1976

[FerrisBueller86]

The 1976 electoral map strikes me as a strange one and the last gasp of the old political alignment.  I'm struck by how similar it looks to 1960.  Carter swept the South and even won many states that have not voted Democratic since, such as Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, North Carolina, and South Carolina even though this was a close election.  (Carter's margin was similar to that of Bush in 2004.)  Short of a Reagan-like landslide for the Democrats or another political realignment, I don't expect a Democratic candidate to carry these states anytime soon.

What was President Ford's appeal?  How was he able to make the election such a close one after being down 30 percentage points as a result of his trips, Nixon pardon, stagflation, and debate gaffe about Communism in Eastern Europe?

Why wasn't Carter able to sweep the Northeastern states?  Why didn't his outsider status have appeal in any of the Great Plains states or the Rocky Mountain states?  Why was Carter locked out of all but two states in the western half of the nation?  (Of these states, he only carried Texas and Hawaii.)

[dazzleman]

jhsu, you make a great observation about the 1976 election.  That was the last gasp of the old New Deal coalition, which had previously been killed by Nixon's southern strategy, but which was temporarily resurrected by Carter's position as a southern Democrat.

Carter was able to obtain the strong support of liberal interest groups in 1976 without taking strong liberal positions on many issues.  Carter was not strongly pro-abortion, as an example, but staked out an ambiguous position, as did Ford.

The political landscape was quite a bit different then, and social issues had not risen to the forefront as they later did.  But Carter's 1976 victory coalition contained in many ways the seeds of his 1980 defeat, because he had two irreconcilable constituencies that he had to please - northern liberals and conservative southerners.

Ford generally ran an effective campaign organizationally, aside from some well-publicized gaffes.  Much of the public was reasonably comfortable with Ford as a leader, and Carter earned a reputation of promising all things to all people, which turned some people off.  While Ford's popularity in 1976 was middling, he was surely not wildly unpopular, the way Carter became in 1980.  For many more conservative Americans, Ford was viewed as a much safer choice than Carter.

There may have also been some residual prejudice in the north against a southern candidate.  I find it interesting that Ford won several northeasthern states that had gone for Humphrey in 1968, such as Connecticut and Maine.  But Ford did not win the western states by anywhere near the margins that Republicans are accustomed to winning them today.

1976 was probably the last election in which large number of states were actually competitive.  Since then, especially after 1996, we seem to have settled into a pattern where most states aren't really competitive, and there are a relative few swing states.  That was definitely not the case in 1976.

[RN]

It must of been hard for Ford to pretty much write off states that Goldwater and Nixon won. 

[Gabu]

The political landscape was quite a bit different then, and social issues had not risen to the forefront as they later did.  But Carter's 1976 victory coalition contained in many ways the seeds of his 1980 defeat, because he had two irreconcilable constituencies that he had to please - northern liberals and conservative southerners.

There's an interesting thing to point out, though: those groups were the two groups that he best held onto.  Take a look at the 1980 map, or specifically, the states in which Reagan won by less than 50%:



Pretty much all of the states that Reagan only barely carried were the states that Carter carried in 1976 - both in the northeast and in the south.  In other words, no one group of his voters in 1976 abandoned him over any other in 1980, which is kind of interesting.

[dazzleman]

Good point.  I think 1980 was the last time that the overall Democratic percentage of the vote was higher in the south than in the country as a whole.  There was a whole host of southern states, carried by Carter in 1976, that Reagan carried by only the slimmest of margins in 1980.  It's easy to forget that because except for Georgia, he carried them so consistently, but it could have easily been otherwise.

Apparently, there was still regional pride for Carter in 1980, though not enough to carry the region for him, as had been the case in 1976.  By 1980, it was apparent that his policies were generally going against the type of policies that were favored in the south.

It's funny to look at the 1976 results and see some counties carried by Republicans that have now descended into the hell of liberal lunacy.  Marin County, California is a primary one.  Back then, economic issues were more important, plus the people in those counties had not gone off the deep end, as they have now.  Can anybody imagine that a San Francisco jury today would convict Patty Hearst for her role in those 1975 bank robberies, as happened in 1976?

[nclib]

The political landscape was quite a bit different then, and social issues had not risen to the forefront as they later did.  But Carter's 1976 victory coalition contained in many ways the seeds of his 1980 defeat, because he had two irreconcilable constituencies that he had to please - northern liberals and conservative southerners.

There's an interesting thing to point out, though: those groups were the two groups that he best held onto.  Take a look at the 1980 map, or specifically, the states in which Reagan won by less than 50%:



Pretty much all of the states that Reagan only barely carried were the states that Carter carried in 1976 - both in the northeast and in the south.  In other words, no one group of his voters in 1976 abandoned him over any other in 1980, which is kind of interesting.

