1976: Reagan vs. Carter

[Bomster]

Classic alternate election scenario, and one that came oh so close to happening. What would the electoral map look like? And also who are alternative veep selections for Reagan? His veep choice alienated conservatives at the convention.

[Sir Mohamed]

For some reason I think Reagan would have narrowly won. Carter may have won the NPV though.

BUT, he would have been a 1 term prez who loses in a landslide in 1980.



✓ Former Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA)/Senator Richard Schweiker (R-PA): 289 EVs.; 49.3%
Former Governor Jimmy Carter (D-GA)/Senator Walter Mondale (D-MN): 249 EVs.; 49.3%

[brucejoel99]

Carter successfully paints Reagan as an extremist in the Goldwater mold, & with Reagan leading a fractured GOP into the general after successfully primarying the incumbent, Carter picks up more-than-enough disgruntled Ford voters to ensure that movement conservatism all-but-dies before it can ever even take hold:


Former Governor Jimmy Carter (D-GA)/Senator Walter Mondale (D-MN): 440 EVs, 52.1%
Former Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA)/Senator Richard Schweiker (R-PA): 98 EVs, 46.0%

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

My prediction is based on Reagan going with liberal Republican Sen. Richard Schweicker (R-PA) as his running mate. 

People underestimated Reagan his whole career, but he never lost an election, save the 1976 primaries.  Even that one went to the convention.  A Reagan delegate requested that the VA delegation be polled so the whole convention could hear how undecided delegate Eliza Sprinkle voted (and she voted for Reagan). 

Ronald Reagan was the most conservative Republican nominee since Goldwater, but he had a sense of personal moderation that took the edges off that.  The nation was angry with Nixon, but the nation was also far more conservative then than it is now.  Reagan would have won, and he'd have been re-elected because he was a better leader than Carter.  Carter may have had a deeper intellect, but Reagan projected competence and strength; it was key to his success.  In tough times, people will follow a COMPETENT leader over an EMPATHIC leader 9 out of 10 times.

[Sir Mohamed]

Carter successfully paints Reagan as an extremist in the Goldwater mold, & with Reagan leading a fractured GOP into the general after successfully primarying the incumbent, Carter picks up more-than-enough disgruntled Ford voters to ensure that movement conservatism all-but-dies before it can ever even take hold:


Former Governor Jimmy Carter (D-GA)/Senator Walter Mondale (D-MN): 440 EVs, 52.1%
Former Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA)/Senator Richard Schweiker (R-PA): 98 EVs, 46.0%

Carter isn't winning CA. Even Ford won here, and it was Reagan's homestate.

[President Johnson]

The country wasn't ready for Reagan in 1976. He would have lost the general election. He would have turned out more conservatives, but unlike Ford didn't have the incumbency advantage. Even "outdoing" Carter with being an "outsider" wouldn't have worked.



✓ Former Governor James E. Carter (D-GA)/Senator Walter F. Mondale (D-MN): 335 EV. (51.12%)
Former Governor Ronald W. Reagan (R-CA)/Senator Richard S. Schweiker (R-PA): 203 EV. (46.89%)

[Chips]

My prediction is based on Reagan going with liberal Republican Sen. Richard Schweicker (R-PA) as his running mate. 

People underestimated Reagan his whole career, but he never lost an election, save the 1976 primaries.  Even that one went to the convention.  A Reagan delegate requested that the VA delegation be polled so the whole convention could hear how undecided delegate Eliza Sprinkle voted (and she voted for Reagan). 

Ronald Reagan was the most conservative Republican nominee since Goldwater, but he had a sense of personal moderation that took the edges off that.  The nation was angry with Nixon, but the nation was also far more conservative then than it is now.  Reagan would have won, and he'd have been re-elected because he was a better leader than Carter.  Carter may have had a deeper intellect, but Reagan projected competence and strength; it was key to his success.  In tough times, people will follow a COMPETENT leader over an EMPATHIC leader 9 out of 10 times.

Probably something like this.

[dw93]

I think Carter wins, the question is who does the GOP nominate in 1980 after a Reagan defeat in 1976? Is it Bush, Baker, Dole, or does Ford run again in 1980? Whoever it is defeats Carter.

[brucejoel99]

I think Carter wins, the question is who does the GOP nominate in 1980 after a Reagan defeat in 1976? Is it Bush, Baker, Dole, or does Ford run again in 1980? Whoever it is defeats Carter.

Eh, I don't think a former President comes back from a defeat in the primaries as an incumbent, regardless of whether or not the candidate who primaried them went on to lose what would've been considered a winnable election.

