Plausability Check: Nixon Elected To Multiple Terms?

So, let's say their is no 22nd Amendment, which prevent a person being eleccted to more than two-terms as President, and that Watergate is never uncoverd.

Now, in some works of fiction, Richard Nixon get elected to many terms as President, such as in Watchmen and Back to the Future Part II. What I want to know is, is that really possible? I sort of have my doubts, but who knows...
 
Assuming the 22nd doesn't pass for some reason (IOTL it was driven by FDR-hatred from the GOP ultras), the butterflies would be immense. Truman would still likely decline in 1952, and Eisenhower's health might preclude him running in 1960. But if JFK is the Democratic nominee, Ike might run to ensure a GOP victory, since he hated "Little Boy Blue". So Nixon v. Humphrey in 1964, and from there use your imagination...
 
RB: I thought about that, but my history teacher once said that Nixon actually tried whilst President to Amend the 22 to allow him to run for more terms, although i'm not sure if that's true or not. Maybe something like that happens instead?
 
Any popular president would have trouble (except JFK, but he had two ambitious brothers) , and I doubt that Nixon would try that. Your teacher might have been confused with a proposal Nixon floated in 1973 that would change the term to a six year, non-renewable term like in the current Philippine Constitution.

The procedure requires three-quarters of the states to ratify within five years. Perhaps it can happen with sufficient bipartisan support, but I'm still doubtful.
 
Grandfathered

Any popular president would have trouble (except JFK, but he had two ambitious brothers) , and I doubt that Nixon would try that. Your teacher might have been confused with a proposal Nixon floated in 1973 that would change the term to a six year, non-renewable term like in the current Philippine Constitution.

The procedure requires three-quarters of the states to ratify within five years. Perhaps it can happen with sufficient bipartisan support, but I'm still doubtful.
Many a state governor has TRIED to undo term limits only to run up against the stonewall of congressional aspirations. While the belief that the US Senate contains 100 future Presidents is a popular joke, there is enough truth to that joke to guarantee that the Senate would NEVER pass such an amendment. Sorry people, but you would need Skippy the Alien Space Bat to pull this off.:eek:
 
RB: I thought about that, but my history teacher once said that Nixon actually tried whilst President to Amend the 22 to allow him to run for more terms, although i'm not sure if that's true or not. Maybe something like that happens instead?
Actually, I believe that's true.

As a matter of fact, I recall hearing on the THX1138 commentary that Lucas got inspiration for the Empire from Nixon saying (mind you, this was during the time he was still president) that he had given some thought to running for a third term if allowed.

In fact, I had given some thought to making this a big issue in the last year or so of the Nixon Presidency in my Watergate TL (which I wanna do following the Kennedy one. As a matter of fact, I wanted to do this before the Kennedy one since it would be less daunting).
 
I think Nixon would win in 1976. Now can someone draw up a EMK-RMN electoral map? :p

genusmap.php


(R) Richard M. Nixon/ John B. Connally: 305 EV, 53.6%
(D) Edward M. Kennedy/ Henry M. Jackson: 233 EV, 45.5%

Incumbent President: Richard Nixon (R)
 
I think Nixon would win in 1976. Now can someone draw up a EMK-RMN electoral map? :p
The problem is I don't know if the Democrat controlled Congress would allow it. Certainly he was perhaps the most popular President up to that point and could perhaps manage some bipartisan strength, but I think it'd be an uphill battle.
 
Ignoring butterflies, obviously, but I think the only President from OTL who could have been elected to a third term was probably Bill Clinton in 2000. Reagan was popular, but he was ancient by '88...
 
Against Dubya, yes. McCain would have a chance. Remember, Clinton lost his legislative effectiveness in his second term due to the Lewinsky scandal.
 
Assuming the 22nd doesn't pass for some reason (IOTL it was driven by FDR-hatred from the GOP ultras), the butterflies would be immense. Truman would still likely decline in 1952, and Eisenhower's health might preclude him running in 1960. But if JFK is the Democratic nominee, Ike might run to ensure a GOP victory, since he hated "Little Boy Blue". So Nixon v. Humphrey in 1964, and from there use your imagination...
I think this is more interesting, rather than the 22nd being amended...
 
I agree with althistorian: the only way to not have the 22nd is to have it dragged out so long that the five years expire, or an insufficient number of states ratify it. But that can create so many ATLs it boggles the mind.
 
I think Nixon would win in 1976. Now can someone draw up a EMK-RMN electoral map? :p

genusmap.php


(R) Richard M. Nixon/ John B. Connally: 305 EV, 53.6%
(D) Edward M. Kennedy/ Henry M. Jackson: 233 EV, 45.5%

Incumbent President: Richard Nixon (R)

I don't recall that big square state sitting in the sea off Virginia ;)

Its a bit like Bioko - that caught me by surprise!

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
I think Nixon would win in 1976. Now can someone draw up a EMK-RMN electoral map? :p

genusmap.php


(R) Richard M. Nixon/ John B. Connally: 305 EV, 53.6%
(D) Edward M. Kennedy/ Henry M. Jackson: 233 EV, 45.5%

Incumbent President: Richard Nixon (R)
Why does EMK decide to run in 1976, when he didn't OTL? How does Nixon overcome the bad economy?
 
Ok I realize that with no Watergate Jimmy Carter would not be the Democratic nominee. So Nixon could win with the support of the South.
 
There is no requirement that constitutional amendments be ratified in five years (or any other time period) unless that limit is stipulated as a condition of the amendment. The 27th amendment took 202 years to ratify.
 
Many a state governor has TRIED to undo term limits only to run up against the stonewall of congressional aspirations. While the belief that the US Senate contains 100 future Presidents is a popular joke, there is enough truth to that joke to guarantee that the Senate would NEVER pass such an amendment. Sorry people, but you would need Skippy the Alien Space Bat to pull this off.:eek:

All of 3 sitting US Senators have been elected to the presidency, and one of them while running against another senator. Do a lot of people use it as a springboard for future ambitions, and have senators gotten ambitious? Yes. But to say that the Senate is a pool of Presidents in waiting may be overstating things a tad.*

Fact is, most american political institutions tend to be inclined against repealing term limits, albiet with exceptions.

*to be fair, there is some speculation that the nature of modern campaigning makes a national campaign easier for a senator to run for the presidency than for a governor. Then again, that is still only a theory.
 
Top