America Needs Change: A Collaborative Mondale/Ferraro Victory TL

Vidal

Vidal

GeographyDude said:
Then it would be a different Reagan, because he was way into tax cuts.
Click to expand...

Reagan is actually quite the paradox. When his 1981 tax cuts devastated the federal budget, Reagan went back and passed TEFRA - the largest increase of taxes during peacetime. While I agree generally with your point, it's worth noting that a different set of advisers may have been able to convince him tax cuts were actually not the way to go.
 

Byz

October 21st, 1984: President Reagan publicly collapsed on his way to the second Presidential Debate. He was quickly rushed to medical professionals, and after a few tense hours it was revealed that the President was in a stable condition, and would recover. However, this created further worries about Reagan's age, which as Walter Mondale would remark in his address wishing the President a speedy recovery, "was no joking matter".

Obviously this isn't the only thing that needs to change, but it could be a start, and could narrow things going down the stretch if the race was already close.
 

Ferguson97

January 20 - February 1, 1985: The entirety of Walter Mondale's cabinet is confirmed by the Senate.

Secretary of State:
Claiborne Pell

Secretary of Treasury:
Russell B. Long

Secretary of Defense:
Sam Nunn

Attorney General:
Bill Clinton

Secretary of the Interior:
Robert Stafford

Secretary of Agriculture:
Kika de la Garza

Secretary of Commerce:
Gaylord Nelson

Secretary of Labor:
Ted Kennedy

Secretary of Health and Human Services:
Patricia Roberts Harris

Secretary of Education:
Carl D. Perkins

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development:
William Proxmire

Secretary of Transportation:
James J. Howard

Secretary of Energy:
John Dingell​
 

GeographyDude

Gone Fishin'
Somedevil said:
Kennedy out of the senate could be huge? . . .
Click to expand...
I think this is one difference between UK and U.S. systems.

In the UK, you can have the most senior people joining the government without losing their seats in Parliament [I think! probably should say that I'm a Yank. :) ]
 
Last edited:

GeographyDude

Gone Fishin'
PANEL OF TEACHERS' UNION RECOMMENDS ENDORSEMENT OF MONDALE,
New York Times, by PHIL GAILEY, September 30, 1983.

http://www.nytimes.com/1983/09/30/us/panel-of-teachers-union-recommends-endorsement-of-mondale.html

"The National Education Association's political action committee recommended today that the association, the nation's largest teacher organization, endorse Walter F. Mondale for the 1984 Democratic Presidential nomination. . . "

" . . . has long been considered the favorite candidate of the leadership of the 1.7-million-member teacher organization, . . . "

" . . . Mr. Mondale's political strategists acknowledge that while such endorsements may contribute to the former Vice President's image as the candidate of special interests, that disadvantage would be offset by the substantial political resources labor would bring to his campaign. . . "
Click to expand...
So, in an ATL, Mondale anticipates this a little earlier and plays the hand differently.
 
Last edited:

Somedevil

GeographyDude said:
I think this is one difference between UK and U.S. systems.

In the UK, you can have the most senior people joining the government without losing their seats in Parliament [I think! probably should say that I'm a Yank. :) ]
Click to expand...

yes it is. But its because we have two different systems of government.

I kinda feel who gets Ted Seat would be one of these Three since they ran in the 84 primary that Kerry won to fill Tsongas seat unless you can find a Kennedy to hold on to the Kennedy seat.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_M._Bartley
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_J._Connolly
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Shannon
 

Somedevil

May 7th ,1985
Ed Markey wins special election to fill the term of Secretary of Labor Ted Kennedy's seat in the senate he defeated Ray Shamie by a 53% to 47% margin he will be up for reelection in 88 (ooc Went with him since it just feels right it moves him from the house to senate earlier)
 

GeographyDude

Gone Fishin'
Right Turn: The Decline of the Democrats and the Future of American Politics, Thomas Ferguson, Joel Rogers, 1986, page 168:

https://books.google.com/books?id=D... Institution and other organizations"&f=false

' . . . in the Summer of 1983, leading Democrats at the Brookings Institution and other organizations, including the New York Federal Reserve Bank, began a behind-the-scenes press campaign against the industrial policy. One later averred that their purpose was to warn Mondale away from supporting labor too strongly, not to defeat him. Regardless of their actual intentions, one of the main themes of this campaign--that the Democratic industrial policy represented an unconscionable surrender to "special interests"--quickly was seized upon by many interests hostile to the whole Mondale effort. Thus was born the deadly charge that--amplified again and again by the media, the business community, and eventually the Republicans-- . . . '
Click to expand...
This is the thesis that American business interests decide who's an acceptable candidate, and within that rather narrow range, we the members of the general public kind of, sort of have a free election. It's nothing as fancy as a conspiracy theory, for it's far too open and sloppy for that. Rather, it's just the way the world works.

And yeah, I think there's more than a little truth to this thesis! :p
 
Last edited:

GeographyDude

Gone Fishin'
Vidal said:
Reagan is actually quite the paradox. When his 1981 tax cuts devastated the federal budget, Reagan went back and passed TEFRA - the largest increase of taxes during peacetime. While I agree generally with your point, it's worth noting that a different set of advisers may have been able to convince him tax cuts were actually not the way to go.
Click to expand...
The Congressional bill Reagan signed in August 1981 did cut taxes. The bill he signed in '82 raised them.

Reagan's big thing was the top individual rate because he could remember being an actor and at least theoretically subject to a 90% top bracket. In reality, few people paid this because of a variety of loopholes and exceptions. But all the same, "having" to do certain things to avoid taxes distorts economic decisions and probably isn't the best thing in the world.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/08/news/economy/reagan_years_taxes/

.
.
Two bills passed in 1982 and 1984 together "constituted the biggest tax increase ever enacted during peacetime," Thorndike said.

The bills didn't raise more revenue by hiking individual income tax rates though. Instead they did it largely through making it tougher to evade taxes, and through "base broadening" -- that is, reducing various federal tax breaks and closing tax loopholes.

For instance, more asset sales became taxable and tax-advantaged contributions and benefits under pension plans were further limited.
.
.
Click to expand...
 
Jaguars4life

Jaguars4life

Banned
March 2nd 1985:Senator Ted Stevens in a NBC interview says he doesn't think the election was fairly decided and thought there must of been a outside force behind it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top