[President Johnson]

I think Carter wins, the question is who does the GOP nominate in 1980 after a Reagan defeat in 1976? Is it Bush, Baker, Dole, or does Ford run again in 1980? Whoever it is defeats Carter.

I think there would have been a chance Ford gets rehabilitated after Reagan's loss in the general election. He would definitely started off with an advantage. If nominated, he would have trounced Carter in the general.

[(no subject)]

If Reagan wins, despite the fantasies of the Republicans he would NOT win re-election in 1980 as that would mean the Republicans would have held the WH for sixteen straight years. Not happening.

Reagan and his goons left a whole community in a panic, abandoned by their government.

[Samof94]

If Reagan wins, despite the fantasies of the Republicans he would NOT win re-election in 1980 as that would mean the Republicans would have held the WH for sixteen straight years. Not happening.

Reagan and his goons left a whole community in a panic, abandoned by their government.

He’d also be president in a different decade, which gives him a different image. Who do the Dems run in 1980 if he wins?

[Alben Barkley]

Carter successfully paints Reagan as an extremist in the Goldwater mold, & with Reagan leading a fractured GOP into the general after successfully primarying the incumbent, Carter picks up more-than-enough disgruntled Ford voters to ensure that movement conservatism all-but-dies before it can ever even take hold:


Former Governor Jimmy Carter (D-GA)/Senator Walter Mondale (D-MN): 440 EVs, 52.1%
Former Governor Ronald Reagan (R-CA)/Senator Richard Schweiker (R-PA): 98 EVs, 46.0%

Ford only won Michigan because of the favorite son effect. There is no way Reagan wins it in this scenario, after just primarying Ford.

[Alben Barkley]

I think the map’s more like this:



Give or take a few states. MAYBE Reagan wins CA due to his own home state advantage. MAYBE a couple more marginal states for Carter like KS and ND don’t flip. (I do think VT does, as Reagan was a much worse fit for the state than Ford.) This is essentially his best case scenario, but it’s not as implausible as it may seem, as he actually came pretty close to winning all of those states, and likely never would have lost as much of his big lead against Reagan as he did against Ford.

The country was not ready for Reagan, and the GOP would have been bitterly divided after he just beat Ford. Carter would have won practically all moderates, and still presented himself as the fresh faced outsider more successfully. Would have been a Goldwater repeat. Reagan needed Carter to be seen as a failure before he could get the country to buy what he was selling. In hindsight he was lucky he lost the primary in 1976.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Reagan was really never Goldwater, he was always much more electable than Goldwater was and was liked by the establishment far more than Goldwater as well. 1966 actually proves this when Nixon backed Reagan in the GOP primary over the Rocky GOP candidate , Eisenhower mentored him then too and Reagan won a state Goldwater lost by 19 by 15 points.


Honestly I think this is the map




Whoever wins Ohio takes the presidency

[(no subject)]

"I'm from the government and I'm here to help" would have been welcome during the AIDS crisis but no...

[Gass3268]

Reagan winning and then going into the buzzsaw of the late 1970's would probably be the best way to permanently discredit the conservative movement for a generation. 

[Samof94]

Reagan winning and then going into the buzzsaw of the late 1970's would probably be the best way to permanently discredit the conservative movement for a generation. 

Indeed. Do one of the OTL 1996 candidates become President?

[Alben Barkley]

Reagan was really never Goldwater, he was always much more electable than Goldwater was and was liked by the establishment far more than Goldwater as well. 1966 actually proves this when Nixon backed Reagan in the GOP primary over the Rocky GOP candidate , Eisenhower mentored him then too and Reagan won a state Goldwater lost by 19 by 15 points.


Honestly I think this is the map




Whoever wins Ohio takes the presidency

I think it’s a major reach to give Reagan ALL the Western states, even WA/OR, in this scenario, even in his best case. And definitely a major reach to give him ALL of IA, IL, NH, NJ, VA, FL, OK, and TX. I stand by my map and repeat the sentiment that neither the GOP or the country was ready for Reagan in 1976, and he would have gone down pretty decisively had he been the nominee. GOP would have been split in two; there would have been a “Republicans for Carter” movement of disgruntled Ford supporters much like the “Democrats for Nixon” in 1972. Incumbency advantage would be lost. It would have been the humble outsider Carter against the flashy arch-conservative Reagan at a time the former was heavily favored.

[(no subject)]

The GOP will split into two factions and Reagan is all flash and no fire: He won't reunite them in time.