What if Watergate never happened?

[Phony Moderate]

Let's say Watergate never happened, and Nixon served a full second term. What would have happened in the 1976 Election?

[jokerman]

Ted Kennedy wins barely over Ronald Reagan, George Bush perhaps wins over Kennedy in 1980.  The left is a lot better off in the long term, with a much milder cynicism towards government evolving without watergate.

[Mechaman]

Ted Kennedy wins barely over Ronald Reagan, George Bush perhaps wins over Kennedy in 1980.  The left is a lot better off in the long term, with a much milder cynicism towards government evolving without watergate.

Inless Kennedy was assassinated. There seems to be a pattern of unnatural deaths within some of the Kennedy family. And, in all seriousness, John Hinckley did stalk Jimmy Carter but never had a chance to shoot. Could Hinckley get luckier with Kennedy?

Plus, what about Chappaquiddick? I bet in 1976, only 7 years after the incident, people would still be talking about it. It was pretty damning to his RL presidential run in 1980, more than a decade after it occured, I bet in 1976 it would be a bit more damning than it would be 4 years later.

[Padfoot]

Without the albatross of Nixon holding him down, Ford wins in '76.  However his presidency is lackluster and he loses to Ted Kennedy in '80.  Ted turns out to be too radical for most of the public and he loses to Reagan in '84 who is then re-elected in '88.  Clinton defeats Bush in 92' and all subsequent presidential elections remain unchanged.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Without the albatross of Nixon holding him down, Ford wins in '76.  However his presidency is lackluster and he loses to Ted Kennedy in '80.  Ted turns out to be too radical for most of the public and he loses to Reagan in '84 who is then re-elected in '88.  Clinton defeats Bush in 92' and all subsequent presidential elections remain unchanged.

Yes and its possible that the Republicans regain the the House in 1976 or 1978 in the that scenario. The movement was clearly in that direction in 1970 and 1972. Watergate was only thing that kept the Dems in power 40 straight years without it the Republicans would've gain control in the 70's. And this would have meant the Goldwater Libertarians would had more influence in the party because Rep. John Jacob Rhodes(R-AZ) would have been Speaker.

[Erc]

Without the albatross of Nixon holding him down, Ford wins in '76.  However his presidency is lackluster and he loses to Ted Kennedy in '80.  Ted turns out to be too radical for most of the public and he loses to Reagan in '84 who is then re-elected in '88.  Clinton defeats Bush in 92' and all subsequent presidential elections remain unchanged.

I find it highly unlikely that Ford wins the nomination in '76.  In real life, he only barely beat out Reagan as an incumbent, and in this scenario he starts in the unenviable position of being a basically unknown Vice President.  One to one against Reagan, he loses.  Of course, the Republican field would have been much larger than it was in real life, which might render a Ford victory possible...but it's still far more likely to be somebody else, or Reagan.

More fundamentally...would Ford have become Vice President without Watergate?  Might Nixon have had more political clout to force, say, John Connally through?

[Phony Moderate]

Without the albatross of Nixon holding him down, Ford wins in '76.  However his presidency is lackluster and he loses to Ted Kennedy in '80.  Ted turns out to be too radical for most of the public and he loses to Reagan in '84 who is then re-elected in '88.  Clinton defeats Bush in 92' and all subsequent presidential elections remain unchanged.

I doubt Reagan would have ran in 1984.

[hcallega]

I've done some research into this before. These are my best bets.
In regards to actual policy I believe in my gut that in the short term South Vietnam would have survived. The NVA made several probes into the South after the Paris Peace Accords to see if Nixon (during the Watergate trials) or Ford would have intervened. Since they did not, they went ahead with their offensive. Also it's unlikely that the anti-war bills would have passed if not for the left's momentum from Watergate.

I also believe that some form of universal health care legislation would have passed. The political will was their, like today, for some form of change. Kennedy and Nixon were working on a proposal that was working it's way through congress but died due to Watergate, and Ford didn't want any part of it.

In regards to candidates, I believe that Ted Kennedy would have ran and likely would have won the Democratic nomination. I also believe that John Connally would have been Nixon's choice for Vice-President after Agnew resigned, and I believe that he would be the GOP nominee with Nixon's blessing, narrowly defeating Reagan. In a Kennedy-Conally match up, I believe that Ted likely would have won. He was a better campaigner, and I believe would have won in a narrow race.

After that it's anyone's guess. I started a time line about this, but never finished. I might restart it, but it's a little difficult because it's hard to say what long term impact it would have on the elections themselves, whereas something like JFK surviving or Wallace staying on FDR's ticket is more tangible.

[Bo]

Nixon doesn't resign and appoints John Connally instead of Gerald Ford to the VP spot in 1973. Connally wins the nomination in 1976 and defeats Mo Udall for the Presidency. Scoop Jackson defeats Connally in 1980, and dies in the middle of his second term. Jackson is succeeded by his VP, who could be a whole number of different choices.

