WI: President Chuck Percy?

Bomster

Banned
Let's say that Nixon loses to a Democratic opponent, whether it be Humphrey or Bobby, in 1968, and said Democrat serves for two terms, defeating the rising star of Reagan in 1972. Could the moderate liberal Chuck Percy find himself as the front runner in 1976 for the Republican nomination? Could he win both the nomination and the general election? What would his presidency look like? Could he win re-election in 1980, or will another Democrat defeat him? And if he does win re-election, what happens when John Hinckley Jr. sets his sights on the President in 1981?
 
Last edited:
Let's say that Nixon loses to a Democratic opponent, whether it be Humphrey or Bobby, in 1968, and said Democrat serves for two terms, defeating the rising star of Reagan in 1972. Could the moderate liberal Chuck Percy find himself as the front runner in 1976 for the Republican nomination? Could he win both the nomination and the general election? What would his presidency look like? Could he win re-election in 1980, or will another Democrat defeat him? And if he does win re-election, what happens when John Hinckley Jr. sets his sights on the President in 1981?

I would have to say that as early as 1976
IOTL, the Republican Party was already so
conservative(though not, of course, ANY-
WHERE as far to the right as it is today)that
Percy being nominated is most unlikely, almost ASB.
 
After Reagan loses to RFK or Humphrey in '72, the GOP will want to shift to the center or even to the left depending on what the Democrats do in terms of healthcare policy and UBI. Percy would have ran in '76 if his fellow moderate President Ford didn't (Percy was a typical Republican of this era, fiscally conservative and socially liberal). Given his strong ties with the Republican leadership and star power I think Percy could win the '76 nomination and handily defeat the Democratic nominee. By this point the Dems will have been in power for 16 years and the economy is in the tank - so the Republicans are guaranteed to win the White House. The Republicans may even get coattails in Congress for the first time since 1952.

As for Percy's term it depends on how he handles the economy and Iran. If he proves as incompetent as Carter, then he'll lose. But if the economy starts to improve and the hostages are released from Iran before election day, then Percy wins. And his VP probably wins in '84.
 
Note that after Goldwater lost in 1964, the GOP did not go for a progressive in 1968--it did move to the center somewhat, but only as far as Nixon. (And even in 1968 it was not out of the question that Nixon might have fallen short on the first ballot and Reagan get the nomination--at least if he had started earlier. See my post at https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/ronald-reagan-in-1968.443980/#post-17038433) Likewise, if Reagan loses in 1972, while the Republicans may nominate a more centrist candidate in 1976 I still doubt that the GOP will name someone too closely identified with the progressive wing of the party. By then, conservatives will just make up too much of the GOP primary electorate (in part, because many progressives and moderates will have left the party, and many conservative southern Democrats joined it).

Percy does have some advantages: for example, unlike Rockefeller and Romney, he endorsed Goldwater in 1964 after the latter won the nomination. This may somewhat soften conservative opposition to him. OTOH, as Geoffrey Kabaservice notes, he was an "ineffective public speaker" and also "struck some of the people who worked with him as an ineffective legislator, marshmallowy and yielding in the way of many moderate politicians." https://books.google.com/books?id=b1jPSXnnRHwC&pg=PA226
 
BTW, it is not even out of the question that Reagan, after losing in 1972, will again be nominated in 1976! (At least if he isn't defeated too overwhelmingly.) William Jennings Bryan, Thomas Dewey and Adlai Stevenson were all renominated after losing presidential campaigns.
 
BTW, it is not even out of the question that Reagan, after losing in 1972, will again be nominated in 1976! (At least if he isn't defeated too overwhelmingly.) William Jennings Bryan, Thomas Dewey and Adlai Stevenson were all renominated after losing presidential campaigns.

But if Reagan's loss is blamed on him being too right wing, then he's unlikely to be nominated again in '76. Bryan, Dewey, and Stevenson were nominated more than once because of their strong popularity with the mainstream of their respective parties. (And in Bryan's case, an almost cult-like following). Reagan on the other hand fell on one side of a party divided between conservative and moderate factions. Also, Bryan and Stevenson were nominated in years when the Democrats were generally expected to lose and few other leading politicians were willing to run. In 1976 the Republicans will not only expect to win but they will be hungry for the first presidential victory in 16 years. They aren't going to nominate a 65 year old loser who the general electorate perceives as a right-wing extremist.
 
Let's say that Nixon loses to a Democratic opponent, ....and said Democrat serves for two terms....Could the moderate liberal Chuck Percy find himself as the front runner in ...Could he win both the nomination and the general election?

sorry too many if's for me....
 
The problem for Percy was that he just came along at the wrong time, 1968 was Nixon's year and unless Nixon did not run and Nelson Rockefeller stayed out that was his best chance.
1972 with Nixon for re-election was also a no-go for Percy and only if Nixon dumped Agnew for him could Percy get on the ticket or if Nixon selected him after Agnew's resignation for VP could Percy become President (and there was no way that Nixon would have chosen Percy for VP for a lot of reasons).
After that the national Republican Party moved to the right and Percy was out of step with the Republican voters.
 
