|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 06, 2020, 02:23:46 pm
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs?
  Past Election What-ifs (US) (Moderators: Babette d'Interlaken, Apocrypha)
  Democrats Runner up nominiee vs Republican Runner up nominiee
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Author Topic: Democrats Runner up nominiee vs Republican Runner up nominiee  (Read 9810 times)
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,530


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: January 11, 2015, 10:43:07 pm »
« edited: January 18, 2019, 03:13:16 pm by Old School Republican »

In every election since 1968 Runner up nominee from each party run versus each other with maps. In years where there the nominee won over 80 % of vote in primaries ( Republicans: 1972, 1984,2004) (Democrats: 1996, 2012) have the runner up from one primary face the actual nominiee .

1968: Rockerfeller vs Mccarthy


Rockerfell-297
Mccarthy-197
Wallace-53
1972: Nixon vs Henry M Jackson


Nixon-438
Jackson -100

1976: Reagan vs Mo Udall

Reagan 293
Udall 243

1980: Bush vs Kennedy


Bush 365
Kennedy 173
1984: Reagan vs Hart


Reagan 519
Hart 20

1988: Dole vs Jesse Jackson


Dole 531
Jackson 7

1992: Buchanan vs Jerry Brown


Brown 462
Buchanan 63
Perot 13

1996: Buchanan vs Clinton


Clinton 516
Buchanan 22

2000: Mccain vs Bradley


Mccain 314
Bradley 224

2004: Bush vs Edwards


Bush 296
Edwards 242

2008: Romney vs Clinton


Clinton 384
Romney 154

2012: Santorum vs Obama


Obama 383
Santorum 185
Logged
"'Oeps!' De blunders van Rick Perry Indicted"
DarthNader
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 484


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: January 11, 2015, 11:31:28 pm »

1992 should be Buchanan vs. Brown (Wiki says Bush only got 72% of the primary vote).
Logged
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,530


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2015, 12:19:57 am »

Ok fixed
Logged
Nichlemn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,925


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2015, 12:31:59 am »

Theoretically, Huckabee is #2 in 2008 (although his "runner up" status was mainly due to him staying in even when McCain was practically inevitable).
Logged
MyRescueKittehRocks
JohanusCalvinusLibertas
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,623
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2015, 05:20:15 pm »

Paul was runner up in 2012 not Santorum.
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,518
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2015, 05:45:55 pm »

Why do you have Rockefeller winning the south but losing New York? That's insane.
Logged
MATTROSE94
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,572
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -6.43

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: January 13, 2015, 01:18:25 pm »

Why do you have Rockefeller winning the south but losing New York? That's insane.
I agree with you as well. I think that Rockefeller would probably pick up New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maine, Connecticut and Michigan and wold probably lose every Southern state except Virginia and possibly Florida to George Wallace.
Logged
TNF
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,469


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: January 13, 2015, 07:37:45 pm »

2012



Pres. Barack Obama of Illinois and Vice Pres. Joe Biden of Delaware (Democratic): 434
Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin (Republican): 104

2008



Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York and Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware (Democratic Party): 362
Mitt Romney of Massachusetts and Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska (Republican Party): 176

2004



Pres. George W. Bush of Texas and Vice Pres. Dick Cheney of Wyoming (Republican Party): 267
Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina and Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts (Democratic Party): 271

2000



Bill Bradley of New Jersey and Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut (Democratic Party): 195
Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Dick Cheney of Wyoming (Republican Party): 343

1996



Pres. Bill Clinton of Arkansas and Vice Pres. Al Gore of Tennessee (Democratic Party): 508
Pat Buchanan of Virginia and Jack Kemp of New York (Republican Party): 30

1992



Pat Buchanan of Virginia and Vice Pres. Dan Quayle of Indiana (Republican): 135
Jerry Brown of California and Sen. Al Gore of Tennessee (Democratic): 133
Ross Perot of Texas and James Stockdale of California (Independent): 270
Logged
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,530


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: January 13, 2015, 08:32:57 pm »

Why do you have Rockefeller winning the south but losing New York? That's insane.