[RosettaStoned]

Nixon doesn't resign and appoints John Connally instead of Gerald Ford to the VP spot in 1973. Connally wins the nomination in 1976 and defeats Mo Udall for the Presidency. Scoop Jackson defeats Connally in 1980, and dies in the middle of his second term. Jackson is succeeded by his VP, who could be a whole number of different choices.

No way could he have ever won the Democratic Nomination.

[Psychic Octopus]

Nixon serves out two terms; Gets CHIP passed, leading the way for additional health care reform later. Due to Nixon's heavy support, Connally is able to win the Republican Nomination and defeat the Democrat easily. In 1980, due to crises at home and abroad, Connally loses his re-election bid to Governor Hugh Carey of New York, who serves two terms.

It is basically a swap of party holds on the Presidency since 1976.

[Bo]

Nixon serves out two terms; Gets CHIP passed, leading the way for additional health care reform later. Due to Nixon's heavy support, Connally is able to win the Republican Nomination and defeat the Democrat easily. In 1980, due to crises at home and abroad, Connally loses his re-election bid to Governor Hugh Carey of New York, who serves two terms.

It is basically a swap of party holds on the Presidency since 1976.

I don't think Connally would have won easily in 1976. You got to remember that unemployment was at 8% on election day that year and inflation was also kinda high at 5%. I think Connally might have definitely won, but it would have definitely been a challenge for him and the final result could have ended up being pretty close. I agree with everything else you said though.

[President Mitt]

Nixon doesn't resign and appoints John Connally instead of Gerald Ford to the VP spot in 1973. Connally wins the nomination in 1976 and defeats Mo Udall for the Presidency. Scoop Jackson defeats Connally in 1980, and dies in the middle of his second term. Jackson is succeeded by his VP, who could be a whole number of different choices.

He wouldn't be able to win the Democratic Nomination. If Teddy doesn't go in 1980, it's probably Jerry Brown, or Hugh Carey.

[Badger]

Nixon doesn't resign and appoints John Connally instead of Gerald Ford to the VP spot in 1973. Connally wins the nomination in 1976 and defeats Mo Udall for the Presidency. Scoop Jackson defeats Connally in 1980, and dies in the middle of his second term. Jackson is succeeded by his VP, who could be a whole number of different choices.

As Nixon chose Ford as a result of Agnew's resignation unrelated to Watergate, it's highely unlikely that part of history would've changed. It's hard to see Connally beating Reagan in the 76 primaries, particularly considering how poorly Connally ran against Reagan in 1980 when he was in a stronger position politically (for the GOP race).

Carter ran on a platform of personal integrety that wouldn't have sold nearly so well in a non-post-Watergate America. It's probably be Reagan vs. Udall in 1976. Even odds on who'd win.

[Psychic Octopus]

John Connally could never survive confirmation, just pointing that out. He would have to go with a caretaker.

[pragmatic liberal]

John Connally could never survive confirmation, just pointing that out. He would have to go with a caretaker.

Right. Although we'll never really know what happened, I think there's actually a good case to be made that, at least in terms of presidential races, there may not have been a major shift.

Connally would have had difficulty winning confirmation AND in 1975 he was actually on trial for a milk-pricing scandal from which he was acquitted. I think he has only about 50/50 odds at being nominated for VP and he may not even be able to win the nomination.

The 1976 nomination battle on the Republican side probably goes down to Reagan vs. Charles Percy of Illinois (who had been gearing up for a run but withdrew so that Ford would have an easier shot). Reagan would win.

On the Democratic side, keep in mind that post-Watergate, they were just about in the most favorable position imaginable - if a major Democrat didn't run in '76 after Watergate, it's hard to see them running in '76 without Watergate. Mo Udall is a definite possibility, since he did quite well in the primaries, but I actually - and I've made this case before - think people shouldn't dismiss Carter's chances either.

Yes, I know, Carter made a splash partly because post-Watergate people were looking for an "outsider." But they also wanted an outsider because of dissatisfaction with Washington Democrats and NONE of the other Democratic candidates seemed to understand the new primary rules. Carter had by far the best-planned primary campaign and as a Southerner, he started out with a very large base of support. It's not at all inconceivable that Carter could have won the nomination even in a Watergate-less world.

So we might well just get a rotation of office that looks pretty similar to real life. In 1976, Carter wins the Democratic nomination in a huge upset and narrowly defeats Reagan that year. Then in 1980, a Carter presidency (which goes similarly to real life) proves disastrous and he loses to Reagan making a repeat bid.

