DBWI: President Jimmy Carter

The race of 1976 was very close. Despite having trailed Carter by wide margins early that year, President Ford managed to win reelection by 49.3% of the popular vote over 48.8% for Carter. Ford narrowly won Ohio, Wisconsin and Mississippi, giving him 284 electoral votes. However, he just won Wisconsin and Mississippi by less than 0.3%. Had Ford lost both, he would have lost the election to Carter. How could a Carter presidency turn out, and how would the Carter administration fix the economy and react to Red Iran?
 
The race of 1976 was very close. Despite having trailed Carter by wide margins early that year, President Ford managed to win reelection by 49.3% of the popular vote over 48.8% for Carter. Ford narrowly won Ohio, Wisconsin and Mississippi, giving him 284 electoral votes. However, he just won Wisconsin and Mississippi by less than 0.3%. Had Ford lost both, he would have lost the election to Carter. How could a Carter presidency turn out, and how would the Carter administration fix the economy and react to Red Iran?
Well, as you know, Governor Carter was and is a very humanitarian man. I honestly do not believe he would have had the will to use presidential power o nthe world stage.

When the SOviets invaded Aghanistan, President Ford reacted to the Kremlin's "Adventurism" with massive military deployments to Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iraq and Kuwait. as wel las supporting Charlie Wilson's and Gust' Stavros' efforts in occupied afghanistan. (Suring ford's second full term)

The Seventies were a time of general national apathy, but due to Ford's economic policies, it did not sink into full on Depression.

President FOrd had the will to use his executive powers, and the mind to realize that it was not the President job to be "Mr. Sweetheart."

Carter I believe would have allowed the country to sink into a malaise of inaction and self pity.

I can even see him reacting to overt threats with nothing more than impotent fist shaking followed by pleading and wheeling with the tyrants to "Please be nice."
 
All I can say is the near-miss election of Jimmy Carter was and is quite likely a bullet dodged. Carter the man is a warm, caring sort, but Carter the public official seemed hopelessly naive, believing that merely setting a good example would cause others to fall in line. Foreign officials would have taken advantage of this for all they could, barring the presence of a no-nonsense national security advisor and a similar secretary of state (let's face it: add up all the players on the Democrats' side and you still didn't or couldn't come close to approximating Henry Kissinger). I can't imagine what he would have formulated as a response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan: a few tut-tut speeches, perhaps, and little more.

Further, he was well known as a notorious micro-manager while governor of Georgia: one wonders how he might have frittered away time better spent on more pressing issues--deciding who gets time on the White House tennis courts, perhaps?

A Carter administration would likely have been a dreary single term, full of pious sermonizing, lots of sentences that began with "you should..." or "we should..." followed by calls for lowering one's sights, sacrificing, and the like. It would not have been pleasant.
 
I agree with most here-Carter would be in over his head, particularly where Foreign Polecy is concerned. To be fair to him though, almost anyone who faces what Ford faced in OTL will have their work cut out for them.

I can actually see Ford being a lot more popular if he's not in office between 1977 and 1981-could he even enter the 1980 primaries and pull a Cleveland?

Is a Reagan presidency from 1981 onwards possible here?
 
All I can say is the near-miss election of Jimmy Carter was and is quite likely a bullet dodged. Carter the man is a warm, caring sort, but Carter the public official seemed hopelessly naive, believing that merely setting a good example would cause others to fall in line. Foreign officials would have taken advantage of this for all they could, barring the presence of a no-nonsense national security advisor and a similar secretary of state (let's face it: add up all the players on the Democrats' side and you still didn't or couldn't come close to approximating Henry Kissinger). I can't imagine what he would have formulated as a response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan: a few tut-tut speeches, perhaps, and little more.

Further, he was well known as a notorious micro-manager while governor of Georgia: one wonders how he might have frittered away time better spent on more pressing issues--deciding who gets time on the White House tennis courts, perhaps?

A Carter administration would likely have been a dreary single term, full of pious sermonizing, lots of sentences that began with "you should..." or "we should..." followed by calls for lowering one's sights, sacrificing, and the like. It would not have been pleasant.

I agree, President Ford was not perfect, heck he wasn't the suavest or the most dextrouse, but I'll say this for him, he knew he was the President of a super power and he acted that way, living the Imperial Presidency. All eleven years of Ford's preseidency, 74-85 he ran the country in such a way as to make sure we were taken seriously o nthe world stage.

To a large extent, President Reagan, just followed in Ford's shadow.

James Carter would have been o busy trying to be a nice old man and a parent figure that he never would have had time to be the President of the United Stares.
 
As much as I like the man, as the others have said, he wasn't fit to be President. A bit sad - he would probably have been the kindest president since I don't know when.

The Democrats would probably have been hurt long-term as well - as we all know they would take advantage of the long Republican dominance during the 70's and the events during Reagan's term. Kennedy would probably not have been president - after all, he rode on a wave of anti-Republicanism in '84.
 
As much as I like the man, as the others have said, he wasn't fit to be President. A bit sad - he would probably have been the kindest president since I don't know when.

The Democrats would probably have been hurt long-term as well - as we all know they would take advantage of the long Republican dominance during the 70's and the events during Reagan's term. Kennedy would probably not have been president - after all, he rode on a wave of anti-Republicanism in '84.
True, but it was not enough to get him to the White house, not untile 1988.

I think President FOrd's status as a moderate Republican had a lot to do with that. FOrd resisted a great deal of the "Social Conservativism" from his party and ran a strict conservative administration.

I recall the answer he gave to Mike Walace in the interview with 60 minutes in 1989.

"MW: Sir, you have often been called "Republican in name only" by critics in your own party for your opposition to many republican pet social issues, how do you respond to that?

GRF: "Mike Republicanism is about small government, our party is, or was supposed to be all about letting the individual live their lives, free of Big GOvernment telling them what to do. Well what I would say to my critics is this: Either we are for small government or we aren't. Either we are for individual liberty, or we aren't. They cannot have it both ways."
 
True, but it was not enough to get him to the White house, not untile 1988.

I think President FOrd's status as a moderate Republican had a lot to do with that. FOrd resisted a great deal of the "Social Conservativism" from his party and ran a strict conservative administration.

I recall the answer he gave to Mike Walace in the interview with 60 minutes in 1989.

"MW: Sir, you have often been called "Republican in name only" by critics in your own party for your opposition to many republican pet social issues, how do you respond to that?

GRF: "Mike Republicanism is about small government, our party is, or was supposed to be all about letting the individual live their lives, free of Big GOvernment telling them what to do. Well what I would say to my critics is this: Either we are for small government or we aren't. Either we are for individual liberty, or we aren't. They cannot have it both ways."

Did I write 84? Crud. Sorry. I always forget Ford had two terms.
 
Did I write 84? Crud. Sorry. I always forget Ford had two terms.

"Sok, Ford may have been a great man, but he had all the personal magnetism of my uncle fred.That said he had many inspired ideas, not the least of which was his innovative "Dollars for Democracies" foreign aid program in the 80's and I quote from his state of the Union adress of 1982."As we battle the dangers of communist expantionism and adventurism, we MUST remember that in choosing our allies, it is NOT enough merely to be against International COmmunism. One must be FOR Democracy. It is not enough to be against Stalinist and Maoist tyranny, one must be FOR LIBERTY! We must remember that this great nation, this noble republic is not defined by our transitory enemies, rather we are defined by our eternal watchwords, LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL!"
 
Top