I fixed it and I forget about Wallace before.
Logged
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,530


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: January 13, 2015, 08:36:04 pm »

2012



Pres. Barack Obama of Illinois and Vice Pres. Joe Biden of Delaware (Democratic): 434
Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin (Republican): 104

2008



Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York and Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware (Democratic Party): 362
Mitt Romney of Massachusetts and Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska (Republican Party): 176

2004



Pres. George W. Bush of Texas and Vice Pres. Dick Cheney of Wyoming (Republican Party): 267
Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina and Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts (Democratic Party): 271

2000



Bill Bradley of New Jersey and Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut (Democratic Party): 195
Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Dick Cheney of Wyoming (Republican Party): 343

1996



Pres. Bill Clinton of Arkansas and Vice Pres. Al Gore of Tennessee (Democratic Party): 508
Pat Buchanan of Virginia and Jack Kemp of New York (Republican Party): 30

1992



Pat Buchanan of Virginia and Vice Pres. Dan Quayle of Indiana (Republican): 135
Jerry Brown of California and Sen. Al Gore of Tennessee (Democratic): 133
Ross Perot of Texas and James Stockdale of California (Independent): 270

How do you have Perot winning the Pacific coast over Jerry Brown
Logged
Türkisblau
H_Wallace
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,384
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: January 13, 2015, 09:05:38 pm »

TNF, can you explain why Edwards wins VA but loses NC? That doesn't make much sense to me. Also, it seems like you really wanted Perot to be pres. lol
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,518
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: January 13, 2015, 09:48:33 pm »

1952 -


Senator Robert Taft (R-OH)/Governor Earl Warren (R-CA) - 48.9%, 267 EV's
Senator Estes Kefauver (D-TN)/Governor W. Averell Harriman (D-NY) - 48.2%, 264 EV's


Logged
L.D. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,796
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: January 16, 2015, 11:40:24 pm »
« Edited: January 17, 2015, 11:47:02 am by L.D. Smith, Knight of Appalachia »

Here's my guess, running mates are not the same but complementary and 3rds are purple not green. And I'll have scenarios here just as I did concerning my own thread which pit the actual running mates against each other.

Part I: 1952-1960

1952: Taft vs Kefauver

With Truman declining to run for a second term, the race becomes wide-open. And despite skepticism from party bosses, maverick Senator Estes Kefauver manages this time to make it. In an effort to appease these bosses, Kefauver selects squeaky-clean freshman Governor Adlai Stevenson of Illinois.

Meanwhile on the other end, conservatives in the GOP manage to unite in reaction to Truman and his foreign policies and nominate the aging Senator Robert Taft of Ohio, who picks the fairly liberal Governor of California, Earl Warren as a ticket-balancer.



Senator Robert Taft (R-OH)/ Governor Earl Warren (R-CA): 282 EV, 49.2% PV
Senator Estes Kefauver (D-TN)/ Governor Adlai Stevenson (D-IL): 249 EV, 46.6% PV


Though the race is close, Taft does a much better job impressing upon the Northern elite and West Coast conservatives, which more than makes up for any gains in the Southwest by Kefauver

1956: Eisenhower vs Kefauver

Unfortunately, Taft dies in office...which leaves Warren in charge. But luckily for the conservative base, Warren declines to stay-on in favor of other political pursuits. Instead, war hero Dwight D. Eisenhower fills the void, and to appease the base and make a statement on civil rights, senior California Senator William Knowland is chosen.

Kefauver, bitter over his narrow loss, decides to run again. Trying to also make a statement on Civil Rights, he selects  Governor G. Mennen Williams of Michigan as running mate



General Dwight Eisenhower (R-PA)/ Senator William Knowland (R-CA): 391 EV, 57.8% PV
Senator Estes Kefauver (D-TN)/Governor G. Mennen Williams (D-MI): 140 EV, 41.9% PV

Ultimately he ends up hardly better than Stevenson IRL, doing slightly better in the South and retaining Michigan.

1960: Johnson vs Rockefeller

Unfortunately, popular as Eisenhower was, he also ended up kicking the bucket. This left Knowland in charge, which did not sit well with the moderates and liberals of the Republican party. Ultimately the non-conservatives rallied around Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller of New York. And after a heated primary and convention, Knowland was successfully replaced.

The Democrats also had a very scattered nomination process, between JFK, Humphrey, Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson of Texas, Smathers Senator Stuart Symington of Missouri, and Governor Adlai Stevenson of Illinois. But thanks to some wily tactics, Lyndon Johnson ended up taking the nomination.



