A more successful Carter term

MrHola

Banned
How can we manipulate Carter's term (1977-1981) so that he is regarded as more of success then in OTL? He still get's defeated by Reagan in 1980 but it's far less of land slide.
 
Obvious choice is no Iran hostage crisis, or a shortening of it. Either:
1) Carter refuses to let the Shah into the U.S.
2) Carter returns the Shah for trial or apologizes to Iran.
3) The military rescue works.
4) (As alleged only) Reagan does not work behind-the-scenes to delay return of the hostages until after the election.

That way the election is based primarily on stagflation / the economy. He still loses.

Other possibility is for John Anderson's campaign to be stronger. Have him keep the 25%-30% popular vote he had when starting. Maybe he wins Illinois, New York, other more liberal-Republican strongholds (obviously without California).
 
Obvious choice is no Iran hostage crisis, or a shortening of it. Either:
1) Carter refuses to let the Shah into the U.S.
2) Carter returns the Shah for trial or apologizes to Iran.

Safest of the two options.

3) The military rescue works.

I think this is the worst of the options because Iran may choose to strikeback somewhere in the Gulf or maybe against an Allied Embassy in Terhan.
 
Appoint Paul Volcker earlier, and implement higher interest rates? However, it's uncertain whether showing progress against inflation would help when unemployment would be higher at the same time.
 

MrHola

Banned
Would a different VP make any difference? Let's say Carter appoint John Glenn as Running Mate instead of Mondale. Would it also help if Carter won the Georgian gubernatorial elections in 1966? It could give Carter more experience.
 
Working with Congress. IOTL Carter basically told Congress what to do, they resented it, and killed anything Carter wanted done.

If Carter doesn't approach the whole business as an outsider against those corrupt evil Washington politicians he'll see a far more successful legislative agenda.

Given that the economic problems were largely out of his control (although he did do a lot of work that Reagan got credit for both inflation and deregulation) and the Iran crisis would still likely happen it's clear that Carter is doomed in 1980.

However passing economic stimulus, a good energy bill, and more credit for his work in fighting inflation, deregulation, and reforming the military could lead to people seeing him in a largely positive light—but the economy overwhelming all other issues anyway.
 
Safest of the two options.


Wasn't Carter already taking flak for not supporting our allies, like the Shah? I think this would actually make him look even weaker.




I think this is the worst of the options because Iran may choose to strikeback somewhere in the Gulf or maybe against an Allied Embassy in Terhan.

But the American people would not blame him for that. Hell, I suspect he might have won if that rescue had worked!
 
Top