1976 primaries without Watergate

[darklordoftech]

Do Reagan and Carter run? Who gets the nominations?

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Sgt Shriver or Edward Kennedy run off the back of RFK

[brucejoel99]

If you look at presidential politics after 1952, there's a tendency for the pendulum to consistently swing back & forth between the 2 parties. With the exception of 1980, one party will serve 8 years, then the other party serves 8 (Eisenhower 1953-1961, JFK/LBJ 1961-1969, Nixon/Ford 1969-1977, Carter 1977-1981, Reagan-Bush 1981-1993, Clinton 1993-2001, W. 2001-2009, Obama 2009-2017, Trump 2017-present). Reagan's victory over Carter in 1980 is the only election that disrupts this pattern (though Trump's potential defeat next year could very well be the second), with Carter serving 4 & Reagan/Bush serving 12.

Thus, I think the Democrats have the edge in 1976, regardless of who the Republican nominee is. (I'm not saying that a Democratic win is a certainty. I just think that the Democrats would have the edge.)

Assuming Agnew is still gone because of bribery/tax evasion, there's no clear-cut Republican front runner. Nixon's candidate would've been John Connally. Read anything about Nixon, & you'll find that he was absolutely mesmerized by Connally. There's no doubt that Nixon would've preferred Connally to Reagan or anybody else. If Nixon was still popular in 1975 & 1976, then he'd have used his power to push Connally every chance he had. The question is, would Republicans go for a man who was a Democrat as recently as 1973? But hey, it worked for Willkie in 1940, after all.

If it's not Connally, then Reagan is a strong candidate for the nomination. But I don't know if Reagan could win a national election in 1976. Reagan had a reputation in 1976 as being a conservative in the Goldwater mold. Sure, he won in 1980. But in 1980, he was a challenger, able to go on the offensive against a very unpopular Democratic incumbent during a time of inflation & a hostage crisis. He wouldn't have those advantages in 1976. He'd be a perceived Goldwater conservative having to defend the mixed record of an outgoing Republican administration, with his Democratic opponent going on the offensive. Reagan became very popular later, but 1976 wasn't 1980. Of course, if the Democrats had nominated a lousy candidate (which is always possible), then Reagan could've won after all.

If not Connally or Reagan, then the GOP nominee could be somebody like Rockefeller, Percy, Mathias, or maybe a Nixon cabinet member or Republican governor. With Agnew gone & Ford not running, you probably have 7 or 8 candidates, making it a free-for-all.

And it's definitely a free-for-all among the Democrats. I agree that Carter probably wouldn't have been the Democratic nominee. His honest outsider image wouldn't have resonated as much without Watergate. The same people run: Carter, Udall, Jackson, Shriver, Bayh, Brown, Church, etc. Maybe Mondale considers staying at nicer hotels than the Holiday Inn & stays in the race. Maybe people who didn't run in real life jump in after all, like Kennedy or Humphrey (though if Humphrey runs, then Mondale doesn't).

Bottom line: if the Democrats & Republicans nominate candidates roughly even in terms of quality, then I give the Democrats the edge, because of the natural swing of the political pendulum. If one party nominates a lousy candidate, then the other wins.