yeah this plus his charisma are why 1980 would be reagan's year for the nomination even if he'd lose yugely
Gerald Ford's Legacy if he wins in 1976?
- Thread starter dw93
- Start date
Reagan would probable win the nomination, however it could be a tough fight. Bob Dole could benefit from any rally round the flag events, similar to Carter in OTL. That being said Reagan is still likely to beat Dole and whoever runs to represent the Liberal Republican wing. In the general Reagan could be in an awkward position if the economy is still in difficulties. Reagan benefited against Carter because he was the opponent, many of the voters in 1980 chose Reagan despite his platform (which he did moderate while running in the general). As the nominee Reagan would be running for a fourth GOP Term, while being accused of benefiting the wealthy and going against the New Deal consensus. These attacks which partially helped keep Carter in the race would do even better from a non incumbent running against 12 years of GOP economic failure.
Onto Ford. If Ford wins he would probable still be seen as he is today, as a well meaning but inept individual, his failure to Whip Inflation Now (WIN) would still be a defining element of the public memory. He would have been president during two recessions, the 1974-1975 recession and the 1979-1980 recession. In Foreign Relations many of the Neo Con's such as Cheney and Rumsfeld first against power in his administration, and would gain more power in a second term with Kissinger out. His foreign policy would be seen as more hawkish as opposed to the real-politic of Dr Kissinger. Unlike Reagan, he won't receive the (underserved) praise of ending the Cold War. Historians would argue that he did, but the public perception would not share that image. Socially he would be less liberal than Carter but not as right wing as whatever Republican Administration came in the late 1980s or the 1990s (1988 at the earliest though probable 1992 or 1996). He would be ideologically orphaned.
A interesting though perhaps stretched comparison would be Malcom Fraser in the 1970s, albeit less socially liberal than the Fraser Government. He would be known for 1: coming to power as the result of a serious constitutional crises 2: presiding over years of economic difficulty and misery without much success 3: not being conservative enough for the right and too right wing for the left, 4: possible being the last president before the neo liberal revolution of the 1980s, 5:a hawkish anti communist foreign policy.
Onto Ford. If Ford wins he would probable still be seen as he is today, as a well meaning but inept individual, his failure to Whip Inflation Now (WIN) would still be a defining element of the public memory. He would have been president during two recessions, the 1974-1975 recession and the 1979-1980 recession. In Foreign Relations many of the Neo Con's such as Cheney and Rumsfeld first against power in his administration, and would gain more power in a second term with Kissinger out. His foreign policy would be seen as more hawkish as opposed to the real-politic of Dr Kissinger. Unlike Reagan, he won't receive the (underserved) praise of ending the Cold War. Historians would argue that he did, but the public perception would not share that image. Socially he would be less liberal than Carter but not as right wing as whatever Republican Administration came in the late 1980s or the 1990s (1988 at the earliest though probable 1992 or 1996). He would be ideologically orphaned.
A interesting though perhaps stretched comparison would be Malcom Fraser in the 1970s, albeit less socially liberal than the Fraser Government. He would be known for 1: coming to power as the result of a serious constitutional crises 2: presiding over years of economic difficulty and misery without much success 3: not being conservative enough for the right and too right wing for the left, 4: possible being the last president before the neo liberal revolution of the 1980s, 5:a hawkish anti communist foreign policy.
Why would the conservatives NOT be muzzled/thrown out of the party the way the segregationists were from the dems with goldwater, watergate, reagan's loss in '80, rumsfeld's loss in 84(definitely running on a platform to the right of say the current POTUS) as things to blame on them?
Personally, I think they'd be muzzled through the 1980's and the GOP would stay in the pragmatic Eisenhower/Nixon/Ford mold through the decade while the Democrats (and the Country at large) see a bit of a resurgence of New Deal liberalism (or some sort of Social Democracy emerges), only to see said liberalism implode sometime between 1988 and 1996 and when it does implode, a Conservative realignment (though one that's much less religious than OTL) happens.
It is difficult to say. Economically much of the thought (and money) would be promoting right wing ideas about de-regulation and a smaller state. On the other hand a Carter defeat could delay, though not necessarily prevent, the politicization of Evangelical Christianity. I could see people in the 1980s organizing against social liberalism of the 1980s, especially if the trends of the 1970s continue with the ratification of the ERA and potentially an administration that does something, albeit tepidly, about the HIV Aids crises.
Marc
Donor
Quick thought: The 12 year syndrome in American politics.
If Ford wins in 1976, then the Republicans will have held the Presidency for 3 terms. Generally speaking for various reasons that is about the longest run that the voting public in the States seems to be comfortable with (pace, FDR is the poster child for outliers among American Presidents, in many ways).
That alone puts a thumb on the scale for a Democratic White House in the 1980's.
If Ford wins in 1976, then the Republicans will have held the Presidency for 3 terms. Generally speaking for various reasons that is about the longest run that the voting public in the States seems to be comfortable with (pace, FDR is the poster child for outliers among American Presidents, in many ways).
That alone puts a thumb on the scale for a Democratic White House in the 1980's.
Last edited:
Right, which would mean that he doesn't run. Sometimes people don't run again.