Senator Lyndon Johnson (D-TX)/ Senator Hubert Humphrey (D-MN): 280 EV, 49.7% PV
Governor Nelson Rockefeller (R-NY)/Senator Everett Dirksen (R-IL): 257 EV, 49.6% PV

Ultimately thanks to a very skilled campaign, Johnson beats Rockefeller. Rockefeller however does give him a run by managing to hold onto California, Oregon, and the Northeast.
Logged
Nat. Sec. Council Member Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,331
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.68, S: 1.22

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: January 17, 2015, 01:14:32 am »

The Obama/Santorum predictions here are just funny.

For the first, if obama's winning AZ, MT, MO, IN, NC, and NE-2, he'd win GA as well. Not to mention that map assumes Santorum campaigns as poorly as Akin did, which is no sure bet. Under a typical scenario, I'd go with the 2008 map, but make georgia and Arizona 3 point Santorum wins instead of the mccain margin, make missouri a 4 point santorum win, and make iowa/colorado a lot closer due to heavy evangelical turnout.

For the second, the idea that LA, NE, NE-01, ND, or SD would ever vote for Obama is just silly. Enough said.
Logged
Nat. Sec. Council Member Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,331
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.68, S: 1.22

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: January 17, 2015, 01:27:16 am »

In pledged delegates, paul was third, in state wins he was fourth. Only reason he placed second at the convention was because Santorum and Gingrich told their delegates to vote for romney for party unity purposes.
Logged
Libertarian Socialist Dem
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 345
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: January 17, 2015, 03:17:27 am »

I can't see Brown doing that well in the south.
Logged
L.D. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,796
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: January 17, 2015, 11:44:54 am »
« Edited: January 17, 2015, 11:54:31 am by L.D. Smith, Knight of Appalachia »

Part II: 1964-1972

1964: Johnson vs Rockefeller Rematch

Not one to take defeat lying down, Rocky tries again. This time he tries to appease the right-wingers by selecting Senator John Tower of Texas.

Johnson changes nothing, continuing the Civil Rights drum.



Lyndon Johnson (D-TX)/Hubert Humphrey (D-MN): 313 EV, 51.2% PV
Nelson Rockefeller (R-NY)/ John Tower (R-TX): 225 EV, 47.7% PV

Ultimately, the move to replace Dirksen with Tower ends up backfiring. Ultimately Tower's "State's Rights" stances just replace many vital and liberal Northeastern states (and California) with an unprecedented grab of some Southern States and reclamation of Western states.

1968: Rockefeller vs McCarthy vs Wallace

With Vietnam going as it was IRL, and another sort of close loss that many strategists simply attributed to LNJ's muscle. Nelson Rockefeller decided yet again to go for it. Trying not to upset the Northeast this time, he picks the centre-right Spiro T. Agnew of Maryland

For the Democrats, it pretty much was the same mess IRL...except Hubert Humphrey was keen to sit this one out. This left it to a drawn out race between Senator Eugene McCarthy of Minnesota, Senator Robert F. Kennedy of New York, and Senator Edmund Muskie of Maine. RFK seemed to have the nomination in grasp,...until tragically, he was assassinated. This left the race to Muskie and McCarthy. Eventually a deal was made between the two that Muskie could be running mate if he stepped down and allowed McCarthy the nomination.

Meanwhile George Wallace of Alabama decided to contest integration and tossed himself into the ring, in hopes of being the kingmaker. For running mate, he chose Ezra Taft Benson in hopes of gaining a state or two outside the South and wooing over other conservative Republicans




Governor Nelson Rockefeller (R-NY)/Governor Spiro Agnew (R-MD): 300 EV,
Senator Eugene McCarthy (D-MN)/Senator Edmund Muskie (D-ME): 153 EV,
Governor George Wallace (AI-AL)/Fmr. Secretary of Agriculture Ezra Taft Benson (AI-UT): 85 EV, 18. 2% PV

Ultimately Rockefeller got what he wanted, not by doing so much of anything as simply painting Wallace and McCarthy as extremists. Most notable here is that he took less of the South (but got Texas) and that the Mormon states ended up being surprisingly competitive rather than quietly Republican.

1972: H. Jackson vs Nixon

Unfortunately, in spite of going most of his presidency with high approval ratings, Rocky was discovered to have had an affair and in spite of mostly handling the whole thing with more integrity than expected,...it didn't stop a coalition of bitter liberal Democrats and moralistic conservatives from ganging up and successfully impeaching him. As for Agnew, the tax evasion scandal still happened. So in 1971, SoS Richard Nixon succeeded Rockefeller and from there pretty much followed all the foreign policies he did IRL. He chose House Minority Leader Gerald Ford as running mate of the bat.

