Sorry if this topic has been done before, I’m new. How would things change if Gerald Ford had been re elected, for whatever reason? What would the long term effect be on US policy, especially economic policy and foreign policy, and would this stop a charismatic conservative resurgence like the Reagan Revolution?
Gerald Ford is re-elected
- Thread starter Dragonquack
- Start date
I think the major foreign policy change is that detente lasts for longer. Carter was eager to pursue less tense relations with the USSR on the advice of Cyrus Vance, but on the advice of Brzezinski slowly started to emphasize human rights more and more. I see Ford recognizing Pol Pot’s government and continuing conciliatory policies with China, but also supporting the Pinochet government. I see him being more hawkish in Iran; he either prevents the Iran hostage crisis, or is much more willing to use military force. In Afghanistan, I don’t see the crisis escalating the way it did; if it does, I am almost certain Operation Cyclone takes place (Kissinger’s views on ISIS are quite positive; I am not sure why anything should change).
Domestically, I think we see a conservative economic policy that is semi-Reaganite in nature taking place. Ford was moving in a neoliberal direction by 1976, advocating for the end of price controls and less regulation. Economic policy is probably going to be slightly more conservative than Carter’s, all in all - Carter was, after all, the first real neoliberal President. I see Ford supporting the ERA, but I don’t think it will pass; the 1978 midterms will definitely be devastating for the moderate faction of the party and both Reaganites and Democrats will be elected across the country. The recession will probably happen on schedule if Ford doesn’t appoint a neoliberal to the Federal Reserve chairmanship.
Come 1980, I can see Reagan beating Dole out for the nomination and choosing a moderate for VP. On the Democratic side, Ted Kennedy would (as usual) be asked to run but probably decline. In that case, the front runners would likely be Jerry Brown, Mo Udall, and possibly Jimmy Carter. Yes, he would’ve been out of office for six years, but that didn’t stop Reagan. Additionally, party leaders might decide that (assuming Carter only loses narrowly) he’s their best bet as liberals like McGovern and Humphrey were mauled making their run for the Presidency. In that case, we might end up remembering Carter as one of our greatest Presidents...
Domestically, I think we see a conservative economic policy that is semi-Reaganite in nature taking place. Ford was moving in a neoliberal direction by 1976, advocating for the end of price controls and less regulation. Economic policy is probably going to be slightly more conservative than Carter’s, all in all - Carter was, after all, the first real neoliberal President. I see Ford supporting the ERA, but I don’t think it will pass; the 1978 midterms will definitely be devastating for the moderate faction of the party and both Reaganites and Democrats will be elected across the country. The recession will probably happen on schedule if Ford doesn’t appoint a neoliberal to the Federal Reserve chairmanship.
Come 1980, I can see Reagan beating Dole out for the nomination and choosing a moderate for VP. On the Democratic side, Ted Kennedy would (as usual) be asked to run but probably decline. In that case, the front runners would likely be Jerry Brown, Mo Udall, and possibly Jimmy Carter. Yes, he would’ve been out of office for six years, but that didn’t stop Reagan. Additionally, party leaders might decide that (assuming Carter only loses narrowly) he’s their best bet as liberals like McGovern and Humphrey were mauled making their run for the Presidency. In that case, we might end up remembering Carter as one of our greatest Presidents...
I don't think Carter would get the nomination again if he were to lose a very winnable election in 1976. Even Mondale would be somewhat tainted by the loss. I think Hugh Carey, Mo Udall, Reubin Askew, or Scoop Jackson would be the Democratic nominee in 1980.
Scoop Jackson doesn’t have much charisma and by 1980, it’s been 12 Years of GOP presidency and it’s likely Ford would still not handle the 1976 problems well.
Reagan may win on charisma in the primaries, but the GOP may realize he’d potentially lose by virtue of voter exhaustion of the party.
Mo Udall would be my pick, since he would possess the charisma and would likely appeal more to be more progressive. His charisma would be able to hold against Reagan’s and on policy, especially if Udall campaigned on universal healthcare, he’d pretty much get a massive win.
