Did Jimmy Carter ever have a realistic chance in 1980?

[Cyrusman]

Was there any point close to Election Day or through the campaign in which he had a legit chance to win or was he doomed from the start?

[dw93]

The hostage crisis gave him an opening, as shown by the rally around the flag he got early on in the crisis, but as the crisis dragged on and especially after Eagle claw failed, he became doomed. Absent the crisis however, Carter might not have even been renominated, in which case Ted Kennedy would've been the one taking the fall to Reagan, abet by a narrower margin.

[Alben Barkley]

It would have probably taken a perfect storm of Ted Kennedy not running (or at least being more gracious in defeat), the hostage crisis being resolved (bonus points if it’s because Operation Eagle Claw succeeds), Anderson not running and/or dropping out and endorsing Carter, Reagan not winning the debate (at least not decisively), and ideally the economy showing signs of recovery.

Carter’s campaign also could have been better. They tried to go negative and paint Reagan as an extremist, and I can see why they thought that would work since it did against Goldwater. Problem was Reagan was far more charismatic and good at lying about his record to present himself as more moderate than he actually was (such as pretending he never opposed Medicare), unlike Goldwater who openly embraced being called an extremist. Reagan’s optimistic and sunny demeanor also appealed more to the public at a time of “malaise” than the dour and pragmatic Carter.

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

The hostage crisis gave him an opening, as shown by the rally around the flag he got early on in the crisis, but as the crisis dragged on and especially after Eagle claw failed, he became doomed. Absent the crisis however, Carter might not have even been renominated, in which case Ted Kennedy would've been the one taking the fall to Reagan, abet by a narrower margin.

Ted Kennedy would likely have beaten Jimmy Carter in the 1980 Democratic primary without the rally around flag effect in early 1980. Carter was down in the primary polls and his approval rating was terrible in 1979.

[junior chįmp]

No. Incumbent with recession = its over

[Mr. Smith]

He did have a chance, but it lied on holding The South and just a few Midwestern states...which would've been doable if the whole Hostage Crisis had turned out better.

Also the luck of a has-been opponent or boring guy such as Gerald Ford or George Bush...and even then.

But I really doubt he was ever going to win the popular vote.

[Pericles]

The hostage crisis gave him an opening, as shown by the rally around the flag he got early on in the crisis, but as the crisis dragged on and especially after Eagle claw failed, he became doomed. Absent the crisis however, Carter might not have even been renominated, in which case Ted Kennedy would've been the one taking the fall to Reagan, abet by a narrower margin.

Ted Kennedy would likely have beaten Jimmy Carter in the 1980 Democratic primary without the rally around flag effect in early 1980. Carter was down in the primary polls and his approval rating was terrible in 1979.

Maybe, though Kennedy ran a weak campaign and was already losing momentum, so maybe Carter would have come from behind and beaten him anyway. Kennedy did decently in the late states but so did Carter, and his Southern advantage would have been formidable in any event.

The hostage crisis was actually an opportunity for Carter. 1980 was mainly about the economy though, and it may be that Carter screwed himself the moment he appointed Volcker. Volcker's monetarist policy, regardless of the long-term merits, made it very difficult for an incumbent to win.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The hostage crisis gave him an opening, as shown by the rally around the flag he got early on in the crisis, but as the crisis dragged on and especially after Eagle claw failed, he became doomed. Absent the crisis however, Carter might not have even been renominated, in which case Ted Kennedy would've been the one taking the fall to Reagan, abet by a narrower margin.

Ted Kennedy would likely have beaten Jimmy Carter in the 1980 Democratic primary without the rally around flag effect in early 1980. Carter was down in the primary polls and his approval rating was terrible in 1979.

Maybe, though Kennedy ran a weak campaign and was already losing momentum, so maybe Carter would have come from behind and beaten him anyway. Kennedy did decently in the late states but so did Carter, and his Southern advantage would have been formidable in any event.

The hostage crisis was actually an opportunity for Carter. 1980 was mainly about the economy though, and it may be that Carter screwed himself the moment he appointed Volcker. Volcker's monetarist policy, regardless of the long-term merits, made it very difficult for an incumbent to win.