Reeling from 1968, and keen to find someone more palatable, the Democrats nominated populist neocon Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson. He in turn chose former Governor Terry Sanford of North Carolina.



President Richard Nixon (R-CA)/ House Minority Leader Gerald Ford (R-MI): 312 EV, 52.2% PV
Senator Henry Jackson (D-WA)/ Fmr. Governor Terry Sanford (D-NC): 226 EV, 46.9% PV

Ultimately, Nixon proves unstoppable on the foreign front and the real divide is on domestic policies. While liberals and older New Dealer Southerners are moved by the Jackson/Sanford rhetoric, ultimately it doesn't counter the Southern Strategy enough.
Logged
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,530


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: January 17, 2015, 02:27:11 pm »

Part II: 1964-1972

1964: Johnson vs Rockefeller Rematch

Not one to take defeat lying down, Rocky tries again. This time he tries to appease the right-wingers by selecting Senator John Tower of Texas.

Johnson changes nothing, continuing the Civil Rights drum.



Lyndon Johnson (D-TX)/Hubert Humphrey (D-MN): 313 EV, 51.2% PV
Nelson Rockefeller (R-NY)/ John Tower (R-TX): 225 EV, 47.7% PV

Ultimately, the move to replace Dirksen with Tower ends up backfiring. Ultimately Tower's "State's Rights" stances just replace many vital and liberal Northeastern states (and California) with an unprecedented grab of some Southern States and reclamation of Western states.

1968: Rockefeller vs McCarthy vs Wallace

With Vietnam going as it was IRL, and another sort of close loss that many strategists simply attributed to LNJ's muscle. Nelson Rockefeller decided yet again to go for it. Trying not to upset the Northeast this time, he picks the centre-right Spiro T. Agnew of Maryland

For the Democrats, it pretty much was the same mess IRL...except Hubert Humphrey was keen to sit this one out. This left it to a drawn out race between Senator Eugene McCarthy of Minnesota, Senator Robert F. Kennedy of New York, and Senator Edmund Muskie of Maine. RFK seemed to have the nomination in grasp,...until tragically, he was assassinated. This left the race to Muskie and McCarthy. Eventually a deal was made between the two that Muskie could be running mate if he stepped down and allowed McCarthy the nomination.

Meanwhile George Wallace of Alabama decided to contest integration and tossed himself into the ring, in hopes of being the kingmaker. For running mate, he chose Ezra Taft Benson in hopes of gaining a state or two outside the South and wooing over other conservative Republicans




Governor Nelson Rockefeller (R-NY)/Governor Spiro Agnew (R-MD): 300 EV,
Senator Eugene McCarthy (D-MN)/Senator Edmund Muskie (D-ME): 153 EV,
Governor George Wallace (AI-AL)/Fmr. Secretary of Agriculture Ezra Taft Benson (AI-UT): 85 EV, 18. 2% PV

Ultimately Rockefeller got what he wanted, not by doing so much of anything as simply painting Wallace and McCarthy as extremists. Most notable here is that he took less of the South (but got Texas) and that the Mormon states ended up being surprisingly competitive rather than quietly Republican.

1972: H. Jackson vs Nixon

Unfortunately, in spite of going most of his presidency with high approval ratings, Rocky was discovered to have had an affair and in spite of mostly handling the whole thing with more integrity than expected,...it didn't stop a coalition of bitter liberal Democrats and moralistic conservatives from ganging up and successfully impeaching him. As for Agnew, the tax evasion scandal still happened. So in 1971, SoS Richard Nixon succeeded Rockefeller and from there pretty much followed all the foreign policies he did IRL. He chose House Minority Leader Gerald Ford as running mate of the bat.

Reeling from 1968, and keen to find someone more palatable, the Democrats nominated populist neocon Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson. He in turn chose former Governor Terry Sanford of North Carolina.



