Conservative Leader Without Reagan

Reagan assumed leadership of American and Republican Conservatives beginning in the 1960s. Goldwater had been in that position. However, the loss in 1964 and Reagan's rise to power in 1966 cemented the latter as the figurehead of American Conservatism. American Conservatism would come to reflect Reagan far more than the libertarian Conservatism of Barry Goldwater.

Assuming Reagan does not amount to anything, who else could fill that role? And what would happen without Reagan?
 
without Reagan its hard to see quite how the conservative wing of the republican party would've asserted itself, the 1980 primaries would've been won by Bush.

Jack Kemp could well become the right wing poster boy.
 
Phil Crane in 1980 tried to market himself as a younger Reagan. It didn't work, largely because conservatives were quite satisfied with the old Reagan. But if the latter were not around, maybe he would have a chance.
 
These replies are all very late in the game, though. This isn't about 1980. This is about Conservatism from 1964 until 1980. The Conservatives had been a faction of the Republican party, and they were growing and becoming more insurgent. With the divide of the 1960s, Conservative ideas were gaining traction and bringing in older Liberals more concerned by "Law and Order" than the welfare state. By the early 1970s, it was an obvious issue in the party. Reagan was the best leader after Goldwater. And he was an ideal leader for the faction. He was charismatic, witty and he looked presidential. He could have been president in 1968 or 1976.

Without him, things are thrown for a tizzy. Who succeeds Goldwater instead? Or does Goldwater remain the de facto leader? In that case, the Conservatives may be a growing but rudderless movement.
 
Many Possibilities

Pat Buchanan?
M. Stanton Evans?
L. Brent Bozell?
Jeffry Hart?
William Rusher?
The estimable Mister Buckley?
Even Nixon had good anti-Communist credentials.
 
How many divergences are we allowed here? Can Buckley be elected mayor of NYC or some other office?
 
How about John Tower? He was considered a solid conservative until he backed Ford over Reagan in 1976. He was an intellectual, and unlike the other conservative intellectuals mentioned in this thread, he could actually win elections--and in a large state at that...
 
How about John Tower? He was considered a solid conservative until he backed Ford over Reagan in 1976. He was an intellectual, and unlike the other conservative intellectuals mentioned in this thread, he could actually win elections--and in a large state at that...

The instant abortion becomes an issue, Tower is toast.
 

Heavy

Banned
These replies are all very late in the game, though. This isn't about 1980. This is about Conservatism from 1964 until 1980. The Conservatives had been a faction of the Republican party, and they were growing and becoming more insurgent. With the divide of the 1960s, Conservative ideas were gaining traction and bringing in older Liberals more concerned by "Law and Order" than the welfare state. By the early 1970s, it was an obvious issue in the party. Reagan was the best leader after Goldwater. And he was an ideal leader for the faction. He was charismatic, witty and he looked presidential. He could have been president in 1968 or 1976.

I supposed Buckley had been both active and visible in the 1960s, but I admit my knowledge of American rightism isn't especially well-developed and I might be confusing my dates. :eek:
 
Pat Buchanan?

If Pat Buchanan was the leader of the 80's conservative movement instead of Reagan there would've been interesting butterflies, specifically the fact that paleoconservatism would've remained mainstream on the American right. Many neocons probably would've been Democrats ITTL (in the vein of Scoop Jackson). Now in the U.S., Conservatives and other right-of-center people are (very wrongly) all assumed to be hawks. Maybe with Buchanan as their darling instead of Reagan, conservatism might be stereotypically synonymous with non-interventionist foreign policy?
 
I supposed Buckley had been both active and visible in the 1960s, but I admit my knowledge of American rightism isn't especially well-developed and I might be confusing my dates. :eek:

Buckley was well active as far back as the 1950s. The thing with Bill Buckley is that he preferred to be the force behind the scenes, creating a coherent right-wing that was not as Lionel Trilling derided as "irritable mental gestures which seek to resemble ideas."

However, who is to say that he can't have a change of heart with a few butterflies?
 

Heavy

Banned
See, I thought he tried to run for the mayoralty of New York, then decided he'd be a kind of intellectual elder statesman when he didn't win. Then again, that might have been a timeline I read here!
 
If Pat Buchanan was the leader of the 80's conservative movement instead of Reagan there would've been interesting butterflies, specifically the fact that paleoconservatism would've remained mainstream on the American right. Many neocons probably would've been Democrats ITTL (in the vein of Scoop Jackson). Now in the U.S., Conservatives and other right-of-center people are (very wrongly) all assumed to be hawks. Maybe with Buchanan as their darling instead of Reagan, conservatism might be stereotypically synonymous with non-interventionist foreign policy?

I always found it strange how Buchanan kept running for President without ever winning prior elected office. Could he have realistically ran for Governor or Senator of Virginia?
 
People keep on bringing up Bill, but James Buckley actually did hold high office.

What if Doloris Bridges is appointed to her late husband's Senate seat (in NH)?

But ultimately John Wayne is probably the most galvanizing choice.

Maybe Bob Dole?
 
Top