What if nobody discovered Watergate?

Let's stick with Ford v. Jackson in 1976. Who do you see winning in this ATL and explain why.

Ford was just a placeholder VP, and I feel that if he chose to run he would be beat by Reagan by the primary votdrs. Hell, Reagan nearly beat Ford IOTL despite Ford having the incumbency advantage.

I think the Republican, whether it be Ford or Reagan, will win as Jackson will lose a lot of New Left voters to Eugene McCarthy's independent candidacy.
 
If he does not become President, then Ford does not run. Reagan almost won the nomination against running against the President, so he would win the nomination ITTL.
 
If he does not become President, then Ford does not run. Reagan almost won the nomination against running against the President, so he would win the nomination ITTL.

Ford was also a generally unpopular president whose main accomplishment to many people was giving Nixon a full pardon. Ford as an untested, unblemished VP may stand a better chance.
 
Ford was also a generally unpopular president whose main accomplishment to many people was giving Nixon a full pardon. Ford as an untested, unblemished VP may stand a better chance.

He almost won IOTL, BTW. I feel that he represents an older generation of liberal Republicans, and that if he chose to run, he would suffer from being too liberal for America.
 
Well one of the major effects is his Comprehensive Health Care Plan (CHIP) proposals have a serious shot at getting passed.
I spent an embarrassing amount of time trying to figure out how to get that to spell CHIP.
 

ben0628

Banned
I'm not sure if this topic has been discussed much, but what if nobody found out about Nixon's involvement in Watergate? Assuming nobody finds out about any of his other dodgy deeds, what does he do for the rest of his Presidency and how does this affect future politics?

You'd lose one of the best scenes in the movie Forrest Gump.
 

Wallet

Banned
Reagan actually won the popular vote in the 1968 primaries and almost won at the convention.

The GOP always pick the next in line, and has done that always until 2016.

In 1976, Ford seriously thought about not running cuz he didn't want to lose to Reagan. It was so close that it went to the convention where Ford barely got a majority. After Reagan concession speech (which is regarded as the best of his career) a poll was done when the vast majority of the convention would have switched to Reagan.

Ronnie Raygun is going to be president in 1976
 

Stolengood

Banned
Nope. Without Watergate, Nixon has the political capital to not have to go with a safe pick in replacing Agnew, so he goes with John Connally. Ergo, John Connally becomes Republican frontrunner for 1976.
 
Nope. Without Watergate, Nixon has the political capital to not have to go with a safe pick in replacing Agnew, so he goes with John Connally. Ergo, John Connally becomes Republican frontrunner for 1976.

This may overstate a bit the amount of political capital Nixon has with a Democratic House. Remember, Agnew just resigned after pleading no contest to tax evasion. Nixon still needs to pick someone who won't be a battle or distraction getting confirmed and has a clean image. And Connally, a turncoat ex-Democrat, is going to be a battle and a distraction whose image was that of a wheeler dealer too cozy with Texas money interests. Nixon is not going to tie down his Presidency for John Connally when he has other things he wants to accomplish. He will find someone like Ford who is easily confirmable without needing to cut deals with a Democratic House and move on. Nixon was, if anything, a pragmatist. He had a broad foreign policy agenda for his second term. Any distraction from that is an unwelcome nuisance.
 
The reason why I keep refusing to acknowledge the possibility of Reagan being the nominee in this TL is because Moderate Republicanism would remain more popular then it became in the OTL. Let's assume Reagan doesn't have enough popularity to gain the nomination in this timeline, since the country isn't ready for a massive re-alignment yet. I'll also accept that Ford doesn't want to run. Who would verse Jackson in 1976?
 
Whomever the GOP nominee is in 1976, they will likely win, and face a much easier time than Carter did. Carter was a complete DC outsider in over his head during a time when having an experienced hand was needed the most. We may well get one without Watergate.
 
The reason why I keep refusing to acknowledge the possibility of Reagan being the nominee in this TL is because Moderate Republicanism would remain more popular then it became in the OTL. Let's assume Reagan doesn't have enough popularity to gain the nomination in this timeline, since the country isn't ready for a massive re-alignment yet. I'll also accept that Ford doesn't want to run. Who would verse Jackson in 1976?
Howard Baker?
 
Ford might not be VP. Maybe Connally gets it if Nixon has more political capital left. And even if he is VP, Ford might not ran, a reason he ran IOTL was because he was already President.
 
I'll go with your idea of Connally becoming VP. Who wins in 1976 if it's Connally vs. Jackson?

But Connally was indicted in 1974. That could throw a spanner in the mix.

In July 1974, Connally was indicted for allegedly pocketing $10,000 for influencing a milk price decision by Texas lawyer Jake Jacobsen.[33] At his April 1975 trial, he called as character witnesses former First Ladies Jacqueline Kennedy, Lady Bird Johnson, Texas Senator Barbara Jordan (the first female, black state senator in Texas history), Dean Rusk, Robert McNamara, and Billy Graham.[34] According to a November 1979 profile by Paul Burka in Texas Monthly magazine, "The case turned first on whether Connally would simultaneously be tried for perjury—some embarrassing inconsistencies had crept into his pretrial testimony—but his lawyer was able to prevent it, and then the issue came down to whether John Connally or Jake Jacobsen was telling the truth." On the strength of the defense's prominent character witnesses, Connally was acquitted.[31]
 
Top