George Wallace's presidential campaigns in 1968 and 1972

George Wallace’s disruptive presidential campaigns: 1968 vs. 1972

George C. Wallace, the former governor of Alabama, was a singular force in American politics during the volatile era of the late 1960s and early 1970s. His runs for the presidency in 1968 and 1972 reflected not only his unique appeal but also the deep fractures running through American society. Though both campaigns were fueled by populist rhetoric, racial grievance, and anti-elite sentiment, the differences in strategy, structure, and outcome were significant. In 1968, Wallace disrupted the general election as a third-party candidate, drawing significant support from white working-class voters and threatening the two-party system. In 1972, he competed within the Democratic primaries and, before an assassination attempt halted his campaign, was a formidable contender. Each campaign reshaped the political landscape in its own way.

Wallace in 1968: The outsider disruptor



In 1968, Wallace ran as the candidate of the American Independent Party, a third-party effort grounded in Southern populism, segregationist rhetoric, and anti-establishment fervor. His campaign emerged amid a chaotic national backdrop: the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy, widespread riots, the Vietnam War, and President Lyndon Johnson’s decision not to seek reelection. The major party candidates - Republican Richard Nixon and Democrat Hubert Humphrey - were seen by many as uninspiring or compromised. Wallace capitalized on this discontent.



Wallace’s core message was blunt and inflammatory. He championed "law and order," opposed federal intervention in states’ rights (particularly around civil rights issues), and mocked liberal intellectuals. He often said what others wouldn’t. His appeal was strongest among white working-class voters - many of them traditionally Democratic - who were disillusioned by civil rights reforms, urban unrest, and the anti-war movement.



Wallace's disruption was tangible. He won five Southern states (Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, Louisiana, and Arkansas), took 13.5% of the national vote (close to 10 million votes), and carried 46 electoral votes - still the most successful third-party presidential run since Theodore Roosevelt in 1912. Wallace pulled voters from both Nixon and Humphrey. His campaign likely drew more from the traditional Democratic base, particularly white Southerners who might otherwise have voted for Humphrey, but his anti-liberal rhetoric also appealed to some disaffected Republicans. Nixon feared a scenario where Wallace would deny both major candidates a majority in the Electoral College, throwing the election to the House of Representatives. This very real possibility put Wallace at the center of 1968’s political storm.





Wallace in 1972: A populist Democrat with momentum

By 1972, Wallace recalibrated. He entered the Democratic primaries as a registered Democrat rather than running third-party, aiming to be more than just a spoiler - he wanted to win the nomination. Though he remained a staunch segregationist in earlier years, Wallace began softening his rhetoric, subtly shifting from overt racism to a more coded form of populism. His message stayed rooted in economic grievance and cultural resentment: attacking “pointy-headed bureaucrats,” welfare programs, crime, and forced busing.

Wallace’s campaign struck a nerve. In the early 1972 primaries, he shocked the political establishment by winning over a broad swath of voters - not just in the South but also in Northern industrial states. He won convincingly in Florida with over 40% of the vote and performed strongly in Michigan, Indiana, Tennessee, and North Carolina. In the Michigan primary, he came in a strong second, just behind the liberal favorite George McGovern, a U.S. Senator from South Dakota, and beat other mainstream candidates like Hubert Humphrey. His support was strongest among working-class whites, union members, and voters angry at the pace of social change.

Then came the turning point: on May 15, 1972, Wallace was shot five times by Arthur Bremer, a native of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, while Wallace was on the campaign trail making an appearance at a shopping center in Laurel, Maryland. The shooting left Wallace permanently paralyzed from the waist down and ended his campaign’s momentum. Though he continued to appear on ballots and even won some late primaries (Maryland and Michigan), his physical incapacity and the media's focus on his recovery overshadowed any further serious campaigning. More crucially, Democratic Party elites, who had already been wary of Wallace's divisive appeal, turned away entirely.



Did the shooting cost Wallace the Democratic nomination in 1972?