Only caveat is Udall’s condition, but he could still try it out for one term and get as much done while having a supportive VP. He may still be pressured to run for re-election with plans to resign in the middle, letting his VP take the reigns and then VP would coast on that for re-election. Meaning 12 years of more leftist Democrat policy.
Not sure who would be his VP, though Askew could fit him quite well though if he accepts it. Udall I could see focus on the economy and healthcare, with Askew following suit and then implementing as much financial transparency and probably campaign reform and so on.
The GOP would be pretty different. The 80s economy recover would still happen and under the Dems, would mean they wouldn’t claim House or Senate for a dang long while, at least as they are. This could mean the Overton window being shifted as the neocons and more moderate GOPs plus some moderate Dems who jumped ship duke it out.
Askew himself could probably do well also in the primaries if he really campaigned hard on the issues against Reagan.
Not sure on his VP though.
Reagan may win on charisma in the primaries, but the GOP may realize he’d potentially lose by virtue of voter exhaustion of the party.
Mo Udall would be my pick, since he would possess the charisma and would likely appeal more to be more progressive. His charisma would be able to hold against Reagan’s and on policy, especially if Udall campaigned on universal healthcare, he’d pretty much get a massive win.
Only caveat is Udall’s condition, but he could still try it out for one term and get as much done while having a supportive VP. He may still be pressured to run for re-election with plans to resign in the middle, letting his VP take the reigns and then VP would coast on that for re-election. Meaning 12 years of more leftist Democrat policy.
Not sure who would be his VP, though Askew could fit him quite well though if he accepts it. Udall I could see focus on the economy and healthcare, with Askew following suit and then implementing as much financial transparency and probably campaign reform and so on.
The GOP would be pretty different. The 80s economy recover would still happen and under the Dems, would mean they wouldn’t claim House or Senate for a dang long while, at least as they are. This could mean the Overton window being shifted as the neocons and more moderate GOPs plus some moderate Dems who jumped ship duke it out.
Askew himself could probably do well also in the primaries if he really campaigned hard on the issues against Reagan.
Not sure on his VP though.
I think Reagan would beat Dole for the nomination in 1980, but he'd lose to the Democratic nominee. (Even if narrowly). I'm not sure if Kennedy would run, since he only ran IOTL as a protest against Carter, but I think Hugh Carey and Mo Udall would be leading contenders.
My guess is Reagan/Rumsfeld lose by McGovern type margins and the Movement Conservatives/Social Conservatives get kicked out of the GOP/mainstream overton window by a GOP tired of being sabotaged by "backlash" candidates.
marathag
Banned
Even if RR loses, you still have the overall more conservative movement down ballot, and the South turning Red for Congress and Governorships
Voting GOP due to race, crime and to a lesser extent taxes is a different sort of "south turning red" than OTL's yuppie suburban/exurban Religious Right. This would fit in medium/long-term consequences since we'd be talking about a GOP return to power in 1996/2000/2004 after the Democratic 80s/90s.
One thing is for sure, it'd be AT MINIMUM visibly less elitist than the reagan-bushes era GOP given Ford's opposition to gun control. Another thing for sure is you'd get a situation where you get a set of options on the most leftward wing with a pro-choice GOP, with the most convergent to OTL/right-wing being a lean prolife party with a visible pro-choice wing given Ford's position on abortion. The last sure thing? Visibly weaker Religious Right without 1) Carter's encouraging them 2) A Ford GOP with an incumbent POTUS being nowhere near as welcome to outsiders as the post-76 realigning rightwards GOP of OTL.
Mind you, this is just for ford's second term. This isn't even getting into second-order cultural/electoral impacts of national healthcare, a basic income among other things[1].
[1] No Carter or Reagan means you see both parties being visibly less moralistic. No Religious Right GOP and also no clinton/obama/2010s soccer mom/corporate progressive dems. Democrats don't end up OTL's corporate progressive party. GOP? OTL's post-2017 but with more populism and less jesus and more electable in northern/western states without the constant dixie accents.
relevant threads:
1980s Democratic Revolution
There are numerous ways in which this could happen. For example, have Carter or the 1976 Democratic nominee lose to Ford or Reagan. Then by 1980, when things go awry for the incumbent Republican. the people will now be sick of 12 years of GOP rule and the turmoil of the years 1978-80, and crush...
www.alternatehistory.com
AHC: Pres. Ford wins in '76, difficult second term, how long for U.S. Republican Party to recover?
