1976 No Watergate
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 24, 2024, 07:32:31 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs? (Moderator: Dereich)
  1976 No Watergate
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: 1976 No Watergate  (Read 893 times)
ReaganLimbaugh
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 357
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: March 31, 2024, 05:16:16 PM »

How does 1976 go if no Watergate or it is buried 10000 feet below ground (non issue).  Under this scenario Nixon has a mediocre run from 1974 to 1976 and the North Vietnamese actually recognize the Paris accords.

Who wins the Democrat nomination.....how does the primary go?  How is the GOP side different than in real life?

Your thoughts???
Logged
wnwnwn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,522
Peru


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: March 31, 2024, 05:47:42 PM »

Reagan would had probably won the GOP primaries.
On this particular scenario, maybe Church would had won the democrat primaries.
Logged
Benjamin Frank 2.0
Frank 2.0
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,062
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: March 31, 2024, 05:48:20 PM »

Would Hubert Humphrey or Teddy Kennedy have run for the Democratic nomination in this scenario?

Otherwise, the profile of the remaining Democrats drops off significantly. However, I think it's a bit hard to imagine this counterfactual because key Democrats profiles were raised due to Watergate (like Jimmy Carter and Mo Udall.) What would have been the main issues if not for Watergate?

Logged
Benjamin Frank 2.0
Frank 2.0
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,062
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: March 31, 2024, 05:49:47 PM »

Reagan would had probably won the GOP primaries.
On this particular scenario, maybe Church would had won the democrat primaries.

Makes sense since the hearings on Cointrelpro/Operation Chaos weren't related to Watergate.
Logged
Brother Jonathan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,030


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: March 31, 2024, 06:51:30 PM »

Does Agnew still resign/have his corruption issues? If not, he'd probably be favored for the Republican nomination being the Vice President and having a strong connection to the base. Would be a crowded field in any event, regardless of if the VP was Agnew or Ford or someone else. Reagan probably runs, as well as other conservatives like maybe John Connally. Without Ford as President a lot more room for moderates like Charles Percy and Howard Baker as well. Assuming Agnew was out, I would think of that group Reagan would be the most likely nominee.
Logged
Schiff for Senate
CentristRepublican
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,247
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: March 31, 2024, 10:17:45 PM »

Does Agnew still resign/have his corruption issues? If not, he'd probably be favored for the Republican nomination being the Vice President and having a strong connection to the base. Would be a crowded field in any event, regardless of if the VP was Agnew or Ford or someone else. Reagan probably runs, as well as other conservatives like maybe John Connally. Without Ford as President a lot more room for moderates like Charles Percy and Howard Baker as well. Assuming Agnew was out, I would think of that group Reagan would be the most likely nominee.

I think Reagan would beat out even VP Agnew or VP Ford, given that he performed respectably against President Ford irl.
Logged
Brother Jonathan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,030


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: April 01, 2024, 07:49:36 AM »

Does Agnew still resign/have his corruption issues? If not, he'd probably be favored for the Republican nomination being the Vice President and having a strong connection to the base. Would be a crowded field in any event, regardless of if the VP was Agnew or Ford or someone else. Reagan probably runs, as well as other conservatives like maybe John Connally. Without Ford as President a lot more room for moderates like Charles Percy and Howard Baker as well. Assuming Agnew was out, I would think of that group Reagan would be the most likely nominee.

I think Reagan would beat out even VP Agnew or VP Ford, given that he performed respectably against President Ford irl.

I agree on Ford, certainly, but Agnew was seen as being on the right of the party and was something of a darling in those circles, so I think he would probably undercut some of Reagan's support. That being said he also had a lot of other faults that probably hurt him so I think it remains competitive no matter what.
Logged
Prez_zf
Rookie
**
Posts: 84
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: April 02, 2024, 09:38:51 AM »

In my view, Connally probably wins the nomination, defeating Mathias or Anderson. As for the Dems, Mo Udall might win. The election would come down to the wire.
Logged
ReaganLimbaugh
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 357
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: April 02, 2024, 06:26:29 PM »

Yes, Agnew still resigns.
Logged
ReaganLimbaugh
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 357
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: April 02, 2024, 06:27:16 PM »

Hubert no, Kennedy maybe.

