That makes sense, though I think Church's role in the Church Committee would have added an air of honesty. Regardless, Reagan isn't too hard to beat in 1976, so it won't hurt him too much.
A New Deal for America: An Alternate History of the Late 1970s & Beyond
- Thread starter Pericles
- Start date
That makes sense, though I think Church's role in the Church Committee would have added an air of honesty. Regardless, Reagan isn't too hard to beat in 1976, so it won't hurt him too much.
Probably not(you never know though). This is similar to Carter's OTL lead over Ford in July.
Quite frankly, I'm surprised it's not greater. Without incumbency and the same air of honesty, I'd expect Reagan to do as bad as Humphrey immediately after the DNC.
In any case, it doesn't exactly matter. Please continue.
Well 32% is a pretty huge lead. I felt widening it would be implausible. There are quite a few base Republicans who will never vote Democrat, even in the biggest landslides the GOP has been above 35%, and Reagan does have some advantages over Ford(likely not enough to win). So a 32% lead for Jackson was the furthest I was prepared to go.
Statistically the only thing that matters from a VP is not being a failure. At best they add a couple points in their home state and perhaps a good media message. Other than that? The only lesson in the last half-century is don't pick an idiot.
Under those terms both men would have been fine choices. Church better on message, Bentsen more useful because a couple points in '76 Texas is of course much more important than later.
The final contests went to Reagan, except for New Jersey where Ford got 100% of the vote. Yet Gerald Ford refused to surrender. Falling behind in the delegate count, President Ford used the trappings of the presidency to woo undecided delegates. However Reagan very likely already had a majority, no matter how hard Ford tried. The Republican Convention was to be held from August 16 to August 19, 1976. Ford knew by the convention he was behind, and so he proposed an amendment to unbind the delegates. The Ford campaign planned to win over the unbound delegates because Reagan was the least electable candidate, in their view. However, the plan didn't work. Reagan had the majority, and defeated Ford's amendments. Then the convention voted and a majority of bound delegates and several unpledged delegates went to Governor Reagan. Reagan got 1,199 delegate votes in total, or just over 53%. Ford conceded defeat and endorsed Reagan, but his endorsement was not a very warm or heartfelt one, and the Republican Party was deeply divided. Conservatives and moderates fought over the party platform, ultimately the conservatives triumphed there too, with the platform endorsing a constitutional amendment to ban abortion and a "moral foreign policy" plank. Moderates left the convention despondent, with one delegate saying "I went to 1964, and I went to 1976, and the two are just the same. The party has repeated a historic mistake, this is a disaster."
However Reagan was determined to prove them wrong. Reagan delivered a victory speech that wowed the delegates and viewers.[1] Probably the most memorable excerpt is where he discusses making a time capsule for 100 years on.
“And then again there is that challenge of which he spoke that we live in a world in which the great powers have poised and aimed at each other horrible missiles of destruction, nuclear weapons that can in a matter of minutes arrive at each other's country and destroy, virtually, the civilized world we live in. And suddenly it dawned on me, those who would read this letter a hundred years from now will know whether those missiles were fired. They will know whether we met our challenge. Whether they have the freedoms that we have known up until now will depend on what we do here."
Most Republicans rallied behind Reagan. The GOP unashamedly presented a conservative platform to the populace. Foreign policy was not an area where Reagan and Jackson had many differences. But the economy and the role of government were issues where the two were very different. Jackson offered the consensus approach, a New Deal-style approach, the liberal approach. Reagan offered a radically conservative approach, shrinking the government dramatically and moving beyond the New Deal liberal consensus. And the two would argue over trust and the role of government, Reagan made the case that Washington and government had failed America while Jackson tried to tie him to Watergate and claim he would be the one who would bring stability and a trustworthy government, while Reagan would bring extremism and further tumult. It was clear that this election would be a major ideological battle.
The final task of the convention was choosing a Vice-President. Reagan, as conservative as he was, knew he couldn't win without moderates. Despite pressure from conservatives, he needed to balance the ticket. That ruled out Bob Dole and Ohio Governor James Rhodes. John Connally, Howard Baker and Kit Bond were options. But ultimately Reagan went with liberal Pennsylvania Senator Richard Schweiker. Conservatives were upset with the choice, but went along, they'd gotten everything else they wanted. So Schweiker was nominated for VP, but the vote was surprisingly narrow. Several conservatives had refused to vote for Schweiker, and Ford delegates scattered their votes. Still, the Republicans went out having nominated Reagan/Schweiker. The convention was audacious and a strong shift to the right, and the slogan was "Let's Make America Great Again." But would they get that chance?
