WI: Reagan wins in 1976

What if Ronald Reagan had defeated Gerald Ford for the Republican nomination and managed to win the 1976 election? How would Reagan have dealt with the issues which showed up in the late 70s, such as Afghanistan, or the Iran hostage crisis, as well as the various domestic problems? And could he have solved the issues that Carter could not? Effectively, what would an early Reagan presidency have looked like?
 
What if Ronald Reagan had defeated Gerald Ford for the Republican nomination and managed to win the 1976 election? How would Reagan have dealt with the issues which showed up in the late 70s, such as Afghanistan, or the Iran hostage crisis, as well as the various domestic problems? And could he have solved the issues that Carter could not? Effectively, what would an early Reagan presidency have looked like?

Some times your just plain doomed. 1976 and the four years that followed were just a really bad time for america. Who ever gets in that year loses the next election, there are just too many problems hitting the country all at once.
 
Some times your just plain doomed. 1976 and the four years that followed were just a really bad time for america. Who ever gets in that year loses the next election, there are just too many problems hitting the country all at once.

Compound those problems with the fact that its' still Nixon's party in power, you'll find people are hardpressed to vote the GOP in the next decade or so.
 
Reagan would have had to pull off a miracle for the Party of Watergate to win in 1976.

Then he would have been torn apart by runaway stagflation, the energy crisis and afghanistan. Iranian Hostages are probably butterflied away, and Reagan *is* heartless enough to accept the realpolitik issues of letting the Shah into the US for his cancer treatments.
 
I too don't think Reagan can win in 1976. He has taken unpopular positions. He can be tied to Nixon. He is of the president's party in bad economic times. If he could somehow pull it off, he would let the Shah in. There would still be a hostage crisisx There would still be a recession in 1980. He loses reelection in a landslide.
 
I too don't think Reagan can win in 1976. He has taken unpopular positions. He can be tied to Nixon. He is of the president's party in bad economic times. If he could somehow pull it off, he would let the Shah in. There would still be a hostage crisisx There would still be a recession in 1980. He loses reelection in a landslide.

I agree. Ford had a better shot to be honest. Just swing Ohio and Wisconsin and he's in. Can't say much for the next Republican in 1980, though, who ironically might be Reagan.
 
I doubt that Reagan, if he got the GOP nomination, could win in November 1976. For one thing, the GOP will be divided. For another, Watergate and the economy would hurt any GOP presidential candidate. Finally, Reagan's strongest areas will be the West and South--but Ford carried every western state (except Hawaii) anyway (Reagan might carry some of them by larger margins, but this counts for nothing in the Electoral College), and Carter as a southerner would be strong in the South against any GOP candidate--note that *even in 1980* he came very close to beating Reagan in most southern states. http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/pres/1980.txt

One thing is almost certain--if Reagan *does* manage to beat Carter in 1976, it will be by a narrow margin--nothing like 1980. Congress will therefore be heavily Democratic, and Reagan will have a much harder time in 1977 then in 1981 of getting his economic program, especially tax cuts, enacted. Moreover, Congress will probably be even more hostile after the 1978 midterms (the party controlling the White House almost slawys loses seats in midterms).

For example, in OTL the Democrats controlled 61 of the 100 Senate seats after the 1976 election. Very likely they will control almost as many if Reagan wins narrowly in 1976--except for Howard Metzenbaum's victory in Ohio, none of the Democoratic victories in OTL was really close. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_1976 This is vastly different from the situation Reagan faced in OTL after 1980, when the GOP won control of the Senate 53-46. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_elections,_1980
 
I agree. Ford had a better shot to be honest. Just swing Ohio and Wisconsin and he's in. Can't say much for the next Republican in 1980, though, who ironically might be Reagan.

If Ford wins in 76, Reagan is the 1980 nominee. He loses because of the recession, the hostage crisis and his unpopular views.
 
not really, '76 was an incredibly close run thing

Yes, but Reagan was viewed as significantly more extreme than Ford. Even in 1980, that dissatisfaction with Reagan is what helped keep the polling so close until the end. (Reagan actually had the lowest favorability ratings of any winning presidential candidate ever.)