The 5 largest swings to Reagan in 1980 were:

1. North Dakota
2. Nevada
3. Arkansas
4. South Dakota
5. Oklahoma

It looks like the Plains states were the most likely to abandon him (Carter).

[dazzleman]

It must of been hard for Ford to pretty much write off states that Goldwater and Nixon won. 

Since Nixon won 49 states, that was pretty much unavoidable.

But seriously, I realize you're talking about 1968.  Ford's running against a southerner posing as a moderate, at a time when the Republican party was starting to depend upon the south to win elections, was unfortunate for him. 

Ford may have done better against a northern liberal who would have alienated much of the south.  He may have lost some northern states, but probably not too many that he didn't win anyway.  And he may have more than offset that by picking up southern votes, which went to Carter more for regional pride than any other reason.  For many of those southern states, 1976 was the last time they voted Democratic in a presidential election, and may be for a very long time.

[J. J.]

One thing that you forget is that of Goldwater supporters in 1964 were Reagan supporters in 1976.  The Ford/Reagan Primary battle really damaged conservative support for Ford.  At the time of the GOP Convention, Reagan was slightly less beatable by Carter than Ford.  Had a Ford/Reagan ticket been formed, we might have very well seen Ford elected in 1976.

It was an exceptionally nasty campaign, probably the nastiest GOP Primary since 1964, up until today.

[dazzleman]

One thing that you forget is that of Goldwater supporters in 1964 were Reagan supporters in 1976.  The Ford/Reagan Primary battle really damaged conservative support for Ford.  At the time of the GOP Convention, Reagan was slightly less beatable by Carter than Ford.  Had a Ford/Reagan ticket been formed, we might have very well seen Ford elected in 1976.

It was an exceptionally nasty campaign, probably the nastiest GOP Primary since 1964, up until today.

Great point.  I think Ford would have won election had it not been for the Reagan challenge.

Despite his sunny exterior, Reagan was a cold, calculating politician.  Reagan knew that a primary challenge would probably cost Ford the presidency if the challenge failed.  He offered the challenge anyway, despite his 11th commandment not to speak ill of a fellow Republican (unless you are after the job he has!).  He also had to know that if he beat Ford and divided the party, his general election chances would not be that great.

When Ford won the nomination, Reagan's support for him in the general election was decidedly lukewarm.  Reagan knew that if Ford won, Reagan's chance to be president would be gone forever, most likely.  So he wanted Ford to lose. 

As it turned out, things went great for Reagan.  Carter was a miserable failure as president, much worse than Ford from the conservative prospective, and this made the country much more prepared for a conservative nominee in 1980 than it was in 1976.  Reagan's loss of the Republican nomination to Ford, and Ford's subsequent defeat, was the best piece of luck Reagan got.

Reagan had some real policy differences with Ford, and I believe his challenge was sincere, and not just ego-driven.  Despite my admiration for Ford and the job he did as president at a difficult time in our history, I think it was a great thing that Ronald Reagan was president for 8 years, something that would not have happened in the absence of Reagan's 1976 challenge to Ford.

[muon2]

One thing that you forget is that of Goldwater supporters in 1964 were Reagan supporters in 1976.  The Ford/Reagan Primary battle really damaged conservative support for Ford.  At the time of the GOP Convention, Reagan was slightly less beatable by Carter than Ford.  Had a Ford/Reagan ticket been formed, we might have very well seen Ford elected in 1976.

It was an exceptionally nasty campaign, probably the nastiest GOP Primary since 1964, up until today.

The GOP primary was quite damaging, and yet compared to other 20th century elections, the EC was exceedingly close. Polls taken just before the election showed Ford surging and even passing Carter. A number of analysts noted that Ford's campaign peaked the weekend before the election. Had the election been held on that weekend a couple of swing states would have shifted to Ford, and he would have been elected.

[Jake]

One thing that you forget is that of Goldwater supporters in 1964 were Reagan supporters in 1976.  The Ford/Reagan Primary battle really damaged conservative support for Ford.  At the time of the GOP Convention, Reagan was slightly less beatable by Carter than Ford.  Had a Ford/Reagan ticket been formed, we might have very well seen Ford elected in 1976.

It was an exceptionally nasty campaign, probably the nastiest GOP Primary since 1964, up until today.

Great point.  I think Ford would have won election had it not been for the Reagan challenge.

Despite his sunny exterior, Reagan was a cold, calculating politician.  Reagan knew that a primary challenge would probably cost Ford the presidency if the challenge failed.  He offered the challenge anyway, despite his 11th commandment not to speak ill of a fellow Republican (unless you are after the job he has!).  He also had to know that if he beat Ford and divided the party, his general election chances would not be that great.