President Richard Nixon (R-CA)/ House Minority Leader Gerald Ford (R-MI): 312 EV, 52.2% PV
Senator Henry Jackson (D-WA)/ Fmr. Governor Terry Sanford (D-NC): 226 EV, 46.9% PV

Ultimately, Nixon proves unstoppable on the foreign front and the real divide is on domestic policies. While liberals and older New Dealer Southerners are moved by the Jackson/Sanford rhetoric, ultimately it doesn't counter the Southern Strategy enough.


George Wallace and Henry M Jackson dont do as well as in those maps
Logged
L.D. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,796
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: January 17, 2015, 04:27:08 pm »

Part II: 1964-1972

1964: Johnson vs Rockefeller Rematch

Not one to take defeat lying down, Rocky tries again. This time he tries to appease the right-wingers by selecting Senator John Tower of Texas.

Johnson changes nothing, continuing the Civil Rights drum.



Lyndon Johnson (D-TX)/Hubert Humphrey (D-MN): 313 EV, 51.2% PV
Nelson Rockefeller (R-NY)/ John Tower (R-TX): 225 EV, 47.7% PV

Ultimately, the move to replace Dirksen with Tower ends up backfiring. Ultimately Tower's "State's Rights" stances just replace many vital and liberal Northeastern states (and California) with an unprecedented grab of some Southern States and reclamation of Western states.

1968: Rockefeller vs McCarthy vs Wallace

With Vietnam going as it was IRL, and another sort of close loss that many strategists simply attributed to LNJ's muscle. Nelson Rockefeller decided yet again to go for it. Trying not to upset the Northeast this time, he picks the centre-right Spiro T. Agnew of Maryland

For the Democrats, it pretty much was the same mess IRL...except Hubert Humphrey was keen to sit this one out. This left it to a drawn out race between Senator Eugene McCarthy of Minnesota, Senator Robert F. Kennedy of New York, and Senator Edmund Muskie of Maine. RFK seemed to have the nomination in grasp,...until tragically, he was assassinated. This left the race to Muskie and McCarthy. Eventually a deal was made between the two that Muskie could be running mate if he stepped down and allowed McCarthy the nomination.

Meanwhile George Wallace of Alabama decided to contest integration and tossed himself into the ring, in hopes of being the kingmaker. For running mate, he chose Ezra Taft Benson in hopes of gaining a state or two outside the South and wooing over other conservative Republicans




Governor Nelson Rockefeller (R-NY)/Governor Spiro Agnew (R-MD): 300 EV,
Senator Eugene McCarthy (D-MN)/Senator Edmund Muskie (D-ME): 153 EV,
Governor George Wallace (AI-AL)/Fmr. Secretary of Agriculture Ezra Taft Benson (AI-UT): 85 EV, 18. 2% PV

Ultimately Rockefeller got what he wanted, not by doing so much of anything as simply painting Wallace and McCarthy as extremists. Most notable here is that he took less of the South (but got Texas) and that the Mormon states ended up being surprisingly competitive rather than quietly Republican.

1972: H. Jackson vs Nixon

Unfortunately, in spite of going most of his presidency with high approval ratings, Rocky was discovered to have had an affair and in spite of mostly handling the whole thing with more integrity than expected,...it didn't stop a coalition of bitter liberal Democrats and moralistic conservatives from ganging up and successfully impeaching him. As for Agnew, the tax evasion scandal still happened. So in 1971, SoS Richard Nixon succeeded Rockefeller and from there pretty much followed all the foreign policies he did IRL. He chose House Minority Leader Gerald Ford as running mate of the bat.

Reeling from 1968, and keen to find someone more palatable, the Democrats nominated populist neocon Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson. He in turn chose former Governor Terry Sanford of North Carolina.



President Richard Nixon (R-CA)/ House Minority Leader Gerald Ford (R-MI): 312 EV, 52.2% PV
Senator Henry Jackson (D-WA)/ Fmr. Governor Terry Sanford (D-NC): 226 EV, 46.9% PV

Ultimately, Nixon proves unstoppable on the foreign front and the real divide is on domestic policies. While liberals and older New Dealer Southerners are moved by the Jackson/Sanford rhetoric, ultimately it doesn't counter the Southern Strategy enough.


George Wallace and Henry M Jackson don't do as well as in those maps

I admit 1972 Vermont was a stretch, but I figured Jackson's similar opposition to busing and better education focus would tip it and most of Rockefeller land to him.

And Nixon was rushed into office under this scenario, not almost-elected once and elected twice, this gives him less to work with.