In OTL, the Republican Party recovered in 1980, a scant six years after Nixon's resignation. And maybe this is par for the course and is relatively "normal," as political parties are . . . pretty resilient creatures?
www.alternatehistory.com
I wouldn't give the GOP that much. For all we know, the doubling down of progressive policies on the Democrats side along with the need for identity and the clash of the neocons for the GOP could lead to a stronger Reform Party in 1992 or 1996. Though I suppose that is still another topic to figure out.
Religious Right would definitely weakened without any sense of unity or cohesion and likely there would be no chance of happening. And yeah, both parties wouldn't be as moralistic due to the fact that wouldn't be as many needs. Granted, the Southern strategy would still haunt the GOP for a while. It's possible that this new GOP may be the one to push NAFTA or take in what would've been the neoliberals if they didn't percolate into a possible Reform Party (imagine Bill Clinton being Ross Perot's VP).
This is a favorite POD of mine. One 1980 candidate I don’t see being discussed is Lawton Chiles. Another possible candidate on the Democratic side is Hugh Carey. In any case, the Democratic nominee likely defeats Reagan.
Not quite. Think more moderate/center left 1970s type democrats, not capital P progressives for dems. New Deal or if radical semi-socdem as opposed to yuppie liberals. Without Reagan or Thatcher, Neoliberalism would be the chileans and Rogers in NZ for examples, instead of a relevant country implementing so expect less influence from them. That and Ford's deficit hawking/tight monetary policy being seen to not help to further reduce credibility.
Why would there be a Reform party on ttl's schedule? The US has more protectionist trade policy, set up for competing better(national healthcare so removing THAT issue) for trade, sees inequality drop a little bit before stalling out, probably not to start rising (slower) in the 90s. That plus the rustbelt is less ignored/where the two parties are competing for more than OTL's sunbelt-focused elections. Without that alienation no energy in it.
Now, if you want a third party for the 90s or 00s in TTL perhaps the Movement Conservatives attempt it, fizzle out like OTL Reform but without hope of coming back since well economic nationalism/social centrism sells to a bigger demographic than Conservatism does, zero chance of movement conservatives coming back in ttl. As in "technically not ASB since the laws of physics don't forbid it but uh not happening" territory. Why? OTL level of secularization after the 90s would work against that, nevermind TTL's seeing even more secularization without Carter to inject even more piety in politics.
Well it depends. After all, the growing calls for civil rights protections and equality for the LGTBQ community isn't gonna die down and grow more prominent. Yuppieism probably wouldn't come about because of the differing culture. And yeah, without the US backing up neoliberalism, it will probably be looked more upon, especially with how it happened in Chile.
Thatcher may still be around, but without Reagan's backing, would just end up flopping I reckon.
Rust belt will still be an issue to tackle so I suppose it's a matter of figuring out how to deal with stagnating cars though maybe it would become a race for environmentalism, especially if someone like Askew makes changes regarding financial transparency and extends to lobbying.
Definitely the next wave of New Dealers I wold see it.
Yuppiesm being set aside would speed up certain forms of social liberalism compared to OTL. Expect more effort in drug law reform, LGBT protections instead of say stuff soccer moms or rich people who want overpaid executives/management to "look like america" would want.
Rustbelt would rust, but not quite to OTL's extent given less of a gordon gekko type mindset on top of different trade/healthcare policy.
Rustbelt would rust, but not quite to OTL's extent given less of a gordon gekko type mindset on top of different trade/healthcare policy.
Drug law reform will probably take a while, but it won’t be as bad as under Reagan was in OTL, though the GOP might try and still and push for harsher crime and drug bills.
Granted, a more social liberal climate means that the US will more likely decriminalize it when under a Dem president in the 21st century, especially citing Portugal’s approach
Reagan imo set it back by 30 years OTL. TTL nowhere near as bad for a setback, so definitely legal weed in alot more of the US than OTL even if national legalization isn't a thing yet.