But if Reagan's loss is blamed on him being too right wing, then he's unlikely to be nominated again in '76. Bryan, Dewey, and Stevenson were nominated more than once because of their strong popularity with the mainstream of their respective parties. (And in Bryan's case, an almost cult-like following). Reagan on the other hand fell on one side of a party divided between conservative and moderate factions. Also, Bryan and Stevenson were nominated in years when the Democrats were generally expected to lose and few other leading politicians were willing to run. In 1976 the Republicans will not only expect to win but they will be hungry for the first presidential victory in 16 years. They aren't going to nominate a 65 year old loser who the general electorate perceives as a right-wing extremist.

(1) By 1976, conservatives may well be the mainstream of the Republican Party. (2) Reagan had almost of much of "a cult-like following" as Bryan. (3) By the way, many Democrats did think that their party had a good chance to win in 1908--and some Republicans also feared it. (TR campaigned hard for Taft largely out of a genuine fear by the GOP that Bryan might win this time.)
 
(1) By 1976, conservatives may well be the mainstream of the Republican Party. (2) Reagan had almost of much of "a cult-like following" as Bryan. (3) By the way, many Democrats did think that their party had a good chance to win in 1908--and some Republicans also feared it. (TR campaigned hard for Taft largely out of a genuine fear by the GOP that Bryan might win this time.)

The best way for Percy to become President is not for the POD described in the original post. Rather, if everything remained the same until 1980 and Percy had decided to run, perhaps he would have been Reagan's leading moderate challenger instead of Bush. This would most likely lead to Percy being chosen as VP by Reagan. Either he could use his position to run in 1988 as Bush did, or Reagan is assassinated in 1981 and Percy becomes President then.
 

Bomster

Banned
(1) By 1976, conservatives may well be the mainstream of the Republican Party. (2) Reagan had almost of much of "a cult-like following" as Bryan. (3) By the way, many Democrats did think that their party had a good chance to win in 1908--and some Republicans also feared it. (TR campaigned hard for Taft largely out of a genuine fear by the GOP that Bryan might win this time.)
If you have a liberal like Bobby Kennedy in the Oval Office could the Republicans shift to the conservative camp?
 
If you have a liberal like Bobby Kennedy in the Oval Office could the Republicans shift to the conservative camp?

Either they lurch further to the right as they did under Clinton, or try to pivot more towards the center as they did after the New Deal. It depends upon what the Democrats do from 1969 to 1972.
 
The best way for Percy to become President is not for the POD described in the original post. Rather, if everything remained the same until 1980 and Percy had decided to run, perhaps he would have been Reagan's leading moderate challenger instead of Bush. This would most likely lead to Percy being chosen as VP by Reagan. Either he could use his position to run in 1988 as Bush did, or Reagan is assassinated in 1981 and Percy becomes President then.

Actually, the most plausible way to make Percy president is with the Reagan-Percy ticket proposed by William Rusher if Nixon were to be stopped on the first ballot in 1968 (as he almost was). https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/ronald-reagan-in-1968.443980/#post-17038433
 

claybaskit

Gone Fishin'
from Wikipedia. Strom Thurmond
"Thurmond had quieted conservative fears over rumors that Nixon planned to ask either liberal Republicans Charles Percy or Mark Hatfield to be his running mate. He informed Nixon that both men were unacceptable to the South for the vice-presidency. Nixon ultimately asked Governor Spiro Agnew from Maryland—an acceptable choice to Thurmond—to join the ticket"
 
Reagan would've lost to Humphrey. And even if he'd won and been re-elected, Percy would be facing a serious uphill climb in '76 due to the bad economy.

Whether Reagan would have lost to Humphrey may depend on whether Wallace would still run. Admittedly, Reagan's choice of Percy as running mate might make this more likely. Still, there was a difference between Reagan and Nixon which Wallace would recognize: "He [Reagan] opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964[38] and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 signed into law by President Johnson..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ronald_Reagan#Civil_rights True, Reagan (I am willing to assume) did not oppose these bills for racist reasons--but neither did Goldwater. If Wallace was willing to forego a third-party run for Goldwater's sake, why not for Reagan? (True, Goldwater's running mate, William Miller, was much more conservative than Percy--but he did vote for the 1964 civil rights bill.)

(See https://authors.library.caltech.edu/64647/1/approval voting The case of the 1968 election.pdf for a study concluding that "Wallace supporters would have cast more than twice as many approval votes for Nixon than for
Humphrey." I think the percentage of Wallace voters who would vote for Reagan would be even higher.)

As for whether Percy would win in 1976, that might not even be necessary to make Percy president for a while. Arthur Bremer is only one of the possibilities...
 
Last edited:
Top