Crossposting this from SLP as there's a greater number of folks interested in American politics over here.

I just finished reading Oregon governor Tom McCall's TOM McCALL: MAVERICK, a bombastically titled memoir in which he touches on his Watergate-era plans for a "Third Force" in American politics.

By the time he made headlines as the first Republican governor to call for Nixon's resignation, McCall had already alienated himself from the national party through personal spats with Ronald Reagan, Spiro Agnew and Oregon's senior senator Mark Hatfield as well as through his habit of cheerfully leaking party information to the press. (He said that as a former newsman he wanted to help them justify their travel expenses to their editors.) In 1973, he'd publicly mulled switching parties to challenge Senator Bob Packwood as a Democrat.

In the book, McCall claims that before the 1974 midterms he was approached separately by Clare Booth Luce and George Romney, who encouraged him to start a new political party and run for President. Eugene McCarthy apparently offered to be his number two on an independent ticket in 1976. (Whether or not any of these conversations really happened, he was being talked up as a potential candidate by some commentators at the time.) Apparently, in the summer of 1974, 60 Minutes filmed an episode on McCall's concept of a nonpartisan "Third Force" in politics, featuring interviews with the governor himself, former HEW Secretary John Gardner, Ralph Nader, and Elliot Richardson. The show was never aired because it had been set for broadcast on August 14th and was rendered old news by Nixon's resignation.

McCall spins the CBS special's cancellation as a bit of a POD. He says in the next chapter that he wouldn't have wanted to run against an incumbent President and especially not a fellow Republican, but also goes on about his fear in the summer of '75 of a Reagan-Wallace election and how it would leave left "65-70 percent of the country unrepresented and looking for a rational progressive." It's all very vague and faffy, but you can get an impression that he might really have gone for it had circumstances been different. A worst-case Watergate, maybe, with Nixon in prison or a scandal-tarnished John Connally holding the Presidency?

What would an independent McCall campaign in 1976 have looked like? Apparently, the Third Force "eludes definition" but its "commandments" include "protecting the environment, stressing energy conservation, developing a new openness in government, creating a national presidential primary and national initiatives [ed: that is, referenda], eliminating the seniority system in Congress and protecting consumers." A Third Force campaign might involve national versions of programs McCall pushed in his home state such as a Bottle Bill, comprehensive land-use planning, and an expansive interpretation of free speech. He'd probably be rather pragmatic and centrist on economic issues - he'd tried to institute sales duties in Oregon in order to cut property tax, a right-wing suburbanite's dream, but he also advocated wage and price controls in response to stagflation. It's also worth mentioning that he was a proponent of legal euthanasia. Conversely, the platform might be thinner on issues where he had less expertise or interest, such as civil rights, labor, and foreign policy.

The overall picture captures a certain 70s zeitgeist and there would be a constituency for it - but I'm not sure the majority of Americans would be in that constituency.

It's difficult to imagine a path to victory for any independent candidate, but McCall's charisma and list of actual accomplishments as Governor would put him in a better starting position than the comparable OTL campaigns of McCarthy and John Anderson. A lot would depend on the other candidates in the race. If Carter still won the Democratic nod, their outsider messages might overlap too much. The stigma of Nixon had begun to fade by this point IOTL and the Third Force would have had less appeal than it did in 1974 - you might need a really heinous end to the Watergate saga to give McCall a chance.

What do you all think?
 
It sounds a lot like John Anderson's 1980 campaign, and would probably be even less successful (since moderate and progressive Republicans were much more satisfied with Ford in 1976 than with Reagan in 1980, and since Jimmy Carter was far more popular with Democrats in 1976 than he would be in 1980).
 
It sounds a lot like John Anderson's 1980 campaign, and would probably be even less successful (since moderate and progressive Republicans were much more satisfied with Ford in 1976 than with Reagan in 1980, and since Jimmy Carter was far more popular with Democrats in 1976 than he would be in 1980).
POD would be in 1974. The "Third Force" may have time to organize, and the primaries may be won by soneone else. For example, George Wallace may try to clean his image passing from segregationist to race-neutral populist and take the place of Carter. A Wallace vs Ford election may give a boost to the Third Force.
 
Crossposting this from SLP as there's a greater number of folks interested in American politics over here.

I just finished reading Oregon governor Tom McCall's TOM McCALL: MAVERICK, a bombastically titled memoir in which he touches on his Watergate-era plans for a "Third Force" in American politics.

