Taking this brand new Atlantic piece as a basis, what if Lee Atwater is not in the picture for Bush ’88?

Was Gary Hart Set Up?
The Atlantic / November 2018
By James Fallows

“I thought there was something fishy about the whole thing from the very beginning,” Strother recalled. “Lee told me that he had set up the whole Monkey Business deal. ‘I did it!’ he told me. ‘I fixed Hart.’ After he called me that time, I thought, My God! It’s true!
[…]
What are we to make of Strother’s late-in-life revelation of Atwater’s deathbed confession? Hart’s reputation, deserved or not, certainly gave Atwater something to work with, if that’s what he did. (“It would be just like the perversity of history for someone to undertake an effort that might well have happened by itself,” Matt Bai told me when I spoke with him recently.)

If one believes this deathbed confession perhaps Gary Hart does indeed sweep forward in the primaries and then defeat Bush. As an assumption he wins to keep discussion rolling how does Hart actually do as President?
 
Last edited:

nbcman

Donor
There were rumors of Senator Hart's infidelity before the Monkey Business incident and there were other items that would have arisen to most likely trip him up (infidelity and loan repayment issues from 1984 campaign). Witness how quickly he initially exited the 1988 Democratic Presidential race which would indicate to me that he would have folded as quickly when another scandal hit him. He wasn't sturdy enough to win the Democratic Primary let alone win the 1988 Presidential contest.
 
Hart was an inveterate womaniser. There were other affairs out there, even probably affairs Hart was pursuing at the time (IIRC he was believed to be carrying on with a lobbyist's estranged wife - but don't quote me on that) to such an extent that I don't think there was a need to set Gary Hart up. And assuming it was an Atwater setup - presumably Lynn Armandt (Who tipped off the Herald) was part of this, at least to some degree? Well, I don't think you get her to leak it before the primary season has even began!

I think if Atwater did say anything like that, it was boastful bull.

I agree with nbcman, incidentally - Hart had a lot of negatives; a lot of Democrats were convinced he wouldn't win the nomination even before Monkey Business.
 
As an assumption he wins to keep discussion rolling how does Hart actually do as President?

Hart had a strong command of the issues and was an effective Senator. But IMO a presidential sex scandal is inevitable. If it happens in his first term and the economy still takes a hit in 1990, then he probably loses to Bob Dole in 1992.
 
As I've said before, Monkey Business or no Monkey Business, I have my doubts that any candidate who lost to Walter Mondale in 1984 on the strength of a slogan like "where's the beef?" https://www.c-span.org/video/?c3342979/mondale-hart-wheres-beef had much chance in 1988...

6o48wwqemkqy.jpg
 
I feel that Hart was the candidate who could have kept the margin down in 1984 (say, 6-7%), rather than one who could have won the presidency (be it in 1984, 1988 or whenever else).
 
In April 1987--before the Donna Rice story broke--a poll showed Dukakis leading Hart in NH 41-38. http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1987/4/7/nh-poll-shows-duke-in-lead/ Now you may say that this is just because Dukakis was from a neighboring state and was therefore well-known in NH. But Hart after all was well-known in NH, too--he had won the primary there four years earlier!

I have argued elsewhere that peace and prosperity (and the recovery of Reagan's popularity from its lows of 1987) were likely to make 1988 a Republican year, regardless of who the Democrats nominated and that Dukakis' big lead after the convention was an illusory "bounce." https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/can-bill-clinton-win-in-1988.353222/#post-10749600 But even if you disagree with me about that, you should realize that Hart was by no means a lock to get the Democratic nomination in 1988--even without the Monkey Business.
 
In April 1987--before the Donna Rice story broke--a poll showed Dukakis leading Hart in NH 41-38. http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1987/4/7/nh-poll-shows-duke-in-lead/ Now you may say that this is just because Dukakis was from a neighboring state and was therefore well-known in NH. But Hart after all was well-known in NH, too--he had won the primary there four years earlier!

I have argued elsewhere that peace and prosperity (and the recovery of Reagan's popularity from its lows of 1987) were likely to make 1988 a Republican year, regardless of who the Democrats nominated and that Dukakis' big lead after the convention was an illusory "bounce." https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/can-bill-clinton-win-in-1988.353222/#post-10749600 But even if you disagree with me about that, you should realize that Hart was by no means a lock to get the Democratic nomination in 1988--even without the Monkey Business.

IMO the Democrats could only have won with a candidate who had a strong ground game, forceful personality, a record that can't be tarred as too liberal, and without a scandalous personal life. As it was no such candidate was in the running in 1988. Hart would most likely have lost to Bush thanks to his political ineptitude and McGovernite past. And even without Monkey Business there were rumors of his womanizing, which Atwater wouldn't hesitate to exploit. He'd possibly do better than Dukakis, but that's a pretty low bar to aim for isn't it?
 
Last edited:
Hart was an inveterate womaniser. There were other affairs out there, even probably affairs Hart was pursuing at the time (IIRC he was believed to be carrying on with a lobbyist's estranged wife - but don't quote me on that) to such an extent that I don't think there was a need to set Gary Hart up. And assuming it was an Atwater setup - presumably Lynn Armandt (Who tipped off the Herald) was part of this, at least to some degree? Well, I don't think you get her to leak it before the primary season has even began!

I think if Atwater did say anything like that, it was boastful bull.

I agree with nbcman, incidentally - Hart had a lot of negatives; a lot of Democrats were convinced he wouldn't win the nomination even before Monkey Business.

It especially didn't help that Hart's response was to essentially dare the media to expose him, and predicting they'd be bored; talk about big-time hubris (Atwater didn't need to set this up, and I agree he might have been idly boasting; that sounds like Atwater)...
 
Top