I believe inflation was a bigger problem for Carter than unemployment. In 1982 NBC actually points out that while unemployment had gone up from 1980 the economy didn't effect the GOP as much because more people got affected by double-digit inflation than double-digit unemployment

[Pericles]

The hostage crisis gave him an opening, as shown by the rally around the flag he got early on in the crisis, but as the crisis dragged on and especially after Eagle claw failed, he became doomed. Absent the crisis however, Carter might not have even been renominated, in which case Ted Kennedy would've been the one taking the fall to Reagan, abet by a narrower margin.

Ted Kennedy would likely have beaten Jimmy Carter in the 1980 Democratic primary without the rally around flag effect in early 1980. Carter was down in the primary polls and his approval rating was terrible in 1979.

Maybe, though Kennedy ran a weak campaign and was already losing momentum, so maybe Carter would have come from behind and beaten him anyway. Kennedy did decently in the late states but so did Carter, and his Southern advantage would have been formidable in any event.

The hostage crisis was actually an opportunity for Carter. 1980 was mainly about the economy though, and it may be that Carter screwed himself the moment he appointed Volcker. Volcker's monetarist policy, regardless of the long-term merits, made it very difficult for an incumbent to win.

I believe inflation was a bigger problem for Carter than unemployment. In 1982 NBC actually points out that while unemployment had gone up from 1980 the economy didn't effect the GOP as much because more people got affected by double-digit inflation than double-digit unemployment

Except inflation was still really high in 1980, but unemployment was also surging and rising pretty quickly.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The hostage crisis gave him an opening, as shown by the rally around the flag he got early on in the crisis, but as the crisis dragged on and especially after Eagle claw failed, he became doomed. Absent the crisis however, Carter might not have even been renominated, in which case Ted Kennedy would've been the one taking the fall to Reagan, abet by a narrower margin.

Ted Kennedy would likely have beaten Jimmy Carter in the 1980 Democratic primary without the rally around flag effect in early 1980. Carter was down in the primary polls and his approval rating was terrible in 1979.

Maybe, though Kennedy ran a weak campaign and was already losing momentum, so maybe Carter would have come from behind and beaten him anyway. Kennedy did decently in the late states but so did Carter, and his Southern advantage would have been formidable in any event.

The hostage crisis was actually an opportunity for Carter. 1980 was mainly about the economy though, and it may be that Carter screwed himself the moment he appointed Volcker. Volcker's monetarist policy, regardless of the long-term merits, made it very difficult for an incumbent to win.

I believe inflation was a bigger problem for Carter than unemployment. In 1982 NBC actually points out that while unemployment had gone up from 1980 the economy didn't effect the GOP as much because more people got affected by double-digit inflation than double-digit unemployment

Except inflation was still really high in 1980, but unemployment was also surging and rising pretty quickly.

Sure , I could see Carter losing in a close election vs in a landslide but this is the best possible performance I can see Carter doing.

[Alben Barkley]

The hostage crisis gave him an opening, as shown by the rally around the flag he got early on in the crisis, but as the crisis dragged on and especially after Eagle claw failed, he became doomed. Absent the crisis however, Carter might not have even been renominated, in which case Ted Kennedy would've been the one taking the fall to Reagan, abet by a narrower margin.

Ted Kennedy would likely have beaten Jimmy Carter in the 1980 Democratic primary without the rally around flag effect in early 1980. Carter was down in the primary polls and his approval rating was terrible in 1979.

Maybe, though Kennedy ran a weak campaign and was already losing momentum, so maybe Carter would have come from behind and beaten him anyway. Kennedy did decently in the late states but so did Carter, and his Southern advantage would have been formidable in any event.

The hostage crisis was actually an opportunity for Carter. 1980 was mainly about the economy though, and it may be that Carter screwed himself the moment he appointed Volcker. Volcker's monetarist policy, regardless of the long-term merits, made it very difficult for an incumbent to win.

I believe inflation was a bigger problem for Carter than unemployment. In 1982 NBC actually points out that while unemployment had gone up from 1980 the economy didn't effect the GOP as much because more people got affected by double-digit inflation than double-digit unemployment

Except inflation was still really high in 1980, but unemployment was also surging and rising pretty quickly.

