Ford wins in 1976. What Democrat wins in 1980?

[Ricardolindo]

If Gerald Ford had won in 1976, a Democrat would surely have won in 1980. But, what Democrat, exactly, would it have been? After all, as I remember, that, someone, else, said somewhere, else, in this forum, by this timeline's 1980, both McGovern's New Left and Carter's New South would have been defeated.

 

[catalfalque]

Eugene McCarthy

 

[Amadeus]

If Gerald Ford had won in 1976, a Democrat would surely have won in 1980. But, what Democrat, exactly, would it have been? After all, as I remember, that, someone, else, said somewhere, else, in this forum, by this timeline's 1980, both McGovern's New Left and Carter's New South would have been defeated.

It wouldn't be Carter or Kennedy, as some have suggested in similar threads. Carter isn't going to get the nomination a second time after blowing what should've been an easy election, and Kennedy never really wanted to run. He only ran in 1980 because Carter broke his promise to pass Kennedy's healthcare plan.

So who would be the nominee? It could be Hugh Carey, who saved New York's economy in the 1970s. After the Democrats have failed with a Midwesterner hated by labor and a Southerner distrusted by the urban North, a popular New Yorker would be attractive to primary voters. Aside from Carey, I'm sure that Brown, Bayh, Cliff Finch, and Reubin Askew would also run.

 

[Electric Monk]

Jerry Litton.

 

[mr1940s]

It wouldn't be Carter or Kennedy, as some have suggested in similar threads. Carter isn't going to get the nomination a second time after blowing what should've been an easy election, and Kennedy never really wanted to run. He only ran in 1980 because Carter broke his promise to pass Kennedy's healthcare plan.

So who would be the nominee? It could be Hugh Carey, who saved New York's economy in the 1970s. After the Democrats have failed with a Midwesterner hated by labor and a Southerner distrusted by the urban North, a popular New Yorker would be attractive to primary voters. Aside from Carey, I'm sure that Brown, Bayh, Cliff Finch, and Reubin Askew would also run.

Carey makes sense on paper, however having read into sources for his time and the reputation he had both as a governor and a campaigner, I don't believe he would be as effective a primary campaigner, unless he has effective media people and strong union connections, perhaps with George Meaney's successor at the AFL-CIO.

In some ways Mondale could be a very strong candidate. Mondale was a Midwesterner, with ties to the departed Hubert Humphrey and his coalition of liberals, minorities and labor unions. He could run as the last hurrah of the New Deal candidate and win with a coalition of liberals, farmers and blue color voters. If Carter looses narrowly the conventional wisdom will be about how Carter over performed in the South but lost key midwest battleground states like Illinois, Michigan Ohio and Wisconsin and underperforming in the west and pacific Northwest. Mondale can genuinely claim to appeal to the Midwest, and also have a good shot at some Great Plains states which would probable be hurting by the late 1970s.

Jerry Litton.

In a universe where Jerry Litton lives and Jimmy Carter Looses I could see him either making a run for the Presidency, or at least being considered as Vice President.

 

[Amadeus]

In some ways Mondale could be a very strong candidate. Mondale was a Midwesterner, with ties to Walter Mondale and the big labor unions

Mondale had ties to...Walter Mondale?

 

[Ricardolindo]

It wouldn't be Carter or Kennedy, as some have suggested in similar threads. Carter isn't going to get the nomination a second time after blowing what should've been an easy election, and Kennedy never really wanted to run.

I agree that Carter wouldn't have gotten the nomination again but saying that the 1976 election should've been an easy one for the Democrats is, IMO, a serious mistake. As David T explained before, Carter's huge lead in the polls was never real and it disappeared with the debates.

 

[mr1940s]

Mondale had ties to...Walter Mondale?

Whoops awkward typo there

 

[Francisco Cojuanco]

Carey as President would be an interwsting choice, especially as he started this period militantly pro-choice and (assuming he wins a second term) militantly the other way by the end of it. Also, his personal life after his first wife died was a trainwreck (it's probably one of the few cases where the Catholic Church thought divorce was the better option for a public man). He'd be like an earlier, eventually more socially conservative, Bill Clinton.

 

[Amadeus]

I agree that Carter wouldn't have gotten the nomination again but saying that the 1976 election should've been an easy one for the Democrats is, IMO, a serious mistake. As David T explained before, Carter's huge lead in the polls was never real and it disappeared with the debates.

I never referred to Carter's massive polling lead. (Although saying that a 33% lead which ultimately lead to electoral victory (albiet a narrow one) was never "real" is hard to believe). It should've been easy because Watergate had devastated public faith in the GOP, Ford's pardon of Nixon was deeply unpopular, the economy was terrible, Saigon had fallen, and the Republicans were split between Reagan and Ford. For these reasons 1976 should have been an easy election for the Democrats, and had Carter blown it he'd have done nothing but earn the ire of his own party.

