Gerald Ford in 1980

JoeMulk

Banned
Say that Reagen beats Ford for the nomination in 76 and loses to Carter. Could Ford then have made a comeback run four years later and been the next Grover Cleavland?
 
The incumbent president/party is doomed from the start in 1980. So, yes, Ford could beat Carter that year. Now, Ford's choice of VP will be critical, since the incumbent party will be guaranteed a win in 1984 because market factors in real estate and petroleum will abruptly stop double-digit inflation as in OTL.

Say GHW Bush is VP in 1980 and is elected president in 1984. The impact today would be tremendous. Reason: the abortion issue would not enter the platform of either party. After all, Ford was pro-choice and Bush Sr. converted only to team up with Reagan. The evangelists, Fallwell, Swaggart, and Baker would see their rise and fall without association with the GOP. The pro-life movement will remain less organized and include Northern Catholics and Dixiecrats who are not Republican.

You might also butterfly away the faith-inspired, no-compromise attitude that plagues the GOP today.
 
Yes, I don't think Ford ( if he wanted to) could avoided endorsing the Reagan tax and budget cuts. Foreign policy would be different. Kissinger would be Secretary of State and he and Ford would do more engaging of the Soviet Union. There would be no evil empire speech. In the good economic times of 1984 and 1988, I see Ford's heir probably Jack Kemp winning two terms.
 
Mark E is right with Ford as leader of the party, social conservatives will not have the same power. Ford's views on abortion make it all the more important to reach out to the conservative wing of the party. So the George HW Bush would not be Ford's running mate. I still see Kemp as the most likely candidate.
 
Since ITTL there is proabably not going to be an incumbent running in 1992. Dick Gephardt runs and wins both the Democratic nomination and the election. Clinton is appointed Education Secretary and could very well have to resign in a sex scandal. Hillary gets a post in the Gephardt admininstration but never becomes a household name and does not run for president.
 
Mark E is right with Ford as leader of the party, social conservatives will not have the same power. Ford's views on abortion make it all the more important to reach out to the conservative wing of the party. So the George HW Bush would not be Ford's running mate. I still see Kemp as the most likely candidate.
But if socially conservative issues do not enter either party platform, there will be no need for the GOP to "reach out" to such voters. With Bush Sr. remaining pro-choice, he would be a good running mate for Ford. With inflation the number one issue, there will be no room for the Religious Right on any ticket. When the Ford/Bush ticket kills inflation, that will further eliminate any need to pull in the social right. Bush Sr. rides to easy victory in 1984 and 1988 in an environment where social conservatism is considered politically toxic.

What happens in 1992? Assuming the USSR breaks up on schedule, anxiety enthusiasts who thrived on the Red Scare will have a fit. This time, the GOP will not have a socially conservative wing to embrace them. They will be no more a part of the Republicans than was Lyndon LaRouche to the Democrats. Result: the emotionally-based hatred against Clinton and now Obama does not develop, any more than it did against LBJ or Carter. Michele Bachmann, who became Republican in 1980 solely on the issue of abortion, will still be a Democrat and not electable to any national office.
 
I do think it is possible that Reagan would have lost by a lot in 1976. Yes he is more distant from Nixon and did not pardon him. However he could be portrayed as being scary (actually he did scare the Paranoid Soviet leadership in OTL to the point of increasing the risk of war).

In that event the Republican party would not choose a Reagan or other right win candidated in 1980 and Ford is plausable, but remember under the 22nd Amendment Ford would have been limited to 1 full term
 
A Nation In Morning, Part2: The Funeral and aftermath

Say that Reagen beats Ford for the nomination in 76 and loses to Carter. Could Ford then have made a comeback run four years later and been the next Grover Cleavland?
Personally I like Ford-he was quite underrated considering all the things he had to deal with during his OTL presidency.

I think that getting him the nomination in 1980 would be tricky though-if the GOP gave the nomination to someone else in 1976 as a break from the past, why would they nominate Ford 4 years later?

Even if Reagan loses bigger to Carter than Ford did IOTL (which isn't a forgone conclusion imho, but not impossible either, especially if a 'Ford republican' runs as a third party candidate), they'd believe Ford's hypathetical loss would be even bigger than Reagan's turned out to be.

I think if you want a Ford run in 1980 then the best way is to have everything go as OTL throughout the 1976 election and have Reagan die at some point during Carter's term. Ford could then (if he wanted to) run on experience. If everything still went as it did regarding Carter's presidency (can't see why it wouldn't) then they'd know he's likely to lose. Since Ford only lost a close one in 1976 (and, it's not much of a stretch with that knowledge to see him come back in 1980.

I agree that the economy means Ford's VP is asured victory in 1984 (and probably 1988).
One of the best things about TTL is the absence of the far-write in the GOP (or at least the reduced representation).
 
Not sure how the title appeared on my previous post by the way-got to love computers! Anyway I'd like to see a TL on a hypathetical Ford presidency in the 80's.
 
Top