A Tale of Two Texans (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 29, 2024, 04:46:49 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs? (Moderator: Dereich)
  A Tale of Two Texans (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: A Tale of Two Texans  (Read 3407 times)
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,355
United States


« on: August 21, 2014, 02:31:40 PM »

Glad to see someone's using the idea again, and this time with an earlier President Bush. Should be interesting, especially if H.W. gets stuck dealing with the late '70's.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,355
United States


« Reply #1 on: August 21, 2014, 11:34:29 PM »

This is sick. What was Agnew's angle? Did he run as his 1960's Rockefeller Republicsn incarnation, or his 1970's populist conservative persona?
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,355
United States


« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2014, 09:25:25 PM »

Hmmm... I would think that Bush would fare better than Ford, given his combination of Southern and New England history, whereas Gerry was running solely as a Michiganian. Thus, I would assume that H.W. would have an edge in the South that Ford lacked, while still being able to tie in the North, and that Reagan's real life campaign problems (a surprising loss in New Hampshire) would persist.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,355
United States


« Reply #3 on: August 23, 2014, 02:58:22 AM »

Hmmm... I would think that Bush would fare better than Ford, given his combination of Southern and New England history, whereas Gerry was running solely as a Michiganian. Thus, I would assume that H.W. would have an edge in the South that Ford lacked, while still being able to tie in the North, and that Reagan's real life campaign problems (a surprising loss in New Hampshire) would persist.

I had considered this a potential obstacle to Reagan posing a serious threat to Bush's renomination, hence why I figured that Reagan's campaign would have to gain steam earlier in order for Bush to perform equivalently to Ford IRL. I thought that given Bush's 1980 Iowa caucus win that a New Hampshire upset would be more plausible, but now that I think about it Iowa is probably one of the few states where Bush could probably underperform Ford. Once we accept Reagan's unlikely New Hampshire win prima facie, I do not think that the subsequent Southern primary victories are as implausible.

Not familiar with "prima facie". I assume it means "at face value" or something. I am aware that in '76, Reagan was expected to do well in the anti-tax New Hampshire, but due to a tax plan of his that, while lowering federal taxes, would have devolved them to the states, he ended up losing and needed North Carolina, as I recall, to gain momentum. And yeah, I can see Bush doing worse than Ford given Ford's Mid-Western strength.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,355
United States


« Reply #4 on: August 28, 2014, 03:21:24 PM »

Can we see maps for elections where the outcome has already been made clear (changes to '68 and possibly '72 due to Nixon's selection of Bush, and the 1976 GOP primaries and general election)?
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,355
United States


« Reply #5 on: August 28, 2014, 09:08:59 PM »

Thanks. Will you be going over the themes of Agnew's election over Clinton later on?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.031 seconds with 12 queries.