Sure , I could see Carter losing in a close election vs in a landslide but this is the best possible performance I can see Carter doing.

Carter lost Kentucky by 1.46 points, considerably less than several other states you flipped and 8 points to the left of the nation.

The idea it wasn't in play for him in his best case scenario is absolutely absurd. It would have been one of the first states to flip if he did even slightly better, even if he still lost badly.

I'm honestly not sure if this was just an oversight (hopefully so) or if you have some bizarre reason for thinking Carter could flip all those other states but not KY, but in any case it's just plain wrong.

I also think in his absolute best case scenario, Carter could have won outright ("easiest" path probably being through Illinois), but that's another story.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The hostage crisis gave him an opening, as shown by the rally around the flag he got early on in the crisis, but as the crisis dragged on and especially after Eagle claw failed, he became doomed. Absent the crisis however, Carter might not have even been renominated, in which case Ted Kennedy would've been the one taking the fall to Reagan, abet by a narrower margin.

Ted Kennedy would likely have beaten Jimmy Carter in the 1980 Democratic primary without the rally around flag effect in early 1980. Carter was down in the primary polls and his approval rating was terrible in 1979.

Maybe, though Kennedy ran a weak campaign and was already losing momentum, so maybe Carter would have come from behind and beaten him anyway. Kennedy did decently in the late states but so did Carter, and his Southern advantage would have been formidable in any event.

The hostage crisis was actually an opportunity for Carter. 1980 was mainly about the economy though, and it may be that Carter screwed himself the moment he appointed Volcker. Volcker's monetarist policy, regardless of the long-term merits, made it very difficult for an incumbent to win.

I believe inflation was a bigger problem for Carter than unemployment. In 1982 NBC actually points out that while unemployment had gone up from 1980 the economy didn't effect the GOP as much because more people got affected by double-digit inflation than double-digit unemployment

Except inflation was still really high in 1980, but unemployment was also surging and rising pretty quickly.

Sure , I could see Carter losing in a close election vs in a landslide but this is the best possible performance I can see Carter doing.

Carter lost Kentucky by 1.46 points, considerably less than several other states you flipped and 8 points to the left of the nation.

The idea it wasn't in play for him in his best case scenario is absolutely absurd. It would have been one of the first states to flip if he did even slightly better, even if he still lost badly.

I'm honestly not sure if this was just an oversight (hopefully so) or if you have some bizarre reason for thinking Carter could flip all those other states but not KY, but in any case it's just plain wrong.

I also think in his absolute best case scenario, Carter could have won outright ("easiest" path probably being through Illinois), but that's another story.

It was an error and I have fixed it

[Podgy the Bear]

Carter had closed the gap substantially with Reagan following the DNC in August 1980.  In hindsight, it was a bad convention for Carter (Ted Kennedy stuck it to Carter on several occasions), but the press coverage of the DNC was quite heavy in 1980, and overall it was largely favorable.  By Labor Day, Carter and Reagan were running close to even.

In fact, Reagan was only willing to accept a two man debate with Carter in mid-October because general polling plus Reagan's internal polling showed Carter with a small PV lead.  Of course, we know that turned out to be an excellent decision by the Reagan campaign.

On the electoral front, OSRs map is reasonably accurate.  Carter was hoping to retake most of the South (and he did come close except in FL, TX, and VA) and he hoped to get a lot of union support to win MI.   

Carter's team felt they had a chance in WA and OR (which would have meant overall victory if he won them), and those states were the last two stops of the campaign.  Carter lost both states by considerable margins, but the Anderson vote was quite heavy and Reagan was held to below 50 percent.  Carter flew back from Seattle that night to Plains, and it was on the flight that he learned from pollster Pat Caddell that he was going to lose badly.

Carter had too many forces going against him, and it was going to be very difficult to win re-election.  But his inability or unwillingness to reconcile with Kennedy in any significant manner or to bridge any type of relationship with John Anderson supporters made the defeat that much worse.   He could have made the margin 4 or 5 points (rather than 10), and that would easily saved a lot of House and Senate seats and made Reagan's agenda much harder to implement.