"President Chester A. Arthur" <congyog...
@gmail.com> wrote in news:firstname.lastname@example.org
> Yeah, the WI as written doesn't really work. But it's easy enough to
> keep something close to the POD:
> Nixon takes Romney as his VP in 1968 to shore up support in the
> Midwest and among "Rockefeller" Republicans.
Even assuming Nixon decides on a Rockefeller Republican as his running mate,
doesn't Romney's "brainwashing" gaffe pretty much remove him from vice-
presidential as well as presidential contention in 1968?
(I was wondering whether choosing Romney could cause a backlash in the
South--a pro-civil rights Mormon is hardly the ideal choice there--sufficient
to cost Nixon his Electoral College majority. Probably not, I have
concluded; if you look at
http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/pres/1968.txt you will see that
even if Romney does not gain Nixon any additional electoral votes in the
North, including Michigan, and even if he causes Nixon to lose North Carolina
, South Carolina, and Tennessee, still, Nixon will win with *exactly* the
required 270 electoral votes...)
If Nixon wants to make Michigan competitive, Bob Griffin would seem a choice
acceptable to all wings of the GOP and all sections of the country.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Griffin (Of course the AFL-CIO would not
like the co-author of the Landrum-Grifffin Act to be nominated, but they are
not going to be supporting Nixon anyway. And note that in heavily unionized
Michigan, Griffin, despite union opposition, was able to defeat Soapy
Williams decisively for the Senate in 1966.) So after Nixon resigns in 1974,
we get not Gerald Ford but his fellow Michigander Bob Griffin in the White
 Or to be more precise, if he causes Nixon to lose the twelve electoral
votes he got in North Carolina in OTL (one GOP "faithless elector" voted for