It didn't seem like it. Polls after the convention showed Jackson/Bentsen with a very wide lead. A Gallup poll days after the convention showed Jackson/Bentsen at 55% to Reagan/Schweiker at 33%. The odds were against the Republicans. Frustration with the performance of the Ford administration and Watergate, though not affecting Reagan as much as it would Ford, still hurt him. Jackson had broad support, while many Americans regarded Reagan as too extreme. Americans distrusted Reagan's conservative solutions, and while Jackson was hawkish many still feared President Reagan would start a nuclear war. The Republicans were divided and weak, and it seemed the only way Jackson could lose was by trying to lose. Still, the lesson many are still learning in politics is never say never.
----------------------------------------
[1]Reagan does not call for a debate as Ford did in his speech so whether there is a presidential debate is not guaranteed, though the issue will come up.
“And then again there is that challenge of which he spoke that we live in a world in which the great powers have poised and aimed at each other horrible missiles of destruction, nuclear weapons that can in a matter of minutes arrive at each other's country and destroy, virtually, the civilized world we live in. And suddenly it dawned on me, those who would read this letter a hundred years from now will know whether those missiles were fired. They will know whether we met our challenge. Whether they have the freedoms that we have known up until now will depend on what we do here."
Most Republicans rallied behind Reagan. The GOP unashamedly presented a conservative platform to the populace. Foreign policy was not an area where Reagan and Jackson had many differences. But the economy and the role of government were issues where the two were very different. Jackson offered the consensus approach, a New Deal-style approach, the liberal approach. Reagan offered a radically conservative approach, shrinking the government dramatically and moving beyond the New Deal liberal consensus. And the two would argue over trust and the role of government, Reagan made the case that Washington and government had failed America while Jackson tried to tie him to Watergate and claim he would be the one who would bring stability and a trustworthy government, while Reagan would bring extremism and further tumult. It was clear that this election would be a major ideological battle.
It didn't seem like it. Polls after the convention showed Jackson/Bentsen with a very wide lead. A Gallup poll days after the convention showed Jackson/Bentsen at 55% to Reagan/Schweiker at 33%. The odds were against the Republicans. Frustration with the performance of the Ford administration and Watergate, though not affecting Reagan as much as it would Ford, still hurt him. Jackson had broad support, while many Americans regarded Reagan as too extreme. Americans distrusted Reagan's conservative solutions, and while Jackson was hawkish many still feared President Reagan would start a nuclear war. The Republicans were divided and weak, and it seemed the only way Jackson could lose was by trying to lose. Still, the lesson many are still learning in politics is never say never.
----------------------------------------
[1]Reagan does not call for a debate as Ford did in his speech so whether there is a presidential debate is not guaranteed, though the issue will come up.
Ford did so because of a few young Cheney staffers who suggested it plus his amazing campaign team pushed hard on the idea (now that's a potentially fun POD). Reagan under caution averse Sears will likely call for a debate simply because a debate is the safe option when you're that far behind. Plus every old Reagan hand rated Reagan far far better than he was (which was, before Alzheimer's in the 1980s, straight up excellent—yes his people still overrated him lol) so anybody that talks to Reagan and/or Nancy will push towards debates. After all he defeated RFK in '68… which reinforced Reagan's own opinion of himself, of course.
He will but not in his speech due to butterflies so the issue gets a bit less attention and there may or may nit be a debate. I might just have a debate anyway, but there's a chance not.
The election started with Jackson in a very strong position. He had double-digit leads in the polls and was ahead in every region of the country except for the South, where it was still a close race, and even there the main battle was for the Deep South. It looked as if 1964 was about to be repeated. But Reagan wasn't going to give up. He saw, even as polls showed Jackson ahead by around 20 points, he saw a path to victory. If he could run as the outsider, the anti-establishment candidate, and win over voters distrustful of Washington, he had a chance. The South would likely go for him, so Reagan needed to win over the swing voters. To do that he had to be the outsider and portray Jackson as an insider, successfully combat the narrative he was an extremist, and he needed to be the Great Communicator. Even then it would likely not be enough. Reagan was determined to debate Jackson, he felt he could beat him there easily and gain momentum. Without a game-changer or a serious change in the race Reagan was doomed to a landslide defeat. And so Reagan/Schweiker started the general election campaign behind, but they still had a chance, if a slim one.
Reagan's conservative movement was still probably a minority, but a vocal one. Many Americans were sick of inflation, social turmoil, busing, detente, high taxes, an ever-expanding government and a government that now lacked credibility and was failing the American people. The problem for Reagan was that Jackson addressed many of these concerns with a more mainstream approach. He opposed busing and was a law and order politician, he like Reagan promised to end the social turmoil. He would also conduct a tougher foreign policy, though unlike with Reagan few feared President Jackson would start a nuclear war. Jackson had a liberal solution to the economic crisis, though he did not at all support major tax cuts. Jackson's approach was less radical and vulnerable to failing, but Reagan's was a more dramatic, radical and dangerous risk. He had to persuade the American people it was worth the risk. Reagan got started on the issue of taxes. The top marginal tax rate was at 70%, and Americans had lost faith in the ability of their government to solve their problems or spend their money wisely. Reagan made the case that taxes needed to be cut dramatically to stimulate the economy and he was the one to do it, saying "The more government takes in taxes, the less incentive people have to work. What coal miner or assembly-line worker jumps at the offer of overtime when he knows Uncle Sam is going to take sixty percent or more of his extra pay? Any system that penalizes success and accomplishment is wrong. Any system that discourages work, discourages productivity, discourages economic progress, is wrong. If, on the other hand, you reduce tax rats and allow people to spend or save more of what they earn, they'll become more industrious; they'll have more incentive to work hard, and money they earn will add fuel to the great economic machine that energizes our national progress. The result: more prosperity for all--and more revenue for government." In that area Jackson strongly disagreed, he declared "Governor Reagan says we need to cut taxes to the bone. He has proposed a plan that will make our tax system more regressive, that will unfairly benefit the wealthiest Americans and blow a giant hole in the budget. He wants to cut taxes because then he has to cut the social safety net. This is an extreme proposal to destroy our budget, make our tax system more regressive and destroy the social safety net. Governor Reagan wants to return America to 1920s economics, I don't, I want to get us moving forward."
Democrats did not underestimate Reagan. They knew his bad position in the polls was not an excuse to take the election lightly, polls had changed before, notably in 1968. And so the Democrats attacked Reagan on his conservative positions. Running mate Bentsen declared at a campaign stop on September 1 that "You like Medicare, right? You like your Medicare! If Ronald Reagan becomes President it's gone. It's true, folks, it's true, he said it, he's called Medicare socialized medicine. This is a very extreme man, a dangerous man. Scoop Jackson, he's not a dangerous man, he's someone we know and trust. We must elect Scoop as our President, he'll mend America, Reagan won't." Medicare was an issue in the campaign, in 1961 Reagan had spoken out against Medicare, calling it 'socialized medicine'. Democrats exploited that to hammer the Governor as an extremist. Jackson's campaign adopted a very negative tone against Reagan, in fact some pundits criticized the tone as too negative and said the Democrats needed to focus more on their program. But they got their point across.
In September the Reagan campaign pressed for a debate with Jackson. Reagan campaign manager John Sears desperately wanted a debate, and there was good reason for the Reagan campaign to want one. So far behind in the polls a debate could be a game-changer, and anyway there was little to lose. Reagan was known as charismatic too, and while many things could be said about Jackson charismatic wasn't one of them. So the Reagan campaign pressed for a debate, and Reagan kept mentioning it, saying "It's time we got together and debated the issues and we had a discussion in front of the nation." Jackson knew a debate was big risk, little reward. Jackson's campaign turned down a debate, Jackson aide Dick Perle told the media, "A debate isn't what we need. Those televised affairs, they're a distraction, they don't help people make the right decision. We've only had one debate in our history, there's good reason for that." Reagan's campaign mocked Jackson, and Sears said 'If Scoop isn't willing to debate us it's clear he isn't serious about openness in government." Jackson replied "No debate, no, no, no." The debate controversy hurt Jackson's image, and a public looking for openness shifted away from him. The polls began to narrow in September, a Gallup poll by the end of the month showed 48% Jackson, 40% Reagan and 4% McCarthy. The campaign was getting heated as it entered the final stretch, and it was clear. It was a very stark choice; liberal vs conservative, that was presented to the American people, and 1976 could potentially decide the ideological future of American politics and government. The polls were closing fast, but Jackson still had the lead. Still, entering October Democrats were staring to worry. The idea of President Reagan was a real possibility. But President Jackson was still more possible.
_______________________________________________
Due to butterflies and a different candidacy there will be no debates, which could have major butterflies going forward. The next update will go through the next part of the election and other aspects of it(such as McCarthy's candidacy, more of the electoral effects of Jackson's hawkishness). Hope you like it!
