WI: No Richard Nixon

Interesting, what caused Reagan to become a market type.

By the time he was President the hippies and New Left died off, unrest was down so there wasn't much for Reagan to suppress. Best OTL example as POTUS would be the Air Traffic Controller strike.

The Supply-sides economics movement that Reagan embraced came about until the mid-late 70s as a reaction to the perceived failure of Keynesianism to manage stagflation, the result of the oil crises and the 'Nixon shock' of tearing down the Bretton Woods System.

Since none of this would of happened yet, Reagan in '68 would probably follow a more traditional monetarist scheme, ironically assisting the rise of supply-side economics ITTL.

Sadly, IOTL people conflate the effects of Reaganomics on the US economy with the policies Paul Volcker was initiating to control inflation.

Reagan on the economy in '68 will be interesting. I doubt he will do anything as drastic as the Nixon shock but the gold standard is doomed. Reagan would be much more of a deficit hawk than IOTL (in word and deed) so something will have to give between Defense, the Great Society, NASA, etc.

On the Great Society point, ironically, the conservative talking point was that the Great Society was failing and they preferred guaranteed minimum income, which in the long run may be a better solution. It will cause fights at the time.

But back to domestic issues, it is hard to tell what line exactly Reagan will walk with suppressing dissent. As a governor he took a hard line, but as POTUS how far will he go to protect state's rights? If a Governor refuses to send in the National Guard, will he nationalize? A big WI is Reagan's use of the McCarran Internal Security Act.

Internationally he will be a strong anticommunist, even more so than in '80. He is also going to be far less skilled and connected at this point when compared to Nixon. I doubt Kissinger will be involved in the administration, being from the Rockefeller camp. A hard line will be drawn against both China and the USSR.

But as I previously mentioned, Vietnam may be drawing dawn at the time of his inauguration without Nixon's contacts throwing the peace talks off-track in '68.

---

On the other side of the coin, if this is for a TL, readers may have a hard time swallowing the Gipper as an uber-authoritarian figure. For creative reasons, a different character may be needed.

In that case, Governor Jim "Kent State" Rhodes may be easier to squeeze into the fold. Also, being less well known, (a blank canvas if you will), it is easier to associate him with OTL personalities and their policies, fitting him into the Nixon mold, creating a narrative more easily.
 
Well, even earlier, that isn't what I'm looking for.

After all, Ghaullists were for dirigrism, among other things.

Another example is a, "One Nation," style of conservative from the United Kingdom.

My point is, socially conservative, economically interventionist type. Is that possible with American conservatism? We had protectionist types for awhile at least so... yeah...

If not, then please give me a way to just demolish the conservative wing of the GOP and force them to go third party.:p
 
Top