It's unlikely that George Wallace would have won the 1972 Democratic nomination, even had he not been shot. The Democratic Party’s national structure - dominated by liberals and union leadership - viewed Wallace as a threat to party unity and electability. The eventual nominee, George McGovern, represented the opposite end of the party’s ideological spectrum: anti-war, pro-civil rights, and socially liberal.

However, Wallace was on track to gather a substantial number of delegates, and with the Democratic primary field deeply fractured (including McGovern, Humphrey, Scoop Jackson, and others), he might have been able to broker significant influence at the convention. He could have served as a kingmaker - or at least shaped the party’s message toward more conservative or populist tones. The shooting removed that possibility.



The attack also froze Wallace’s public image in a moment of sympathy. While it didn't erase his segregationist past, it added a layer of martyrdom among his followers and gave him national attention as a victim of political violence. It arguably set the stage for his later political rehabilitation in Alabama, where he was re-elected governor in 1974 and eventually renounced his earlier racist positions.

If Wallace had in fact been the Democratic nominee in the 1972 presidential election, he could have significantly reshaped the conservative vote - and possibly siphoned off a portion of Richard Nixon’s base.



Wallace’s appeal to working-class white voters, particularly in the South and among the “silent majority,” overlapped with key parts of Nixon’s support. His populist rhetoric, strong law-and-order stance, and fierce opposition to desegregation and federal overreach resonated with voters who were wary of social change and skeptical of government. These were the same voters Nixon targeted with his “Southern Strategy” and themes of stability and traditional values. Wallace may have also gained significant traction in Rust Belt states with his anti-elitist, pro-working class platform.

In short, Wallace on the Democratic ticket would have posed a serious threat to Nixon's ability to dominate the conservative electorate. While Wallace’s extreme positions may have alienated moderates and liberals, his presence could have fractured the right-leaning vote, tightening what was otherwise a Nixon landslide in 1972. The actual Democratic Party nominee that year, McGovern, only carried Massachusetts and the District of Columbia in the general election against Nixon.



Conclusion

George Wallace was one of the most polarizing and consequential figures in late 20th-century American politics. His 1968 third-party run demonstrated how a populist outsider could disrupt a national election by appealing to cultural and racial resentment. In 1972, he showed he could command serious influence within the Democratic Party, especially among disaffected working-class voters. The assassination attempt cut that campaign short, ending what could have been a more prolonged battle for the soul of the Democratic Party.

Wallace’s legacy is mixed and complicated. He did not win the presidency, but his blend of populist messaging, coded racial appeals, and anti-establishment anger laid groundwork for future political figures - on both the right and left - who would channel similar frustrations. His 1968 and 1972 campaigns were not only about electoral math but about the changing identity of American politics.

Third party candidates for president

Part of an ongoing, occasional series looking at the state of democracy and the political process in the United States in light of the 2024 presidential election.

In light of the 2024 independent bid of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. for president of the United States, we take a look at a sampling of other noteworthy independent and third-party presidential campaigns in modern U.S. history. How did these candidates fare? What were their impacts on the elections they ran in?

The impact of independent and third-party presidential campaigns in modern U.S. history

Throughout the annals of American political history, independent and third-party presidential campaigns have emerged as formidable disruptors, challenging the dominance of the two major parties and injecting fresh ideas into the political discourse. While many of these candidates have faced significant hurdles in their quests for the presidency, their campaigns have often left enduring legacies, reshaping the political landscape and influencing the trajectory of future elections. In this post, we will examine some of these noteworthy campaigns and their impacts on the elections they ran in.

1. Theodore Roosevelt (Progressive Party) - 1912:

Perhaps one of the most famous third-party candidates, Theodore Roosevelt, a former Republican president, launched the Progressive Party (also known as the Bull Moose Party) in 1912 after failing to secure the Republican nomination. Running on a platform of progressive reforms, including labor protections, women's suffrage, and conservation, Roosevelt garnered an impressive 27.4% of the popular vote and won six states for a total of 88 electoral votes. While he ultimately lost to Woodrow Wilson, his candidacy split the Republican vote, paving the way for Wilson's victory and highlighting the growing influence of progressive ideals in American politics.

