Thande
Donor
As I understand it, Reagan originally insisted on including John Anderson (who was running as an independent candidate after failing to win the Republican nomination) in the debates, as he like most people at the time believed that Anderson would cut into Carter's vote. For the same reason, Carter refused. However it's worth noting that modern analysts seem to believe that Anderson actually cut about equally into Carter's and Reagan's votes. Anyway, Reagan eventually backed down and the usual two-man debates were held.
So, a couple of alternatives:
1) What if Carter had given way and allowed Anderson to participate? Would Anderson have significantly increased his vote share if he had had this much more exposure?
2) What if the disagreements over the debates were not resolved at all and the debates were never held? Remember, 1980 is only the third time televised presidential debates were held (1960 and 1976 being the others) so it's not as big a thing for them not to happen as it would be to-day. Would Reagan have achieved his crushing victory without his strong performance in the debates?
One for the U.S. political scholars.
So, a couple of alternatives:
1) What if Carter had given way and allowed Anderson to participate? Would Anderson have significantly increased his vote share if he had had this much more exposure?
2) What if the disagreements over the debates were not resolved at all and the debates were never held? Remember, 1980 is only the third time televised presidential debates were held (1960 and 1976 being the others) so it's not as big a thing for them not to happen as it would be to-day. Would Reagan have achieved his crushing victory without his strong performance in the debates?
One for the U.S. political scholars.