When Ford won the nomination, Reagan's support for him in the general election was decidedly lukewarm.  Reagan knew that if Ford won, Reagan's chance to be president would be gone forever, most likely.  So he wanted Ford to lose. 

As it turned out, things went great for Reagan.  Carter was a miserable failure as president, much worse than Ford from the conservative prospective, and this made the country much more prepared for a conservative nominee in 1980 than it was in 1976.  Reagan's loss of the Republican nomination to Ford, and Ford's subsequent defeat, was the best piece of luck Reagan got.

What you just described is just like Hilary Clinton with John Kerry.  If Kerry had won, she would lose her chance to be president.

[dazzleman]

One thing that you forget is that of Goldwater supporters in 1964 were Reagan supporters in 1976.  The Ford/Reagan Primary battle really damaged conservative support for Ford.  At the time of the GOP Convention, Reagan was slightly less beatable by Carter than Ford.  Had a Ford/Reagan ticket been formed, we might have very well seen Ford elected in 1976.

It was an exceptionally nasty campaign, probably the nastiest GOP Primary since 1964, up until today.

Great point.  I think Ford would have won election had it not been for the Reagan challenge.

Despite his sunny exterior, Reagan was a cold, calculating politician.  Reagan knew that a primary challenge would probably cost Ford the presidency if the challenge failed.  He offered the challenge anyway, despite his 11th commandment not to speak ill of a fellow Republican (unless you are after the job he has!).  He also had to know that if he beat Ford and divided the party, his general election chances would not be that great.

When Ford won the nomination, Reagan's support for him in the general election was decidedly lukewarm.  Reagan knew that if Ford won, Reagan's chance to be president would be gone forever, most likely.  So he wanted Ford to lose. 

As it turned out, things went great for Reagan.  Carter was a miserable failure as president, much worse than Ford from the conservative prospective, and this made the country much more prepared for a conservative nominee in 1980 than it was in 1976.  Reagan's loss of the Republican nomination to Ford, and Ford's subsequent defeat, was the best piece of luck Reagan got.

What you just described is just like Hilary Clinton with John Kerry.  If Kerry had won, she would lose her chance to be president.

Exactly.  Some of my friends had mixed feelings about the past election for that reason.  While they wanted Bush to win, they said that the prospect of Hillary really scared them.  One of my friends said, "I could live with John Kerry as president if I had to.  I could never live with Hillary Clinton as president."

Ford's defeat in 1976 gave Reagan his last chance to be president, and at just the right time.  By 1980, the country was ready for Ronald Reagan.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I don't think it was the last gasp of the old New Deal coalition etc... simileraties to previous elections are (IMO) pretty superficial.

I'll explain tomorrow after I've slept

[The Dowager Mod]

there is a pretty good book called "Marathon1972-1976"
by Jules Witcover.
covers pretty much everything about the election and the primaries.

[gorkay]

I remember the 1976 election quite well. One of the main reasons it was so close was that Carter ran a poor campaign, especially towards the end. If you look at each of his four national campaigns, for the Democratic nomination and for the general election in 1976 and 1980, you see the same thing: he started strong and steadily lost steam. In 1976 he had the nomination won, then almost let it slip away by letting Frank Church and Jerry Brown win a number of late primaries. In the general election, he was ahead in virtually every state early, then frittered away practically all of his lead by running an exceedingly cautious and tentative campaign. The result was that it looked like he won the election on the coattails of his party's strength, rather than being the driving force of their victory, a perception which weakened his status with party leaders and helped doom his Presidency. In 1980 it was the same thing... he blew Kennedy away in the early primaries, then eased off and let him win enough of the late ones to be a major annoyance at the convention. Then, to top it off, he made far too many concessions to Kennedy after he'd won. In the general election, he was running well for a while, even leading Reagan in the polls, but again he faltered at the end, especially in the debate. I have a lot of admiration for Carter as a person, and I think his Presidency may be viewed more positively in the history books than it is now, especially in the field of foreign policy, but he was a lousy campaigner, and it really hurt him.

[johnpressman]

I remember the election of 1976 well.  Several of you have made excellent points as to the dynamics of that year.  I have always been amazed how Ford, with the Nixon pardon an albatross around his neck,  after a bitter. closely-won floor fight for the nomination, and as a representative of a divided, shrinking minority Republican Party in shambles after Watergate; was LEADING in the polls untill he made his "Captive Nation" gaffe!  Had Ford not insisted that  "the Polish people do not consider themselves captives.." he would have been elected.  Carter made his own mistakes with the "lust in my heart" Playboy interview, but as a moderate/liberal Democrat from the South, he  had some innate advantages in 1976.

Had Reagan beat Ford, I feel that he would have lost to Carter. The nation was not ready for Reagan in 1976.  Thats not to say that he wouldn't have run again in 1980 like  Dewey or Stevenson, and, unlike them, won!