 

[mr1940s]

I never referred to Carter's massive polling lead. (Although saying that a 33% lead which ultimately lead to electoral victory (albiet a narrow one) was never "real" is hard to believe). It should've been easy because Watergate had devastated public faith in the GOP, Ford's pardon of Nixon was deeply unpopular, the economy was terrible, Saigon had fallen, and the Republicans were split between Reagan and Ford. For these reasons 1976 should have been an easy election for the Democrats, and had Carter blown it he'd have done nothing but earn the ire of his own party.

During the fall of 1976, the emerging Media commentary was that Ford had momentum, and that Carter was blowing it. Besides from the obvious mistake of Playboy, there was a sense that the campaign was slipping throughout September and October due to unfocused messaging and poor organizing. These takes where ready for Carter's defeat and reading the NY Times coverage you can see the diagnoses that would have been written after his defeat.

 

[Ricardolindo]

I never referred to Carter's massive polling lead. (Although saying that a 33% lead which ultimately lead to electoral victory (albiet a narrow one) was never "real" is hard to believe). It should've been easy because Watergate had devastated public faith in the GOP, Ford's pardon of Nixon was deeply unpopular, the economy was terrible, Saigon had fallen, and the Republicans were split between Reagan and Ford. For these reasons 1976 should have been an easy election for the Democrats, and had Carter blown it he'd have done nothing but earn the ire of his own party.

As David T previously explained, in https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...er-blow-the-fall-of-1976.308937/#post-8834370 and https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/ahc-wi-carter-landslide-76.330146/#post-9772070, Carter's 33% lead in 1976 wasn't anymore real than Dukakis's 18% lead in 1988 and the fact that the actual election was very close proved that. In addition, the economy wasn't that bad. Also, Ford wanted to save South Vietnam but the Congress didn't let him.
An advantage for Ford was that many liberals prefered him, a Midwestern moderate, to Carter, who was a Southern White Evangelical.

 

[David T]

I never referred to Carter's massive polling lead. (Although saying that a 33% lead which ultimately lead to electoral victory (albiet a narrow one) was never "real" is hard to believe). It should've been easy because Watergate had devastated public faith in the GOP, Ford's pardon of Nixon was deeply unpopular, the economy was terrible, Saigon had fallen, and the Republicans were split between Reagan and Ford. For these reasons 1976 should have been an easy election for the Democrats, and had Carter blown it he'd have done nothing but earn the ire of his own party.

The economy wasn't all that terrible in 1976, GDP having recouped its losses from the 1974-5 recession. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GDPC1 That--and the facts that incumbent presidents usually win and that a lot of Democrats had gotten used to voting for Republicans in presidential races-- is why I say that the Democrats, though favored, were not overwhelmingly so. I think the 33% lead was always an illusion, not that there was no underlying lead at all. But all that doesn't really matter: the point is that the Democrats expected a fairly easy victory, and for Carter to lose at all would discredit him as a candidate for 1980. By contrast, I don't think Mondale would necessarily be discredited; few people blame vice-presidential candidates for a ticket's defeat.

 

[Amadeus]

As David T previously explained, in https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...er-blow-the-fall-of-1976.308937/#post-8834370 and https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/ahc-wi-carter-landslide-76.330146/#post-9772070, Carter's 33% lead in 1976 wasn't anymore real than Dukakis's 18% lead in 1988 and the fact that the actual election was very close proved that. In addition, the economy wasn't that bad. Also, Ford wanted to save South Vietnam but the Congress didn't let him.
An advantage for Ford was that many liberals prefered him, a Midwestern moderate, to Carter, who was a Southern White Evangelical.

The economy was improving in 1976, but under Ford's term the economy had been the worst it'd ever been at that point since the Great Depression. So yes, it was bad. Not the absolute worst, but bad.

Saying that Carter's lead was never "real" because his victory was narrow ignores the basic fact that most voters in 1976 wanted change: change from Watergate, change from the bad economy, change from the failure of Vietnam. This is why Carter won and why it would've been extremely difficult for Ford to win. So difficult that he only could have won if the Democratic nominee stumbled, as Carter did with the Playboy interview and his poor performance in the debates, and if he himself had done everything perfectly (e.g., don't pardon Nixon, campaign prior to Labor Day, avoid the "Soviet domination gaffe). This didn't happen, so he lost. But that fact that the result was narrow happened because Carter stumbled in the general election. A stronger politician would've won more decisively with over 300 electoral votes.

Additionally, your contention about Ford wanting to save Vietnam is irrelevant to my original point, as he didn't save it and this hurt him in 1976. I was referring to the fundamental conditions favoring the Democrats, not some hypothetical about Ford. As for your point about Carter's unpopularity in the North, that is true. But again it is not relevant to my point that fundamental conditions favored the Democrats in 1976, and the election should have never been a close affair.

