AHC: Carter reelected

[Tony]

Your challenge, would you choose to accept it, is to have Jimmy Carter reelected President of the United States with a POD no earlier than August 1, 1980. I would accept scenarios where Reagan wins the popular vote while loses the electoral college. Bonus if a Democrat is elected in 1984 following Carter's presidency.

[John Farson]

Carter participates in the first debate, which prevents Reagan and Anderson from criticising him for not showing up. The second debate is altered as a result. Whether that would be enough I have no idea, but at least going to the second debate Carter would now know what he's facing.

[Æsir]

Getting Carter reelected is the tricky part; ironically if Carter manages to squeeze by in 1980, by 1984 his Presidency might be seen as at least a fair success, him having appointed Volker, after all, who is generally credited for the turnaround, and the Democratic nominee might sail to victory, while not as easily as Reagan, maybe as easily as HW Bush did. For massive irony points, if Carter is now seen as a success, maybe you get a movement for 22nd Amendment repeal so Carter can run again.

[kevvy2010]

1. Make Ted Kennedy not run against Carter in the Democratic primary, giving the President a smooth renomination without a lot of the turmoil that came from the convention.

2. Butterfly away the Iran Hostage Crisis.

3. Have Carter actually show up to the debates and do some debating with his opponents.

[Æsir]

The earliest POD allowed by the challenges terms is August 1st, though, so I don't think Kennedy not running works.

[Ariosto]

Having Carter show up at the debates doesn't work though, since that gives John Anderson more exposure and thus allows him to draw away disaffected Liberals from Carter; this is the principal reason why Carter refused to be in debates in which Anderson was included, and the major reason why Reagan refused to debate without him.

So while it might seem a net-benefit for Carter at a glance, it is in reality a net-loser.

[Dave Howery]

the PODs to get Carter reelected are mostly foreign... keep the Russians out of Afghanistan, prevent the oil embargo, and prevent the kidnapping of our embassy staff in Iran. Then, you need a domestic POD: a better economy, or one that is noticeably improving. It would take all that to get Carter reelected and mute Reagan's appeal for new tougher leadership...

[Dan Reilly The Great]

What if the hostage crisis still happens but goes bad in the beginning?

Have the attack on the embassy get messy early on and as a result almost all the staff get killed.

Could this result in Carter declaring war on the new regime?

Being in a state of war would give Carter a strong wartime boost.

[Glass Onion]

I disagree that the Iran Hostage Crisis needs to be avoided entirely. No, it simply has to end at an opportune time. Initially, the crisis engendered a kind of rally around the flag effect that was actually politically beneficial to Carter. If the crisis had ended at the right time, the hostage situation may have actually improved Carter's chances. The challenge is having it end at the right time. It's too bad you made the point of divergence in August, since that means you can't simply allow Eagle Claw to succeed despite all improbabilities.

August 1980 is probably too late to save Jimmy Carter, the best hope he has is simply not appearing at a debate. Let's say Reagan doesn't agree to debate without Andersen, and Carter simply refuses to show up for a debate. I remember reading that Reagan only emerged as the inevitable victor after that debate, and that indeed, Carter actually may have had a slight lead. Without the debate appearance, Carter's team may have an easier time painting former Governor Reagan as unpalatable extremist. And if Carter did indeed have a slim lead before the debate, there's at least a slight chance he keeps it. Now, no debate is probably as likely to lead to a smaller Reagan victory as a Carter reelection, but there's at least the slimmer of a possibility that Carter wins it by the skin of his teeth.

Again, ideally you want an earlier point of divergence, with the Iran-Hostage crisis ending at precisely the right time. Long enough to create a rally around the flag and support the President effect, but not long enough to make President Carter look even more hopelessly incompetent than he already did. Not sure what that time frame would be. If that were combined with a missed debate, Carter's chances would have improved immeasurably.

[Ariosto]

James Carter (D-GA) / Walter Mondale (D-MN):--- 36,289,626 41.91% [283 Electoral]
Ronald Reagan (R-CA) / George H W Bush (R-TX):- 43,093,719 49.77% [255 Electoral]
John Anderson (R-IL) / Patrick Lucey (D-WS):------5,719,850 6.61%

[John Farson]

Originally Posted by Ariosto

James Carter (D-GA) / Walter Mondale (D-MN):--- 36,289,626 41.91% [283 Electoral]
Ronald Reagan (R-CA) / George H W Bush (R-TX):- 43,093,719 49.77% [255 Electoral]
John Anderson (R-IL) / Patrick Lucey (D-WS):------5,719,850 6.61%

With a result like that the GOP would be screaming for a repeal of the electoral college.

[Paul V McNutt]

No hostage crisis or have the rescue mission bring everyone home safely and have Reagan make some serious gaffes. Also have Kennedy not run. The second term sees the passage of a much better energy package.
1977 - 1985 Jimmy Carter
1985 - 1993 Walter Mondale
1993 - 2001 Jack Kemp
2001- 2009 Lamar Alexander
2009 - Barack Obama

[Paul V McNutt]

You could have Reagan promise to ransom the hostages by selling arms to Iran.

[Plumber]

Already done.

Originally Posted by Ariosto

Having Carter show up at the debates doesn't work though, since that gives John Anderson more exposure and thus allows him to draw away disaffected Liberals from Carter; this is the principal reason why Carter refused to be in debates in which Anderson was included, and the major reason why Reagan refused to debate without him.

So while it might seem a net-benefit for Carter at a glance, it is in reality a net-loser.

In the other thread Drew makes it clear that Carter can bring Democrats who swung to Anderson back to Carter if Anderson is in the debates, meaning Anderson is a Reagan spoiler only for the most part.

[Peg Leg Pom]

Originally Posted by Ariosto

James Carter (D-GA) / Walter Mondale (D-MN):--- 36,289,626 41.91% [283 Electoral]
Ronald Reagan (R-CA) / George H W Bush (R-TX):- 43,093,719 49.77% [255 Electoral]
John Anderson (R-IL) / Patrick Lucey (D-WS):------5,719,850 6.61%

Not being American I could be way off, but surely such a definate East West Split is going to set off the survivalist, anti-Washington and conspiracy theory brigades to a dangerous degree?

[Ariosto]

Originally Posted by John Farson

With a result like that the GOP would be screaming for a repeal of the electoral college.

I am going to put a rather extreme version of this in the alternate elections thread. Be ready.

Originally Posted by Plumber

In the other thread Drew makes it clear that Carter can bring Democrats who swung to Anderson back to Carter if Anderson is in the debates, meaning Anderson is a Reagan spoiler only for the most part.

He can and could, but I don't believe it is something that would have happened in most scenarios; I've never seen him as that........definitive?

Originally Posted by Peg Leg Pom

Not being American I could be way off, but surely such a definate East West Split is going to set off the survivalist, anti-Washington and conspiracy theory brigades to a dangerous degree?

Well, because of the results in that map most of Carter's states have been won by maybe (10) votes. The idea was to create an Carter victory with as wide a berth between the winner and loser's popular vote totals as possible.