Quebec_Dave
Banned
This seems like the key hinge point. Bush is going to agree with Atwater given the reality of so little time. Reagan is going to feel played and betrayed.
I agree. It will also tarnish Reagan's legacy as a tragic figure that got the crown at too late in the game and conservative would be wondering what if he had won in 1976 or 1968 during his halcyon days. I think it will also make people much more leery about electing septuagenarians to public office. I could see the amendment proposed by Biden in my earlier post gaining steam and possibly getting ratified. I have to admit I kind of chose Biden as the sponsor of the joint resolution (Constitutional amendments are introduced in Congress as a joint resolution) due to his OTL flirtation with running this year despite being 73 years old.
Of course the Jackson presidency butterflies away all subsequent presidential campaigns. Most people who ran in any election since 1988 would either not run or their campaigns would take a totally different trajectory.
Sorry for the tangent. Anyway, it would be interesting if we could see archive video from alternate timelines. I would love to see the look on Reagan's face when he is endorsing Bush in the Rose Garden. The only reason Bush wouldn't be worried of a last minute counter betrayal is because Nancy gets to be drug czar.
After getting Bush to play Judas and losing to a guy that was supposed to be a pushover, I could see Atwater and his attack politics being discredited. As Jackson gains in the polls, Atwater will go so negative that everything except the N-word will be used. This will likely help contribute to the write-in votes for Reagan, the protest votes for Bergland and lots of people staying home in November.