The only big question: what happens to George H.W. Bush? His eventual positioning as VP under Reagan was very much him milking connections and knowing the right people (how many former CIA directors make credible presidential bids or get selected as VP?) Maybe he gets a full cabinet appointment - something like Commerce or Transportation or even gets picked as Nixon's VP (he went for Ford as the absolute safest choice since he didn't have the capital for anyone else). Hell, if Connally doesn't run in '76  then maybe even a Commerce Secretary Bush makes a bid for the nomination. I guess the major question is: can Bush remain relevant enough to run in 1980 and get picked as Reagan's VP?

Anyway, it's at least plausible that we'd wind up with a very similar trajectory and minimal partisan effects of a full Nixon presidency:

37. Richard M. Nixon (R - 1969-1977)
38. James E. "Jimmy" Carter (D - 1977-1981)
39. Ronald W. Reagan (R - 1981-1989)
40. George H.W. Bush (R - 1989-1993)
41. William J. "Bill" Clinton (D - 1993-2001)
42. George W. Bush (R - 2001-2009)
43. Barack Obama (D - 2009-present)

[Bo]

John Connally could never survive confirmation, just pointing that out. He would have to go with a caretaker.

Right. Although we'll never really know what happened, I think there's actually a good case to be made that, at least in terms of presidential races, there may not have been a major shift.

Connally would have had difficulty winning confirmation AND in 1975 he was actually on trial for a milk-pricing scandal from which he was acquitted. I think he has only about 50/50 odds at being nominated for VP and he may not even be able to win the nomination.

The 1976 nomination battle on the Republican side probably goes down to Reagan vs. Charles Percy of Illinois (who had been gearing up for a run but withdrew so that Ford would have an easier shot). Reagan would win.

On the Democratic side, keep in mind that post-Watergate, they were just about in the most favorable position imaginable - if a major Democrat didn't run in '76 after Watergate, it's hard to see them running in '76 without Watergate. Mo Udall is a definite possibility, since he did quite well in the primaries, but I actually - and I've made this case before - think people shouldn't dismiss Carter's chances either.

Yes, I know, Carter made a splash partly because post-Watergate people were looking for an "outsider." But they also wanted an outsider because of dissatisfaction with Washington Democrats and NONE of the other Democratic candidates seemed to understand the new primary rules. Carter had by far the best-planned primary campaign and as a Southerner, he started out with a very large base of support. It's not at all inconceivable that Carter could have won the nomination even in a Watergate-less world.

So we might well just get a rotation of office that looks pretty similar to real life. In 1976, Carter wins the Democratic nomination in a huge upset and narrowly defeats Reagan that year. Then in 1980, a Carter presidency (which goes similarly to real life) proves disastrous and he loses to Reagan making a repeat bid.

The only big question: what happens to George H.W. Bush? His eventual positioning as VP under Reagan was very much him milking connections and knowing the right people (how many former CIA directors make credible presidential bids or get selected as VP?) Maybe he gets a full cabinet appointment - something like Commerce or Transportation or even gets picked as Nixon's VP (he went for Ford as the absolute safest choice since he didn't have the capital for anyone else). Hell, if Connally doesn't run in '76  then maybe even a Commerce Secretary Bush makes a bid for the nomination. I guess the major question is: can Bush remain relevant enough to run in 1980 and get picked as Reagan's VP?

Anyway, it's at least plausible that we'd wind up with a very similar trajectory and minimal partisan effects of a full Nixon presidency:

37. Richard M. Nixon (R - 1969-1977)
38. James E. "Jimmy" Carter (D - 1977-1981)
39. Ronald W. Reagan (R - 1981-1989)
40. George H.W. Bush (R - 1989-1993)
41. William J. "Bill" Clinton (D - 1993-2001)
42. George W. Bush (R - 2001-2009)
43. Barack Obama (D - 2009-present)

I don't think Reagan would have won the nomination in 1980 if he won it in 1976 and lost the general election that year. Reagan would have been too old (and might not have even run) and also Moderate Republicans would be saying "We nomianted economically conservative candidates in 1964 and 1976--and we lost both times. We need to be more moderate and inclusive." Thus, I think someone like Charles Percy, Bob Dole, Charles Mathias, or some other moderate/liberal Republican would win in 1980 in this scenario, compeltely throwing off the list of Presidents since 1981.

[hcallega]

I did a TL about this, so I've done some fairly in depth research.
Basically in the long run the left is in far better shape, as Nixon passes CHIP (most likely) which in turn sets the stage for greater health care reform down the line. But perhaps even more important for the left is that there would be no Reagan Revolution, at least not in the same sense. Maybe Reagan still becomes President, but even so it would not have been with the same conservative fervor.

As far as who become president thats anyones guess. I would say Connally, as he was Nixon's favorite and 1976 would probably be a good enough year for him to win without watergate. Then probably a Democrat in 1980, either Udall, Carey, or Kennedy if he wanted it. 1984 probably that Dem wins reelection. It gets pretty tough after that.