Logged
Brother Jonathan
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,030


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: April 02, 2024, 10:44:11 PM »


Yeah, in that case Reagan for the Republican, though maybe more conservatives would be in the primary and complicate his path a bit, but that didn't really impact him in 1980 all that much.
Logged
katelyn.a.paulie
Newbie
*
Posts: 14
Australia
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: April 05, 2024, 05:28:56 PM »

How does 1977-81 Reagan handle the fall of the Shah and the trouble in Afghanistan?
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,191
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: April 05, 2024, 08:52:40 PM »

Probably U.S. Senator Scoop Jackson v. VP Spiro Agnew or Governor Ronald Reagan...maybe Senator Bob Dole.
Logged
ClassicElectionEnthusiast
Rookie
**
Posts: 154
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: April 07, 2024, 12:18:37 PM »

Reagan would had probably won the GOP primaries.
On this particular scenario, maybe Church would had won the democrat primaries.

Makes sense since the hearings on Cointrelpro/Operation Chaos weren't related to Watergate.

I'm curious as to how much with regards to COINTELPRO and the other CIA/FBI illegal activities would have come to light had it not been for Watergate?
Logged
Benjamin Frank 2.0
Frank 2.0
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,062
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: April 07, 2024, 01:03:47 PM »
« Edited: April 07, 2024, 04:38:53 PM by Benjamin Frank 2.0 »

Reagan would had probably won the GOP primaries.
On this particular scenario, maybe Church would had won the democrat primaries.

Makes sense since the hearings on Cointrelpro/Operation Chaos weren't related to Watergate.

I'm curious as to how much with regards to COINTELPRO and the other CIA/FBI illegal activities would have come to light had it not been for Watergate?

It might have been due to other Nixon related activity, but the discovery of COINTELPRO (and Operation Chaos/MK Ultra) occurred before the Watergate break-in (June 1972.)

The Citizens' Commission the Investigate the FBI broke into the Pennsylvania  FBI office sometime in 1971.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens%27_Commission_to_Investigate_the_FBI

Edit to add: I'm sure the direct antecedent to 'The Citizens' Commission to Investigate the FBI' was the release of the Pentagon Papers, not Watergate.

Of course, it could also have been Nixon's reaction to the release of the Pentagon Papers, which was to break into Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrists' office. I'm not sure when that became public knowledge though.


Logged
Benjamin Frank 2.0
Frank 2.0
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,062
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: April 07, 2024, 01:06:11 PM »
« Edited: April 07, 2024, 01:13:35 PM by Benjamin Frank 2.0 »

Probably U.S. Senator Scoop Jackson v. VP Spiro Agnew or Governor Ronald Reagan...maybe Senator Bob Dole.

Senator Scoop Jackson is interesting given that I think it was generally regarded even at that time that the inflation of the 1970s (starting in 1966) was sparked by LBJ's Guns and Butter policies and Scoop Jackson was Guns and Butter multiplied.

Liberal Walter Mondale had no problem with that in 1984 because he promised to raise taxes (which probably hurt him in the general election) and he had been Vice President under Carter's austerity budgets (relative to Reagan.)

However, for instance, liberal Illinois Senator Paul Simon's campaign was ended by his inability to answer how he'd pay for all his program spending in 1988.

I suspect that Scoop Jackson would ultimately have suffered the same fate in this scenario.
Logged
katelyn.a.paulie
Newbie
*
Posts: 14
Australia
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: April 07, 2024, 01:50:05 PM »

Richard Helms et al will still likely destroy most of the evidence even without Watergate.
Logged
President Johnson
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,875
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.70


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: April 07, 2024, 02:14:32 PM »

In my view, Connally probably wins the nomination, defeating Mathias or Anderson. As for the Dems, Mo Udall might win. The election would come down to the wire.

Agreed, this is the most likely scenario in my view as well. I think Connally ends up winning, but loses in a landslide in 1980.



✓ Former Treasury Secretary John Connally (R-TX)/Senator Paul Laxalt (R-NV): 294 EV. (49.77%)
Representative Mo Udall (D-AZ)/Governor James E. Carter (D-GA): 244 EV. (48.06%)
Logged
Benjamin Frank 2.0
Frank 2.0
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,062
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: April 07, 2024, 04:42:56 PM »

Richard Helms et al will still likely destroy most of the evidence even without Watergate.

