WI: A Lackluster Reagan

While Reagan won on a wave of hope and optimism in backlash to existing pessimism, so had Jimmy Carter. And while he initially rode that wave high in approval once elected, the early years of his presidency made it seem for a while like he was going to go exactly the same way as Carter. In brief, the economy was in the tank, and the deficit was ballooning, unemployment was increasing, investors were not investing the economy into rebound as supply side promised -- Reaganomics was failing. Things obviously recovered in time for 1984 to be a landslide.

What if Reagan had gone the same way as Carter? What if he became the Republican president who, despite the hope of voters, in perception or fact could not fix the problems that faced the country? What if he became a president fully aware and personally stressed, distraught and devastated by his floundering? This is not necessarily to say that he would be a one term president. Without Iran and the firing of his cabinet, among other avoidable things, an embattled Carter could have been in a fighting position for the presidency in 1980. But it would mean he could be a one term president.
 
Last edited:
While Reagan won on a wave of hope and optimism in backlash to existing pessimism, so had Jimmy Carter. And while he initially rode that wave high in approval once elected, the early years of his presidency made it seem for a while like he was going to go exactly the same way as Carter. In brief, the economy was in the tank, and the deficit was ballooning, unemployment was increasing, investors were not investing the economy into rebound as supply side promised -- Reaganomics was failing. Things obviously recovered in time for 1984 to be a landslide.

What if Reagan had gone the same way as Carter? What if he became the Republican president who, despite the hope of voters, in perception or fact could not fix the problems that faced the country? What if he became a president fully aware and personally stressed, distraught and devastated by his floundering? This is not necessarily to say that he would be a one term president. Without Iran-Contra and the firing of his cabinet, among other avoidable things, an embattled Carter could have been in a fighting position for the presidency in 1980. But it would mean he could be a one term president.

Well for starters, if Reagan were to be a lackluster one term President, it would be one more reason for people to believe that the Presidency wasn't doable anymore, many people came to that conclusion after the '60s and 70s and Reagan getting re elected and finishing his second term changed that. I also think Conservatism would be discredited for a bit, but a conservative re alignment would still happen (1988 at the earliest 2000 at the latest).

As for how Reagan would be remembered historically, I think he'd be remembered somewhere between Ford and Carter, unless he's undone by scandal, which considering more members of his cabinet were indicted than any other administration, means that Reagan being undone by scandal isn't impossible.
 
Top