As for Wallace, I figured in Benson's experience as SoA doing the same thing Johnson's Senate Experience did for JFK.

And then there's the fact that McCarthy is far more partisan than Humphrey IRL.
Logged
L.D. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,796
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: January 17, 2015, 11:32:42 pm »
« Edited: February 07, 2015, 05:04:15 pm by L.D. Smith, Knight of Appalachia »

Now for Part III, 1976-1984

1976: Reagan vs Brown

Unfortunately, Nixon got caught in Watergate here as well, and Gerald Ford still pardoned him. And given what happened to Nelson Rockefeller and Spiro Agnew, even with Ford's efforts, faith in the GOP and the presidency was all but tarnished. Only a conservative challenge from Ronald Reagan of California was willing to shake things up, and even then, he only narrowly defeated Ford by trumping "Washington outsider"-ness. To appease bitter Ford supporters, he selects Senator Richard Schweiker of Pennsylvania.

However, what should've been a slam dunk for Democrats ended up being a clown-car fight between Northern liberals and New-South moderates. In the end, it was half-term Governor Edmund "Jerry" Brown of California who eventually managed the nomination. In an attempt to reign in the South and have a foreign policy leg, he picks Senator Ernst Hollings of South Carolina



Former Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA)/ Senator Richard Schweiker (R-PA): 369 EV, 54.4% PV
Governor Edmund "Jerry" Brown (D-CA)/ Senator Ernst Hollings (D-SC): 169 EV, 43.8% PV

Unfortunately for Brown, Reagan does use Brown's "youth and inexperience" in his campaign, and manages to paint him as a bit of a Moonbeamer, which Brown never does shake off. Brown attempts to point out the failures of the last two presidents and manages to woo some farmers with his economic policies,...but ultimately most expected him to wait.


1980: Kennedy vs Bush

However Reagan ends up in myriad of scandals, and his detractors end up using his age against him. His "Reaganomics" end up being more disastrous than Carter IRL, and ultimately as if the 70's GOP here wasn't seriously bizarre enough, Reagan ends up primaried out by the more moderate Former CIA Director George H.W. Bush of Texas. Bush chooses Howard Baker of Tennessee as running mate.

The Democrats end up peacefully revolving around Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, who chooses Former Governor Jimmy Carter of Georgia in a sort of "team of rivals truce" sort of thing.



Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA)/ Fmr. Governor Jimmy Carter (D-GA): 329 EV, 51.9% PV
Fmr. CIA Director George HW Bush (R-TX)/ Senator Howard Baker (R-TN): 209 EV, 48.2% PV

Ultimately, the voters end of fatigued of Republicans and more wowed by Kennedy's outspoken nature over Bush's guarded one.


1984: Reagan vs Hart

Unfortunately, Kennedy ended up assassinated in early 1981, which ended up turning the administration to Carter. However just like Carter IRL, ultimately the task was far over his head and he narrowly lost the primaries to Senator Gary "New Ideas" Hart of Colorado. Hart ended up choosing liberal senator Alan Cranston of California.

Reagan in a  Grover Cleveland "miss-me-now?" sort of way managed to defeat Bush for nomination. And this time, he had no baggage to deal with. He also selects Bush for a "team of rivals" sort of thing.



Fmr. President Ronald Reagan (R-CA)/ Fmr. CIA Director George HW Bush (R-TX): 496 EV, 56.2% PV
Senator Gary Hart (D-CO)/ Senator Alan Cranston (D-CA): 42 EV, 42.4% PV

So yeah, Reagan manages to comeback and win big...mostly riding on Carter's unpopularity and Hart failing to "have much beef" with his ideas. Also Cranston ended being a liability rather than help. Whereas Bush ended up being an excellent choice for Reagan.


Logged
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,530


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: January 18, 2015, 12:12:49 am »

My maps werent timeline based as yours were
Logged
L.D. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,796
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: January 18, 2015, 12:43:49 am »

My maps werent timeline based as yours were

Respectable enough, but I cannot completely divorce the two given that for the most part (just as I did not when I supposed the Running Mates were the candidates), it would take ridiculously different circumstances for these runner-ups to beat the IRL nominees [especially in cases like Pat Buchanan or Jesse Jackson]...this is especially the case after 1968 elections, given how polarized everything became with Nixon and The Southern Strategy.