Due to butterflies and a different candidacy there will be no debates, which could have major butterflies going forward. The next update will go through the next part of the election and other aspects of it(such as McCarthy's candidacy, more of the electoral effects of Jackson's hawkishness). Hope you like it!
[notsureiftrolling.png]
Wow. Good thing they didn't follow through with the constitutional amendment.
Also, now we know where Trump got his slogan.
Perhaps but Jackson was not charismatic at all and Reagan was the Great Communicator. He had a big lead so he thought ; why risk it?
Scoop Jackson's campaign started with a large lead, and after for most of the race they led every single poll. But their lead was narrowing as they entered October. Jackson had previously enjoyed a 30-point lead over Reagan, but now it was a third that, at best. Most of that was a natural tightening, at least 35% of the electorate would never vote for a Democrat. A strong Reagan campaign was working at closing the gap, and Jackson was suffering from political fallout after refusing to debate Reagan, which was intensified by his campaign coming off as arrogant in the issue. Jackson's lack of charisma, especially compared to Reagan, was also hurting him. Jackson's charisma, or lack of it, was a major problem on the campaign trail, reports even show several people going to sleep in his speeches. On October 9, a new poll was released by Gallup showing Jackson at 45%, Reagan at 42% and McCarthy at 5%. It was the closest poll yet and new polls backed it up showing Jackson's lead firmly in the single digits.
Democrats were terrified and sprung into action. On October 15 a 'war council' of party elders and strategists met with Jackson and his team, including Hubert Humphrey. Humphrey told Jackson "Scoop, this campaign's too important to lose. We can't lose this or everything we've worked our lives for is gone. And so we need to fix this campaign up, and quickly." Jackson finally agreed to get coaching to improve his public speaking skills. He could never be the Great Communicator, but he could manage to not put people to sleep in his speeches. The campaign's message was re-calibrated, more emphasis was placed on how Jackson was somebody you could trust and was honest and principled, rather than Reagan who the Democrats claimed had a "secret agenda" and alleged that his 'secret agenda' was to destroy Social Security and Medicare. New attack ads were released against Reagan. A controversial ad released by the Jackson campaign in the campaign's final days showed people successfully using Medicare and a happy family, saying "This is Senator Jackson's policy on your healthcare. he will protect and enhance Medicare, and he'll grant universal healthcare to all Americans" before cutting to a graveyard showing the crying family saying "Governor Reagan won't." The "Family" ad was infamous, but it worked. It was right on time, because on October 16 a new poll was released. For the first time in months it put Reagan in the lead, showing him at 42% to 40% for Jackson and 6% for McCarthy.
The Democrats also had to stop McCarthy's candidacy. Jackson's weakness, both with the general electorate and the left, was giving McCarthy surprising success, with several polls showing him over 5%. One poll(though an outlier) showed McCarthy at 9%, the result was that had Reagan 42%, Jackson 38% and McCarthy 9%. It was clear McCarthy was winning over dovish liberals who disliked Jackson, the New Left that had supported McGovern. Something forgotten about McCarthy was he, despite being the anti-war candidate in 1968, was no longer a great fit with the New Left ideology, having turned libertarian and in later elections voting Republican. Yet McCarthy was a threat, and he needed to be stamped out. Democrats set at it, scrutinizing McCarthy's platform and record. Dick Perle said in the campaign's final days "Now, it's a two-party system. And if you don't vote Jackson you;re voting Reagan. I'm sorry to say but it's that simple." As McCarthy came under scrutiny and voters got serious about the election his support faded.
The last-minute Democrat push seemed to work. By the end of October the Reagan surge had halted and was beginning to reverse itself. A Gallup poll days before the election showed Jackson at 50%, Reagan at 43% and McCarthy at 4%. But the Democrats weren't quite safe yet. Reagan too was mounting his final pitch, and on October 24 Gerald Ford came in with a firm endorsement of the California Governor. At a joint rally, Ford said "I call on you to vote for Ronald Reagan. Ronald Reagan is a steady hand, he'll heal our nation and he'll bring much-needed solutions to our problems. He is the only one who offers real, workable solutions, and he is a strong conservative I am proud to support. So let's make America great again and vote Reagan/Schweiker." McCarthy's position was unclear, if he got less than 5% Jackson would likely win but if he got more than that Jackson's position was in danger. Jackson in the final days shifted from emphasizing his hawkishness, which was a liability as much as an asset, to emphasizing restoring trust and honesty to government. Character was the issue in the final days, and nobody quite knew who was strongest on that ground, only that it was too important to lose. As the race went into the final days 1976 looked like just that, an election too important to lose(whether history would prove that assumption right remained to be seen).
Last edited: