the more modern elections now.  Sweet! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@vcczar as I stated in my previous post, This is how I believe I would have voted. And my ancestry is a big point as you mentioned, even as recent as grandparents were heaavily racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I, myself, do NOT base these things on my family lineage. Almost all of my family is very conservative-leaning (living in Alberta, Canada, that means Old Conservative, then Progressive Conservative, then Social Credit, then Reform, then Canadian Alliance, and now modern Conservative federally, and Old Conservative, then Social Credit, then Progressive Conservative, and now Wildrose Alliance provincially), but I, as a black sheep voter in my family, haven't been choosing the options in these polls in that light.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patine said:

I, myself, do NOT base these things on my family lineage. Almost all of my family is very conservative-leaning (living in Alberta, Canada, that means Old Conservative, then Progressive Conservative, then Social Credit, then Reform, then Canadian Alliance, and now modern Conservative federally, and Old Conservative, then Social Credit, then Progressive Conservative, and now Wildrose Alliance provincially), but I, as a black sheep voter in my family, haven't been choosing the options in these polls in that light.

 

I understand but I thought that immersing myself into it as my family has a rich history in America would be fun but also a learning process about my Family's history.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Patine

My dad was very conservative; although, he wasn't always. He was never liberal, though. As far as I know, he voted Nixon in 1960, LBJ in 1964, Nixon in 1968 and 1972. I don't know who in 1976, 1980, or 1984. He voted Dukakis in 1988. He voted Clinton in 1992. Perot in 1996. Bush in 2000. Bush in 2004. McCain in 2008. Romney in 2012 in his last election. He always said LBJ was the best president in his life. Reagan was the worst. But he thought Obama was a secret Muslim socialist trying to tear apart Christian America. Basically, prior to 2001, he voted for a party if he made money under their administration. If he didn't, he went for the other party. After 2001, everything was a Holy War to him. He was nearly in his mid-40s when I was born. So I don't know what he was like when he was young. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Reagan04

I can't see why you'd want to immerse yourself into something that's 100% shameful. If I had slaveholders and generational racists, I'd definitely not do anything resembling honoring them. I know I had racist ancestors. I just don't know who they might be, fortunately. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, vcczar said:

@Reagan04

I can't see why you'd want to immerse yourself into something that's 100% shameful. If I had slaveholders and generational racists, I'd definitely not do anything resembling honoring them. I know I had racist ancestors. I just don't know who they might be, fortunately. 

 

That's a major difference between us, what my family did was wrong but maybe they didn't support slavery and simply didn't want to be poor, I've always taken pride in the Confederacy and how my family fought under Lee, I don't support it, but it's my heritage and I am proud of it, I embrace it. I think @ThePotatoWalrus can relate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Reagan04

How can you take pride in something that's wrong? Especially if enslaving human beings--natural equally to white people--in order to make a profit is part of the equation? Slave cultures also made poor whites (most of the population) desperately poor. There is nothing to be proud of (which is where pride comes from). To me that's seriously disgraceful to all universal and natural law. I can understand loving an ancestor/relative, despite the flaws, but to be proud of them, their beliefs, what they fought for, is despicable, when it is tied to a Confederacy protecting and encouraging the institution of slavery. The two Constitutions of the US and the CS, were nearly identical, except one promoted slavery as a "good." Pure evil. To me that's like saying your proud of a rapist relative. Very similar. I say this lightly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Reagan04 said:

That's a major difference between us, what my family did was wrong but maybe they didn't support slavery and simply didn't want to be poor, I've always taken pride in the Confederacy and how my family fought under Lee, I don't support it, but it's my heritage and I am proud of it, I embrace it. I think @ThePotatoWalrus can relate.

I bet you would condemn someone from Germany (or Austria, for that matter) who had pride in an ancestor who was a Nazi Party Member or SS Officer and their activities, but would still claim that this was something entirely different. It NOT different, in the grand scheme of things!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

yeah he was definitely more conservative on NASA funding but because of the whole USSR vs. USA thing reaching its apex in the mid-80's yet that Space Race effectively being won, we spent just enough to get the Soviets to spend themselves into a death spiral.

Okay that seems reasonable. I didn't think on the whole competition between the US and the Soviet Union, but that makes definitely sense to spend more for the NASA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Patine said:

I bet you would condemn someone from Germany (or Austria, for that matter) who had pride in an ancestor who was a Nazi Party Member or SS Officer and their activities, but would still claim that this was something entirely different. It NOT different, in the grand scheme of things!

 

No I wouldn't actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×