1980: How would Anderson voters have split?

[pragmatic liberal]

In 1980, John Anderson attracted the support of lots of Democratic leaners - liberals, independents - who couldn't bring themselves to vote for Carter. In Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.'s memoirs, for example, Schlesinger supports Anderson and wrote that many of the Kennedys (including Jackie O.) did too.

How would Anderson's supporters have voted if he weren't in the race? Mostly to Reagan, mostly to Carter, or split?

The most obvious parallel would be Perot's voters, who were generally conservative-leaning independents who in normal years backed Republicans but gave very low marks to George H.W. Bush. Though polls had Perot voters supporting Geoge W. Bush in 2000, for example, '92 exit polls said they would have split roughly evenly between Clinton and George H.W. Bush. So might most Anderson voters have ended up holding their noses and voting for Reagan? Or was Reagan just too right-wing for them?

(As an aside, a political science professor of mine made a good insight about third-party presidential bids: they tend to become significant when the incumbent party or president is so unpopular that the main opposition party can't hold all the defecting voters.)

[Guderian]

(As an aside, a political science professor of mine made a good insight about third-party presidential bids: they tend to become significant when the incumbent party or president is so unpopular that the main opposition party can't hold all the defecting voters.)

This is a great observation. That's why there's a strong correlation between a significant third-party challenge and the eventual defeat of the incumbent president or party.

Speaking of Anderson voters, I think they would probably split 60-40 for Carter. Those who would vote, that is.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Ultimately it doesn't matter since even if every single Anderson vote had gone to Carter, Reagan still would have won 331-207.

However, they likely would have gone 30-30-40 Carter-Reagan-no vote overall with the percentage of stay at homes higher in the states he did best in.  Anderson didn't just attract Democratic leaners disgusted with Carter, he attracted liberal Republicans who weren't yet ready to concede that their party had left them.  Absent Anderson, those liberal Republicans would have largely either held their noses and voted for Reagan or just stayed home.

[Bo]

I'm guessing about 20-30% would have stayed home. Out of 70-80% that would vote, I'd say about 65% would have voted for Reagan and 35% for Carter. I know most of Anderson's support was from the left, but many of those liberals voted for him because they disliked Carter, and thus I could see many of those liberals holding their noses and voting for Reagan if Anderson was not on the ballot (they knew that voting for Anderson will help elect Reagan in RL because every liberal vote for Anderson is one less vote for Carter).

[Deldem]

I'm guessing about 20-30% would have stayed home. Out of 70-80% that would vote, I'd say about 65% would have voted for Reagan and 35% for Carter. I know most of Anderson's support was from the left, but many of those liberals voted for him because they disliked Carter, and thus I could see many of those liberals holding their noses and voting for Reagan if Anderson was not on the ballot (they knew that voting for Anderson will help elect Reagan in RL because every liberal vote for Anderson is one less vote for Carter).

I completely disagree.
Seeing as both my father and my maternal grandparents voted for Anderson, and that they are all very liberal, I find this hard to be true. There is simply NO WAY they would ever vote for Reagan.
You act as if Reagan wouldn't have won anyway. He was so far out in the lead, there was no reason to vote for Carter at all.
Also, it's silly to suggest that liberals would vote for the arch-conservative.

[Bo]

I'm guessing about 20-30% would have stayed home. Out of 70-80% that would vote, I'd say about 65% would have voted for Reagan and 35% for Carter. I know most of Anderson's support was from the left, but many of those liberals voted for him because they disliked Carter, and thus I could see many of those liberals holding their noses and voting for Reagan if Anderson was not on the ballot (they knew that voting for Anderson will help elect Reagan in RL because every liberal vote for Anderson is one less vote for Carter).

I completely disagree.
Seeing as both my father and my maternal grandparents voted for Anderson, and that they are all very liberal, I find this hard to be true. There is simply NO WAY they would ever vote for Reagan.
You act as if Reagan wouldn't have won anyway. He was so far out in the lead, there was no reason to vote for Carter at all.
Also, it's silly to suggest that liberals would vote for the arch-conservative.

Actually, I thought the polls showed a dead heat until about a week or two before the election, after Reagan asked "Are you better off than you were four years ago?", and that in turn caused Reagan to open up a large lead over Carter. So, until late October, it appeared as though everyone's votes (of the people who lived in swing states) might matter.

[Deldem]

I'm guessing about 20-30% would have stayed home. Out of 70-80% that would vote, I'd say about 65% would have voted for Reagan and 35% for Carter. I know most of Anderson's support was from the left, but many of those liberals voted for him because they disliked Carter, and thus I could see many of those liberals holding their noses and voting for Reagan if Anderson was not on the ballot (they knew that voting for Anderson will help elect Reagan in RL because every liberal vote for Anderson is one less vote for Carter).

I completely disagree.
Seeing as both my father and my maternal grandparents voted for Anderson, and that they are all very liberal, I find this hard to be true. There is simply NO WAY they would ever vote for Reagan.
You act as if Reagan wouldn't have won anyway. He was so far out in the lead, there was no reason to vote for Carter at all.
Also, it's silly to suggest that liberals would vote for the arch-conservative.

Actually, I thought the polls showed a dead heat until about a week or two before the election, after Reagan asked "Are you better off than you were four years ago?", and that in turn caused Reagan to open up a large lead over Carter. So, until late October, it appeared as though everyone's votes (of the people who lived in swing states) might matter.

But late October doesn't matter. What matters is how the country felt on the first Tuesday of November- and from what I understand it was pretty apparent that Carter was going to lose.