WI: Muskie for President 1980

In the spring of 1980, as Ted Kennedy and President Jimmy Carter fought for the Democratic nomination for president, there was a movement to have Ed Muskie nominated as a compromise candidate.

So, here's my proposal: What if Kennedy did well enough to deadlock the DNC, giving Muskie a chance at winning the nomination as a compromise candidate?

So, on the first ballot, neither President Carter or Senator Kennedy wins the nomination.

Meanwhile, the Muskie movement is powerful enough to stay strong in the DNC and popular with the delegates. And when some polls show both Kennedy and Carter behind the Republican presumptive nominee, Governor Ronald Reagan, the Democratic delegates, still deadlocked, turn to Ed Muskie, who is eventually nominated by the Democratic Party as a compromise candidate.

1) Who does he choose as his running mate? I imagine he would have to do a little appeasing to both the diehard Carter and Kennedy forces, and I might add it would be quite a feat to appease both. Kennedy and Carter, for obvious reasons, wouldn't take the spot themselves, even if it were offered, which it wouldn't be.

2) Can Muskie defeat Reagan in the November 1980 presidential election? Now I know quite a few of you would say that no Democrat could defeat Reagan in 1980. I disagree - at the time of the Muskie '80 movement IOTL, polls showed Muskie tied with Ronald Reagan, at the same time that Reagan was seven points ahead of President Carter.

3) If Muskie, against all odds, is elected POTUS in November 1980, how does his first term turn out?

4) Is President Muskie re-elected in 1984, or is he defeated? If he is, by who?

5) If he wins re-election, how does President Muskie's second term turn out, and who succeeds him in 1988?
 
The supers would push either Carter or Kennedy over the top, but it would not be a pleasant scene on the floor of Madison Square Garden. Dude: don't put trust in polls. Muskie, as Secretary of State, would not have a wide base of support. In addition, he's only three years younger than Reagan, so there goes the age argument against Reagan. Muskie is a New Deal Democrat in the Humphrey mold, associated with a failed administration and whose record in national politics has hardly been a wild success. His dethronement in 1972 is comparable to Rudy's in 2008- from frontrunner to nowhere. In 1968 he lost as VP. Reagan is, along with FDR, the most charismatic president of the 20th century, with a solid hold on WWC voters- Reagan Democrats. New Dealers might be sentimental about WWC, but their ideology doesn't get WWC votes. Muskie's colourless and would not appeal to enough voters. If anything, he might do worse than Carter- lose Georgia to Reagan.
 
The polls also showed Reagan tied with Carter for a time, and look how that turned out. I think Reagan's charisma and charm (not to mention the unpopularity of the Democrats) would've pulled the day for Reagan by a significant margin, though I admit the election might have been a little closer than Reagan's 489-49 landslide (Muskie would probably pull in ME, but could also pull in MA and NY but lose GA in the process). I also second everything RB said.
 
Reagan cannot be beaten in the OTL 1980 environment. Jody Powell himself says that "the President's re-election chances died with the hostage-taking." The same applies to Kennedy's challenge to Carter.
 
Top