By the time he made headlines as the first Republican governor to call for Nixon's resignation, McCall had already alienated himself from the national party through personal spats with Ronald Reagan, Spiro Agnew and Oregon's senior senator Mark Hatfield as well as through his habit of cheerfully leaking party information to the press. (He said that as a former newsman he wanted to help them justify their travel expenses to their editors.) In 1973, he'd publicly mulled switching parties to challenge Senator Bob Packwood as a Democrat.

In the book, McCall claims that before the 1974 midterms he was approached separately by Clare Booth Luce and George Romney, who encouraged him to start a new political party and run for President. Eugene McCarthy apparently offered to be his number two on an independent ticket in 1976. (Whether or not any of these conversations really happened, he was being talked up as a potential candidate by some commentators at the time.) Apparently, in the summer of 1974, 60 Minutes filmed an episode on McCall's concept of a nonpartisan "Third Force" in politics, featuring interviews with the governor himself, former HEW Secretary John Gardner, Ralph Nader, and Elliot Richardson. The show was never aired because it had been set for broadcast on August 14th and was rendered old news by Nixon's resignation.

McCall spins the CBS special's cancellation as a bit of a POD. He says in the next chapter that he wouldn't have wanted to run against an incumbent President and especially not a fellow Republican, but also goes on about his fear in the summer of '75 of a Reagan-Wallace election and how it would leave left "65-70 percent of the country unrepresented and looking for a rational progressive." It's all very vague and faffy, but you can get an impression that he might really have gone for it had circumstances been different. A worst-case Watergate, maybe, with Nixon in prison or a scandal-tarnished John Connally holding the Presidency?

What would an independent McCall campaign in 1976 have looked like? Apparently, the Third Force "eludes definition" but its "commandments" include "protecting the environment, stressing energy conservation, developing a new openness in government, creating a national presidential primary and national initiatives [ed: that is, referenda], eliminating the seniority system in Congress and protecting consumers." A Third Force campaign might involve national versions of programs McCall pushed in his home state such as a Bottle Bill, comprehensive land-use planning, and an expansive interpretation of free speech. He'd probably be rather pragmatic and centrist on economic issues - he'd tried to institute sales duties in Oregon in order to cut property tax, a right-wing suburbanite's dream, but he also advocated wage and price controls in response to stagflation. It's also worth mentioning that he was a proponent of legal euthanasia. Conversely, the platform might be thinner on issues where he had less expertise or interest, such as civil rights, labor, and foreign policy.

The overall picture captures a certain 70s zeitgeist and there would be a constituency for it - but I'm not sure the majority of Americans would be in that constituency.

It's difficult to imagine a path to victory for any independent candidate, but McCall's charisma and list of actual accomplishments as Governor would put him in a better starting position than the comparable OTL campaigns of McCarthy and John Anderson. A lot would depend on the other candidates in the race. If Carter still won the Democratic nod, their outsider messages might overlap too much. The stigma of Nixon had begun to fade by this point IOTL and the Third Force would have had less appeal than it did in 1974 - you might need a really heinous end to the Watergate saga to give McCall a chance.

What do you all think?
Maybe add in a successful Reagan primarying of Ford? That could drive voters toward McCall, I assume.
 
It sounds a lot like John Anderson's 1980 campaign, and would probably be even less successful (since moderate and progressive Republicans were much more satisfied with Ford in 1976 than with Reagan in 1980, and since Jimmy Carter was far more popular with Democrats in 1976 than he would be in 1980).

There are some similarites there for sure. McCall has the advantage, though, of a successful and consistent record as a governor rather than being a reformed arch-reactionary Congressional backbencher.

I don't think he'd run if the circumstances in 1976 were exactly like OTL's; he spoke highly of both Ford and Carter. In his nightmare Reagan v Wallace scenario, though? Maybe.
 
POD would be in 1974. The "Third Force" may have time to organize, and the primaries may be won by soneone else. For example, George Wallace may try to clean his image passing from segregationist to race-neutral populist and take the place of Carter. A Wallace vs Ford election may give a boost to the Third Force.

Wallace is simply not going to get nominated in 1976. If he couldn't do it under much more favorable conditions in 1972 (no serious southern competition, student protest and busing much more intense issues than they would be in 1976, etc.) he isn't going to in 1976. He did try to soften his image somewhat, but only got 12.8 percent of the primary vote in 1976 (compared to 23.5 percent in 1972). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_1972 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries,_1976

Wallace did fairly well in MA because Boston was one of the few places busing was still a hot issue in 1976. Yet even in MA he finished in third place with 16.73% ; and after Carter defeated him in FL, it was all downhill.