This is kind of interesting, but I don't know if it means anything. There are two sayings related to this
1.Every document has a cousin
2.Every document is in triplicate.

So, in boxes all over the country if not the world, there are likely Operation Chaos/MK Ultra documents just waiting to be discovered.
Logged
katelyn.a.paulie
Newbie
*
Posts: 14
Australia
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: April 07, 2024, 07:34:38 PM »

Richard Helms et al will still likely destroy most of the evidence even without Watergate.

This is kind of interesting, but I don't know if it means anything. There are two sayings related to this
1.Every document has a cousin
2.Every document is in triplicate.

So, in boxes all over the country if not the world, there are likely Operation Chaos/MK Ultra documents just waiting to be discovered.
I'm referring to OTL -- which is why a full investigation was impossible.
Logged
Benjamin Frank 2.0
Frank 2.0
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,062
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: April 07, 2024, 08:19:27 PM »

Richard Helms et al will still likely destroy most of the evidence even without Watergate.

This is kind of interesting, but I don't know if it means anything. There are two sayings related to this
1.Every document has a cousin
2.Every document is in triplicate.

So, in boxes all over the country if not the world, there are likely Operation Chaos/MK Ultra documents just waiting to be discovered.
I'm referring to OTL -- which is why a full investigation was impossible.

I recognize that, but there are discoveries now and then, like those of Jolly West.

Even Wikipedia acknowledges that West worked for the CIA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Jolyon_West
Logged
Benjamin Frank 2.0
Frank 2.0
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,062
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: April 07, 2024, 08:46:20 PM »

In my view, Connally probably wins the nomination, defeating Mathias or Anderson. As for the Dems, Mo Udall might win. The election would come down to the wire.

Agreed, this is the most likely scenario in my view as well. I think Connally ends up winning, but loses in a landslide in 1980.



✓ Former Treasury Secretary John Connally (R-TX)/Senator Paul Laxalt (R-NV): 294 EV. (49.77%)
Representative Mo Udall (D-AZ)/Governor James E. Carter (D-GA): 244 EV. (48.06%)

If that were the scenario Mo Udall (and I think there's a very good chance he would have won the nomination as well) would have been the first member of the House of Representatives to win the nomination of a major party since...? (I don't know the answer.)
Logged
Prez_zf
Rookie
**
Posts: 84
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: April 07, 2024, 09:24:59 PM »

In my view, Connally probably wins the nomination, defeating Mathias or Anderson. As for the Dems, Mo Udall might win. The election would come down to the wire.

Agreed, this is the most likely scenario in my view as well. I think Connally ends up winning, but loses in a landslide in 1980.



✓ Former Treasury Secretary John Connally (R-TX)/Senator Paul Laxalt (R-NV): 294 EV. (49.77%)
Representative Mo Udall (D-AZ)/Governor James E. Carter (D-GA): 244 EV. (48.06%)

If that were the scenario Mo Udall (and I think there's a very good chance he would have won the nomination as well) would have been the first member of the House of Representatives to win the nomination of a major party since...? (I don't know the answer.)
Garfield if I'm not mistaken.
Logged
Benjamin Frank 2.0
Frank 2.0
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,062
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: April 07, 2024, 09:26:44 PM »

In my view, Connally probably wins the nomination, defeating Mathias or Anderson. As for the Dems, Mo Udall might win. The election would come down to the wire.

Agreed, this is the most likely scenario in my view as well. I think Connally ends up winning, but loses in a landslide in 1980.



✓ Former Treasury Secretary John Connally (R-TX)/Senator Paul Laxalt (R-NV): 294 EV. (49.77%)
Representative Mo Udall (D-AZ)/Governor James E. Carter (D-GA): 244 EV. (48.06%)

If that were the scenario Mo Udall (and I think there's a very good chance he would have won the nomination as well) would have been the first member of the House of Representatives to win the nomination of a major party since...? (I don't know the answer.)
Garfield if I'm not mistaken.

Thanks!
Logged
Steve from Lambeth
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 485
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: April 08, 2024, 09:30:04 PM »

Everybody welcome Katelyn! To answer her first point - I don't think the Persian monarchy would have collapsed in 1979 or any other point in an earlier Reagan Presidency. (The Trump Effect comes to mind.)
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.057 seconds with 12 queries.