 

[mr1940s]

An additional point about Hugh Carey, as a pro-life Irish catholic he could win back Northern White Ethnic Catholic voters who where one of the largest parts of the New-Deal Coalition, apart from southerners, who left for Wallace or Nixon in 1968. Carters failure ITTL, would have been a failure to win back these voters in Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa and Michigan (in addition to Ohio and Missouri which he won OTL)

 

[Ricardolindo]

The economy was improving in 1976, but under Ford's term the economy had been the worst it'd ever been at that point since the Great Depression. So yes, it was bad. Not the absolute worst, but bad.

Saying that Carter's lead was never "real" because his victory was narrow ignores the basic fact that most voters in 1976 wanted change: change from Watergate, change from the bad economy, change from the failure of Vietnam. This is why Carter won and why it would've been extremely difficult for Ford to win. So difficult that he only could have won if the Democratic nominee stumbled, as Carter did with the Playboy interview and his poor performance in the debates, and if he himself had done everything perfectly (e.g., don't pardon Nixon, campaign prior to Labor Day, avoid the "Soviet domination gaffe). This didn't happen, so he lost. But that fact that the result was narrow happened because Carter stumbled in the general election. A stronger politician would've won more decisively with over 300 electoral votes.

Additionally, your contention about Ford wanting to save Vietnam is irrelevant to my original point, as he didn't save it and this hurt him in 1976. I was referring to the fundamental conditions favoring the Democrats, not some hypothetical about Ford. As for your point about Carter's unpopularity in the North, that is true. But again it is not relevant to my point that fundamental conditions favored the Democrats in 1976, and the election should have never been a close affair.

Sorry for the late reply. I don't think that Ford would have had not to pardon Nixon in order to win, IMO, all he would have had to do is an even stronger peformance in the debates given that, in our timeline, his strong performance made Carter's huge lead in the polls disappear and, at the end, the election was very close.
Regardless, I would like to return to the original subject of the thread.

 

[Amadeus]

Sorry for the late reply. I don't think that Ford would have had not to pardon Nixon in order to win, IMO, all he would have had to do is an even stronger peformance in the debates given that, in our timeline, his strong performance made Carter's huge lead in the polls disappear and, at the end, the election was very close.
Regardless, I would like to return to the original subject of the thread.

Besides Carey, I think Bayh might have a shot. Whoever the Democrats nominate probably wins in 1980. Even if their opponent is Reagan. 1984 is likely to be a Democratic year as well, leaving 1988 as the first serious chance for the GOP to recapture the White House after Ford leaves office.

 

[Ricardolindo]

Besides Carey, I think Bayh might have a shot. Whoever the Democrats nominate probably wins in 1980. Even if their opponent is Reagan. 1984 is likely to be a Democratic year as well, leaving 1988 as the first serious chance for the GOP to recapture the White House after Ford leaves office.

The problem with Bayh is that his wife died in 1979 so he may not be willing to run.

 

[Hydrons]

Well, not Carter. Democrats would have been hesitant with nominating a southern democrat again after Carter's loss, which may even butterfly Clinton away, but that's for a separate scenario. Some would turn to Ted Kennedy, but, like Amadeus said, didn't really want to run in 80, not to mention Chappaquiddick. Carey would be a strong option for the nomination, so I will keep him in mind as well. Mondale could be a strong option as well. He could take his narrow loss in 1976 as an opportunity, running in 1980 like Edmund Muskie did in 1972. Another option would have been Muskie himself. He was considered for the nomination as a compromise candidate, so it wouldn't be too much of a surprise. Reubin Askew would have been great as well. There still would have been Jerry Brown and Cliff Finch, both irl candidates. And as Amadeus also mentioned, Birch Bayh, but i don't expect him to take the offer, as he was running for re-election in the Senate, not to mention his wife's passing. Other options could be Lloyd Bentsen, Dale Bumpers, Scoop Jackson, Frank Church, and Fritz Hollings. As I am a big fan of maps, Im going to make a primary map of 1980, with all the candidates I have listed.

According to this map I made, the nomination goes to either Mondale or Carey, with Reubin Askew in a close third. Both could easily take advantage of Reagan in 1980, but i feel Mondale would have a better shot, as he was more charismatic.

 

[mr1940s]

have listed.View attachment 460914 According to this map I made, the nomination goes to either Mondale or Carey, with Reubin Askew in a close third. Both could easily take advantage of Reagan in 1980, but i feel Mondale would have a better shot, as he was more charismatic.

Why does Carey do well in Indiana, Kentucky and Maryland? Wouldn't those states be ripe for a southerner?