Ford managed to stage a comeback due to his moderate reputation, his incumbency, and his strength in the Midwest combined with some gaffes on Carter's side. Most of those factors aren't going to be helping Reagan - quite a few Ford backers will switch to supporting Carter in this scenario.

Not to say Reagan absolutely can't win in '76, but the odds would be very much against him.
 
Reagan is going to have a very tough time in '76. As flawed as The Carter campaign was in the general election, they can very easily paint him out to be the second coming of Barry Goldwater and pull off a very decisive win. On top of that, Reagan would be the nominee of the President's party during a recession, and on top of that you have Watergate and Reagan can very easily be tied to Nixon just like Ford was but for different reasons.

However, if for whatever Reagan pulled off a miracle and won the GOP nomination and beat Carter in the general, 1980 TTL is going to be an even bigger disaster for the GOP than '80 OTL was for the Democrats. Reagan will have double digit inflation, a Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and a revolution in Iran with an energy shortage just like Carter did. The hostage crisis may not happen, but all the other bad events of 1977-1980 are still going to happen, and Reagan, just like Carter will get blamed and lose the 1980 election. On top of that, Reagan will have voter fatigue to deal with as the GOP would've had the White House for 12 years in TTL, and 12 years of Vietnam, Watergate, energy shortages, and inflation is not going to help the GOP going into 1980.
 
Would Reagan's military Keynesianism have been a good response to stagflation, by sheer good luck if nothing else?

Would a younger, healthier Brezhnev been a cool customer not easily rattled by Reagan's blustering, thereby avoiding the danger peaks of 1983?
 
Would Reagan's military Keynesianism have been a good response to stagflation, by sheer good luck if nothing else?

Would a younger, healthier Brezhnev been a cool customer not easily rattled by Reagan's blustering, thereby avoiding the danger peaks of 1983?

The main person responsible for the economic recovery in the mid 80's was Paul Volcker, who was appointed to be chairman of the Federal reserve by Jimmy Carter in 1979 and was reappointed by Reagan, as he was the one who broke the back of inflation. I doubt Reagan's military Keynesianism alone would've helped it (keep in mind Carter was the one that started the military build up that Reagan is credited for in 1979 or 1980), nor do I think Reagan would've appointed Volcker without someone else doing it first.
 
I really think Keynesian economics, deficit spending, priming the pump is the way to go during economic hard times.

Now, some of this is personal. I graduated from high school in May '81 and had a heck of a hard time finding any kind of job, as did my friends. One friend graduated a year later in May '82 and joined the United States Navy and served honorably, in part because of a lack of other job opportunities.

So, between addressing unemployment and addressing inflation, I say both are important, giving a slight nod to unemployment side of the equation. But overall, we're always trying to achieve multiple goals at the same time, that's just the way we have to do it.

And if there's a single most important engine, I'd say it's economic growth. An advanced economy like the United States needs to keep growing (say two-and-a-half percent a year?), almost like a shark swimming forward. How we reconcile that with stewardship of the environment is another question. Maybe more aggressively pursuing cleaner energies, that kind of thing.
 
If Ford wins in 76, Reagan is the 1980 nominee. He loses because of the recession, the hostage crisis and his unpopular views.


Don't forget though if Ford wins in 1976, conservative Bob Dole is the Vice-President. Reagan would have to defeat a Vice-President Dole in the primaries and Dole would likely have the Washington Republican establishment behind him. Both Dole and Reagan were very conservative (Dole would have to distinguish himself from Ford's policies though). But a Dole vs. Reagan 1980 primary battle could be a bloody one splitting conservatives. Maybe helping some moderate Republican like a Howard Baker end up with the Republican nomination in 1980 (George Bush would probably be Secretary of State by 1980 having replaced Kissinger at some point and unlikely to run).

That's just my theory.
 
Top