Anyway, as I said, McCall's proposed candidacy sounds more like John Anderson's in 1980 or the talked-about Michael Bloomberg candidacy of 2016 than Ross Perot's candidacy of 1992. It's based on a very dubious assumption: that socially liberal, environmentalist, process-emphasizing, "fiscally conservative" politics is what the American people want. It's what certain writers want, and they project their own politics onto the American electorate. (That being said, there might have been a larger constituency for it in 1976 and 1980 if McCall or Anderson had Bloomberg's money...)
 
Anyway, as I said, McCall's proposed candidacy sounds more like John Anderson's in 1980 or the talked-about Michael Bloomberg candidacy of 2016 than Ross Perot's candidacy of 1992. It's based on a very dubious assumption: that socially liberal, environmentalist, process-emphasizing, "fiscally conservative" politics is what the American people want. It's what certain writers want, and they project their own politics onto the American electorate. (That being said, there might have been a larger constituency for it in 1976 and 1980 if McCall or Anderson had Bloomberg's money...)

I think the Carter campaign of OTL shows if there's any time for a moralizing centrist outsider it's right after Watergate! I agree that there isn't a huge natural constituency for that brand of politics, but I think that with a better standard bearer than Anderson and a worse national situation (say Nixon being succeeded by a milk-scandal-tainted John Connally) it could play well. Probably not enough to win, but it could change things.

I'd also note that McCall wasn't a doctrinaire fiscal conservative (he encouraged the Nixon administration to keep wage and price controls), and that his candidacy would have represented something new at the time. Bloomberg, conversely, would have been more-of-the-same neoliberalism - I don't know of any important way in which his politics differ from those of the Democratic right.
 

Bulldoggus

Banned
Ok, so I agree with @David T that Wallace is on the wane by 1976, but here's an idea. In 1972, he receives some spinal injury, but isn't paralyzed as in our TL, which means he can stand (perhaps with FDR-like assistance) on the stump and looks less... well... constrained. So he's a more potent force in 1976, wins some southern states, blocks out Carter, Scoop does better than IOTL in the north, and at the convention, Scoop gets the nomination very obviously thanks to the help of George Corley Wallace. Tattooed Man John Connally is President, but loses the primary to Reagan as he has much more baggage than Gerald Ford. So the tickets are something like as follows....
  • Ronald Reagan/James Holshauser (because the Southern Grandees want the to be assured that Reagan is one of them).
  • Scoop Jackson/John McKeithen
  • Tom McCall/Patrick Lucey (Patrick is the ideal choice. A Democrat, from a Midwestern State but with an independent tradition, with technocratic chops.)
Then it all goes even more to hell. Big John storms out of Kansas City and gives Scoop his full support, in the interest of burning it all to the ground. Both tickets race up and down the south trying to out-dogwhistle each other. Polls predict every outcome under the sun. The Pacific Northwest becomes a whole graveyard of buried careers as McCall and Scoop fight tooth and nail (@Yes can feed us some ideas there I'm sure). And in the end, we get this clusterfuck (I used a 1980 map because it has the same amount of Electoral votes but also 3rd Party options).
Screen Shot 2018-10-19 at 3.52.07 PM.png

Figure out where it goes from there, call it "Tom McCall, the Third Force, and the Bicentennial Crisis", and get cracking.
 
MAXIMUM TOM SCENARIO

-Connally becomes Nixon's VP either in 1972 or after Agnew's resignation.
-Nixon resigns as IOTL.
-Connally's milk price scandal comes out, leading to his resignation as well.
-Carl Albert's alcoholism leads to him being unable to take the oath of office.
-James Eastland serves until the end of the term and picks another conservative as his vice president.
-With the political situation as chaotic as it is, Tom McCall announces the "Third Force" with numerous Republicans and Democrats defecting.
-Wallace gets the Democratic nomination in 1976 over a divided liberal opposition (many joining McCall).
-Reagan, as the conservative leader, defeats Rockefeller and Percy to becomes the Republican nominee.
-With the general election approaching, McCall is able to attract significant progressive support from the public.
-On election night, McCall wins the popular vote and gets third in the electoral vote. Reagan is in second but does the worst electorally given the split Southern vote. Wallace is a more distant third in the popular vote but is second electorally.
 
Top