2. George Wallace (American Independent Party) - 1968:

George C. Wallace, the former, as well as future, Democratic governor of Alabama, ran for president in the 1968 election as the candidate of the American Independent Party. Wallace's campaign centered on a platform of segregationist and law-and-order policies, appealing primarily to white voters disaffected by the civil rights movement and social unrest of the 1960s.

In the end, Wallace captured a significant portion of the popular vote, winning 13.5%, along with five states in the Deep South for a total of 46 electoral votes. Wallace's campaign had a profound impact on the election that year. By tapping into racial anxieties among white voters in the South and parts of the Midwest, Wallace effectively split the Democratic vote in many states, contributing to the election of Republican candidate Richard Nixon, the former vice president under Dwight Eisenhower (1953-1961).

3. Ross Perot - 1992 (Independent) and 1996 (Reform Party):

Business magnate Ross Perot's bids for the presidency in 1992 and 1996 shook up the political establishment with his focus on fiscal responsibility and opposition to free trade agreements like NAFTA. Despite lacking major party affiliation, Perot captured 18.9% of the popular vote in 1992 and 8.4% in 1996. While he did not win any electoral votes in either election, he managed to take several counties across the country and even placed second in two states in his 1992 campaign against Democratic candidate Bill Clinton and Republican incumbent George H.W. Bush. It's widely assumed he most likely would have secured an even greater percentage of the popular vote in 1992 had he not dropped out of the race for several months. In any case, both of Perot's campaigns forced the major parties to address issues such as the federal deficit and government spending, leaving a lasting impact on the national conversation surrounding economic policy.

4. Ralph Nader (Green Party) - 2000:

Consumer advocate Ralph Nader ran as the Green Party candidate in the 2000 presidential election, campaigning on progressive policies such as environmental protection, corporate accountability, and universal healthcare. While Nader only received 2.74% of the popular vote, his candidacy was widely seen as a spoiler for Democratic nominee and incumbent vice president Al Gore, particularly in the closely contested state of Florida. Many Democrats blamed Nader for siphoning off crucial votes that could have tipped the election in Gore's favor, leading to George W. Bush's narrow victory and sparking debates about the impact of third-party candidates on electoral outcomes.

5. Jill Stein (Green Party) - 2012 and 2016:

Physician and activist Jill Stein ran as the Green Party candidate in both the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections, advocating for progressive policies such as Medicare for All, a Green New Deal, and student debt forgiveness. While her share of the popular vote was relatively small (0.36% in 2012 and 1.07% in 2016), Stein's campaigns attracted attention to issues often overlooked by the major parties, such as environmental justice and corporate influence in politics. Stein is running again in 2024.


6. Gary Johnson (Libertarian Party) - 2012 and 2016:

Former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson's libertarian-leaning campaign in the 2016 presidential election focused on issues such as drug policy reform, government spending cuts, and civil liberties. Despite being excluded from the presidential debates and facing limited media coverage, Johnson, who served as a Republican when governor of New Mexico, sealed 3.3% of the popular vote, making him the most successful Libertarian Party candidate in history. While he did not significantly alter the outcome of the election, Johnson's candidacy highlighted the growing appeal of libertarianism among certain segments of the electorate and contributed to discussions about the role of third parties in American politics.

On a side note, Johnson ran for president as the Libertarian Party's candidate four years earlier, in 2012, as well. He originally sought the Republican nomination for the 2012 election before joining the LP. While he only secured 1% of the popular vote, which amounted to some 1.3 million ballots cast for him nationally, his total represents more votes for him than all other third-party candidates combined that year.

Conclusion

In conclusion, independent and third-party presidential campaigns have played a significant role in shaping American politics, often serving as catalysts for change and challenging the dominance of the two major parties. While many of these candidates have struggled to achieve electoral success, their campaigns have nevertheless left indelible marks on the political landscape, influencing policy debates and electoral outcomes for years to come. As Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.'s 2024 independent bid for the presidency demonstrates, the tradition of independent and third-party activism remains alive and well in American politics, offering voters alternative visions for the future of the country.