Carter leads the Democratic Party

What policies could Jimmy Carter have been able to accomplish if Jimmy Carter’s Presidency wasn’t so chaotic and his relationship with Congress so fractured? As I recall even with the defection of the Dixiecrats to the GOP, there was a very powerful Conservative force in the DNC. Add in the nuisance of Teddy Kennedy who openly thwarted any progress with Health Care. So even though nominally Carter had a Supermajority in Congress his entire term, he never truly had the backing of his caucus.
 
What policies could Jimmy Carter have been able to accomplish if Jimmy Carter’s Presidency wasn’t so chaotic and his relationship with Congress so fractured? As I recall even with the defection of the Dixiecrats to the GOP, there was a very powerful Conservative force in the DNC. Add in the nuisance of Teddy Kennedy who openly thwarted any progress with Health Care. So even though nominally Carter had a Supermajority in Congress his entire term, he never truly had the backing of his caucus.

This doesn't provide the full picture. Congressional leaders - including Kennedy - at first looked forward to working with Carter. But Carter was poor at cultivating the personal relationships that make politics work: he often ignored phone calls from key Congressmen, refused to serve liquor at the White House (this particularly offended Kennedy - for obvious reasons), and arbitrarily shot down important legislation due to his opposition to "pork barrel" spending and his commitment to a balanced budget. By 1979 the Democratic leadership was so infuriated with Carter that many openly supported Kennedy's primary challenge.

As for the conservative Democrats who supposedly gave Carter trouble, Carter was one of those conservative Democrats. In fact there was almost no difference between Ford and Carter on policy, and many of Reagan's policies (deregulation, support for the Mujahedeen, confronting the USSR, etc) were continuations and expansions of Carter's policies.
 
Have the McGovern landslide of 1972 be even worse, with serious congressional downballot implications,killing of many liberal dems and demoralizing them.

Thus Carter has more leverage in telling Dems they will lose if they go liberal. Honestly, the best thing for a carter presidency would be sidelining Ted Kennedy, maybe give him a position in the adminsitration?
 
Have the McGovern landslide of 1972 be even worse, with serious congressional downballot implications,killing of many liberal dems and demoralizing them.

Thus Carter has more leverage in telling Dems they will lose if they go liberal. Honestly, the best thing for a carter presidency would be sidelining Ted Kennedy, maybe give him a position in the adminsitration?

Or go back further and have a different D win the 1960 election. JFK is still Senator from Massachusetts. He retires (or dies) due to his health issues in the mid-1960s. RFK takes his seat and doesn't seek the Presidency until later (no mantle to inherit). Ted is just the embarrassing brother, like Billy Carter or Roger Clinton.
 
Have Udall or Jackson win in 1976 and have 1977-1981 go similarly to OTL. President Udall or President Jackson get defeated by Reagan (though I imagine it would be by a smaller margin than Carter's defeat OTL). Carter runs for the Senate in 1980 and wins and is also re elected in 1986. From there he runs for President in 1988 as a Moderate "New South" candidate, secures the nomination, and narrowly defeats Vice President Bush in the General Election. With a term and a half in the Senate, Carter builds working relationships with key senators and congressional leaders, and thus he accomplishes more in TTL than in OTL and is basically a slightly more liberal version of Bill Clinton without all the personal baggage.
 
Top