Logged
Cаквояжник
CELTICEMPIRE
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,811
Botswana


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: January 18, 2015, 03:20:44 pm »

2012 should be Rick Santorum v Randall Terry.
Logged
Old School Republican
Computer89
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,530


Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -0.10

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: January 18, 2015, 05:59:12 pm »

2012 should be Rick Santorum v Randall Terry.

Obama won 89 % of the primary vote
Logged
L.D. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,796
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: January 18, 2015, 11:05:56 pm »
« Edited: February 07, 2015, 05:05:23 pm by L.D. Smith, Knight of Appalachia »

I'll be putting up the maps of Part IV which covers from Bush Sr up to Gore/Bush IRL. Here are the nominees here

1988: Dole vs. Jackson

Given Reagan is term limited still, even with a Grover Cleveland-esque run. The GOP is an open field, and while the favorite appears to be Former President and Vice President George H.W. Bush, ultimately he gaffes up and runs an "I don't care much but I'm inevitable" campaign, which causes him to lose everything after New Hampshire. Enter Senator Bob Dole of Kansas promising a "gentler nation". He chooses Congressman Jack Kemp of New York for VP

For the Democrats, the field is even more contentious, with Walter Mondale, Al Gore, Michael Dukakis, Joe Biden, and Jesse Jackson all vying for it. Eventually ala Jimmy Carter, Jackson gets he delegate count by grassroots as the other four cause an establishment fight. Gore is selected to unify the party.



 Senator Robert Dole (KS)/ Congressman Jack Kemp: 349 EV, 51.7% PV
Reverend Jesse Jackson (IL)/Senator Al Gore (TN): 189 EV, 46.2% PV

Jackson manages to hit a good chord with the liberal base and even get a lot moderates...until his "hymie-town" remark, and a few other gaffes here and there, which of course Senator Dole plays up. Meanwhile Dole manages to get a lot of moderate appeal. Ultimately, Jackson lands the Northeast and select Midwest and that's it.

1992: Brown vs Buchanan vs Perot

Dole ends up alienating the conservative base enough for Televangelist challenger Pat Buchanan to win in a narrow upset in the primaries. Buchanan chooses Senator Jesse Helms as VP

Challenger Jerry Brown wins after California solidly votes for him in June over Bob Kerrey. Paul Tsongas and Bill CLinton were challengers that dropped early. Brown chooses Jesse Jackson

And Businessman H. Ross Perot



Fmr. Governor  Edmund G. "Jerry" Brown (CA)/Reverend Jesse Jackson (IL): 314 EV, 41.9% PV
Pat Buchanan (VA)/ Senator Jesse Helms (NC): 136 EV, 29. 2% PV
H. Ross Perot (TX)/ Vice Admiral Admiral James Stockdale (CA): 88 EV, 28.9% PV

In the end, Brown is the one who comes off the most qualified and sanest, and in the end Buchanan and Perot simply swapped votes from each other, Buchanan took the South and Perot the Mountain West.

1996: Clinton vs Buchanan

Ross Perot does not try again this time.

 More surprising is Jerry Brown's decline to run another term, in favor of going back to local politics. This of course opens the field up again, with  VP  Jesse Jackson attempting to get support from the Brown coalition,and Former Governor Bill Clinton running a moderate campaign. Clinton takes the lead, and selects the centrist Senator Bob Kerrey of Nebraska for running mate.

With Clinton running, most establishment Republicans sit out the election. Grassroot dark horses do not, and ultimately they go with Pat Buchanan again. Selected for running mate is Elizabeth Dole for credit building.


 

Fmr. Governor Bill Clinton (AR)/ Senator Bob Kerrey (NE): 415 EV, 55.0% PV
Pat Buchanan (VA)/Fmr. Sec. of Transportation Elizabeth Dole (DC): 123 EV, 44.3% PV


2000: McCain vs Bradley

Eventually, the alleged scandals catch up to President Clinton and get him impeached, leaving Blue Dog Kerrey to hold down the White House, which does not sit well with liberals. So just like '92 flipped, Bill Bradley wins in a narrow upset. He chooses John Kerry, a fellow liberal.

The GOP nominate "maverick" John McCain, who selects George W. Bush as an olive branch to the conservatives.



Senator John McCain (AZ)/ George W. Bush (TX): 322 EV, 52.2%
Fmr. Senator Bill Bradley (NJ)/ Senator John Kerry: 216 EV, 46.9%
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines