WI Ted Kennedy presidency in 1980

The secret service would have kittens when you think of the number of less than wholly rational persons with guns, the zero curse and the Kennedy curse

I suspect that the crazy who tried ot murder Regan would succeed.

Who would Ted have as VP?
 
Who would Ted have as VP?
Terry Sanford and Lloyd Bentsen are go-to choices usually.

Appreciate all of the advice everyone. I'm far from ready to start much into this but at least now I don't feel like I'm up shit creek without a paddle.
 
Given the fact that his son had bone cancer that resulted in a leg being amputated in late November 1973, EMK sitting out '76 is not that implausible, doubly so given Joan's behind-the-scenes problems. That could hold up even with there being no Chappaquiddick.

So, family issues preclude a '76 race, which, as in '76, Carter wins the nomination. The difference is that Ford wins (no "no Soviet domination" gaffe in the debate) and winds up with much the same mess on his hands that Carter did. EMK would have been ripe for a 1980 run then.

So, you have an epic Reagan-Kennedy race that Kennedy wins. If you have a Fed Chairman like Volcker, the economy will recover much the way it did during the OTL Reagan years and the USSR will continue to rot away from within. Kennedy, rather than working to turn government into the enemy, embarks on a course of reform of traditional liberal programs rather than embarking on a massive military buildup. This might buy the USSR a year or two, but, in hindsight, the Warsaw Pact/USSR was headed for a crack-up anyway. The tech of the '80s and '90s was coming regardless of who was President, so you wind up with a Kennedy Presidency that looks pretty good in hindsight...
 
It would take Ford winning in 1976 for Kennedy to have a real shot at winning in 1980. There would have been Republican fatigue after 12 years of Nixon/Ford. I think there still would have been high unemployment, high inflation, and a oil crisis even with Ford as president in the late 70s. There probably wouldn't have been a hostage crisis though. Ford would have still let the 1980 U.S. Olympic team play in the Moscow games. The Democrats would have grown their majority in the congress after the 1978 midterms. There likely would have been a nasty primary fight between Governor Reagan and Vice-President Dole. Reagan still would have likely squeaked out a win for the nomination. Kennedy knowing he'll likely need California since winning the south would be too difficult for him, he chooses CA Gov. Jerry Brown to be his running mate.

Kennedy/Brown defeats Reagan/Bush 304-234 by winning California in a tight race. In March of 1981 John Hinkley tries to assassinate President Ted Kennedy. But because of the larger and more organized secret service detail, Hinkley's shots miss the president but wound a member of the secret service. Kennedy would've pushed an infrastructure heavy jobs bill (something like the WPA) and a national health care system. After making some compromises he'd likely get both, but he would have exhausted most of his political capital. Kennedy nominates Judge Shirley Hufstedler to be the first female justice on the SCOTUS in 1981. The 1982 midterms would have been unkind to him and the Democrats. The Republicans would have likely gained many seats in both houses returning the makeup of congress to the way it looked in 1976. Maybe the Republicans take control of the senate with something like 51-49. But former MA Governor Michael Dukakis ends up winning Kennedy's old senate seat. Kennedy would want an arms control treaty with the USSR, but negotiations would stall and the deaths of Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko made getting one even more difficult.

By 1983 the economy would start to pick up and Americans would like having a national health care system. Especially those who didn't have coverage before. Kennedy would also push for and sign the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1984. Former Vice-President Dole would win the nomination to be the GOP nominee in 1984. But he would get a strong challenge from Pennsylvania's 46 year old Senator John Heinz. Dole wanting to pick up an electoral rich Midwestern state and attract Heinz's primary supporters, asked Heinz to be his running mate. Heinz thought Dole would lose to Kennedy and didn't want to be on a losing ticket so he declined Dole's offer. Dole would then chose PA's Governor Dick Thornburgh to be his running mate. Despite stories of Kennedy's White House affairs in the tabloids, the improved economy helps get Kennedy re-elected in 1984 by a comfortable margin.

In 1985 he would have reformed Social Security and signed an immigration bill. In 1986 he would be able to sign an arms control treaty with Gorbachev. But around this time there would have been some sort of a Lewinsky type of sex scandal with actual proof of his adultery. Warren Burger retires and Kennedy nominates Attorney General Birch Bayh to be the next Chief Justice. The Republicans pick up seats in congress in 1986. In 1987 Kennedy nominates Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg to replace Justice William Brennan (the liberal Brennan retires instead of the conservative Lewis Powell). In 1988 Thurgood Marshall fears that a Republican might win in November and he knows his health is failing. So he decides to retire and Kennedy appoints Vernon Jordan (a Circuit Court judge Kennedy appointed in his first term) to replace him. Kennedy spent his time as a lame duck president pushing for the release of Nelson Mandela, who would get released in 1988. He would continue to work for peace in Northern Ireland, the reunification of Germany, and an arms reduction treaty with the USSR. Vice-President Jerry Brown would beat Senator Heinz in a close election in 1988.

Kennedy would retire to Hyannis Port in 1989. He and Joan would be divorced by 1990. Kennedy's post-presidency would likely look like the way Clinton's has in OTL. He'd probably in the early 1990s champion fighting the AIDS epidemic, traveling the world to try to fight the spread of the disease. He'd probably continue to advocate liberal causes and legislation. Making paid speeches and writing books until his death.


The Kennedy Administration (1981-1989)

President of the United States
Edward Kennedy (1981-1989)

Vice-President of the United States

Jerry Brown (1981-1989)

Secretary of State
Frank Church (1981-1984)
Claiborne Pell (1984-1989)

Secretary of the Treasury
W. Michael Blumenthal (1981-1985)
Edmund Muskie (1985-1989)

Secretary of Defense
George McGovern (1981-1987)
Vance Hartke (1987-1989)

Attorney General
Birch Bayh (1981-1986)
Derrick Bell (1986-1989)

Secretary of the Interior
Morris Udall (1981-1985)
Floyd K. Haskell (1985-1989)

Secretary of Agriculture
Wendell Anderson (1981-1985)
George Busbee (1985-1989)

Secretary of Commerce
Hugh Carey (1981-1989)

Secretary of Labor
Edward Brooke (1981-1989)

Secretary of Health and Human Services
Abraham Ribicoff (1981-1984)
John Brademas (1984-1986)
Martha Wright Griffiths (1986-1989)

Secretary of Education
Patricia Schroeder (1981-1986)
James Farmer (1986-1989)

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
Shirley Chisholm (1981-1987)
Jane Byrne (1987-1989)

Secretary of Transportation
Howard Cannon (1981-1989)

Secretary of Energy
Stewart Udall (1981-1989)

National Security Advisor
Roswell Gilpatric (1981-1984)
John Culver (1984-1989)

Director of Central Intelligence
Daniel Inouye (1981-1989)

Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
Ted Sorensen (1981-1984)
Roswell Gilpatric (1984-1989)

Chairman of the Federal Reserve
Paul Volcker (1981-1989)

Ambassador to the United Nations
Sargent Shriver (1981-1989)

White House Chief of Staff
John Culver (1981-1984)
Bob Shrum (1984-1987)
John Brademas (1987-1989)

Supreme Court appointments
Shirley Hufstedler (1981, replaced Potter Stewart)
Birch Bayh (1986, appointed Chief Justice, replaced Warren Burger)
Ruth Bader Ginsburg (1987, replaced William Brennan)
Vernon Jordan (1988, replaced Thurgood Marshall)
 
Last edited:
The 1982 midterms would have been unkind to him and the Democrats. The Republicans would have likely gained many seats in both houses returning the makeup of congress to the way it looked in 1976. Maybe the Republicans take control of the senate with something like 51-49.

I agree with a lot of the stuff in your post except this part. Under this scenario Republicans will do much better in 1982, but when you crunch the numbers it will be almost impossible for them to win the Senate. I have the Democrats gaining Senate seats in 1978 getting them to 64-65 seats. Then the Reagan wave of 1980 that knocked out a bunch of the Watergate babies from 1974 doesn't happen, so the Democrats are looking to maintain their numbers or possibly even gain 1 or 2 net seats, and at worst maybe lose 1 net seat. Come 1982 Democrats will have numbers close to the mid 60's in the Senate, so Republicans would need anywhere from 14-18 seats to win control. When you look at the races that year the Democrats are defending 19 seats. So Republicans would need a massive landslide to make that happen.

So I think it's more likely Republicans win the House than the Senate in 1982, but I doubt they even do that. My money is on 1986 as a good time for Republicans to win back the Senate for this timeline. The House will depend on how quickly the South makes its change to the Republican stronghold it became in the OTL. With a real liberal like Kennedy in the Whitehouse that may come sooner than 1994. But it also depends on things like how congressional districts were drawn. With Democrats doing better in 1978 and 1980 they will control more State legislatures during redistricting and can possibly gerrymander themselves into a permanent majority for the rest of the decade. So it would take a wave election to wipe that out, otherwise the Republicans will have to wait until after the 1990 census and the next round of redistricting to get control of the House.
 

katchen

Banned
How would Gerald Ford have handled Iran relations with the fall of the Shah in 1978?. I don't think the US could prop the Shah up and preventg hiim from falling. Would Ford have his own Hostage Crisis?
And would Gerald Ford have pushed Israel for the Camp David Agreeent? Would Kennedy, four years later?
 
Why would Kennedy run if Carter was not President? Kennedy liked being in the Senate at least from what I know, and only ran in 1980 because he was offended by the more conservative direction Carter was taking the party. Without Carter, Kennedy does not have that kind of motivation, and the most likely people to win the nomination are liberals far more acceptable to Kennedy than President Carter. So why would he run?
 
If no Iran Hostage Crisis took place, there are plausible scenarios in which Ted Kennedy--despite Chappaquiddick--defeats President Carter for the Democratic nomination in 1980. Carter would nonetheless win his base in the southern state primaries and caucuses against Kennedy, which bodes ill for Kennedy's chances in the general election. The Democratic Party would be deeply divided. Kennedy would probably have to take a southern running mate--like Senator Benton of Texas--to try and mend fences as best he could.

A Kennedy nomination probably means no John Anderson independent candidacy, as he was basically a voice for liberal opposition to both Carter and Reagan.

Beating Reagan in the Fall is probably an insurmountable problem for Kennedy in any 1980 scenario, as the general electorate at that time would be less forgiving to Kennedy about Chappaquiddick and womanizing than Democratic primary voters. It was commented on at the time that Reagan and his wife were more reminiscent of JFK and Jackie, than were Ted and Joan Kennedy. IMHO, Reagan still wins a landslide, but Kennedy does better than Carter because he carries New York, Massachusetts, a few other New England states without Anderson in the race. Georgia goes for Reagan ITTL though.
 
If no Iran Hostage Crisis took place, there are plausible scenarios in which Ted Kennedy--despite Chappaquiddick--defeats President Carter for the Democratic nomination in 1980. Carter would nonetheless win his base in the southern state primaries and caucuses against Kennedy, which bodes ill for Kennedy's chances in the general election. The Democratic Party would be deeply divided. Kennedy would probably have to take a southern running mate--like Senator Benton of Texas--to try and mend fences as best he could.

A Kennedy nomination probably means no John Anderson independent candidacy, as he was basically a voice for liberal opposition to both Carter and Reagan.

Beating Reagan in the Fall is probably an insurmountable problem for Kennedy in any 1980 scenario, as the general electorate at that time would be less forgiving to Kennedy about Chappaquiddick and womanizing than Democratic primary voters. It was commented on at the time that Reagan and his wife were more reminiscent of JFK and Jackie, than were Ted and Joan Kennedy. IMHO, Reagan still wins a landslide, but Kennedy does better than Carter because he carries New York, Massachusetts, a few other New England states without Anderson in the race. Georgia goes for Reagan ITTL though.

I don't think millions of unemployed Americans would have cared about Teddy's womanizing. The people that would vote against him solely on that reason likely would have never voted for him anyway. Teddy would have likely denied it unless there was physical proof (pictures, tape recordings, a love child) out there somewhere of his adultery. Without proof he would have denied it and said those allegations were just "Nixon style dirty tricks" by the Republicans. 1980 was after the sexual revolution and many Americans knew about JFK's affairs by that point too. I don't think most Americans would have cared as much as they would've in the early 60s.
 
Thank you CCK, for writing the TL I never could've managed. I'm genuinely grateful and if I still move forward with a TL I'll give you credit and use some of your ideas.

Why would Kennedy run if Carter was not President? Kennedy liked being in the Senate at least from what I know, and only ran in 1980 because he was offended by the more conservative direction Carter was taking the party. Without Carter, Kennedy does not have that kind of motivation, and the most likely people to win the nomination are liberals far more acceptable to Kennedy than President Carter. So why would he run?
Kennedy still considered running in 1984 and 1988 without Carter, so while I know Carter was a big motivating factor I don't think he was the sole factor - or at least, not so much Carter himself as the basic idea of a conservative Democrat gaining hold. Maybe in a similar but not identical scenario, he still goes for it. My placeholder excuse for my TL early draft was Carter loses in '76 and stubbornly tries to go for it again in '80, but as a non-incumbent, taking away his advantage but still giving Kennedy a reason to enter. Not that I'd ever have used it in the published draft though.
 
I wrote this post about Senate elections for 1978 & 1980 in a thread about a possible Ford victory in 1976 last year. Maybe this can help with your timeline:

I think Democrats are favorites to win 1980 simply because Republicans will have held office for 12 years, and voters would be ready to give the other party a chance. When you add in stagflation, it makes that outcome even more likely. I'll leave the others to go into more detail about the Presidential race, but I'd like to focus on what a Ford Presidency means for Senate elections in 1978 and 1980, because this will have a huge impact on what a possible Democratic President after 1980 would be able to accomplish.

With a President Ford during the 1978 midterms, you can expect a shift in voting percentages away from Republicans and toward the Democrats compared to what they were in President Carter's midterm, as people tend to vote against the party in control of the Presidency. I think Democrats still lose Colorado, Maine, and Mississippi, because those elections were blowouts in the OTL so a shift of a few percentage points would not change anything. They might still lose South Dakota, especially if Senator Abourezk retires. He only served one term and was just 47 years old at the time, so I'm not sure if his decision was based on a tough re-election fight in a bad midterm situation, or if he was really just tired of politics. Since I don't know what his intentions were and what the numbers of a matchup between him and Pressler would be, I'll say he still retires and Pressler wins the seat. So that's 4 pickups for Republicans.

For the Democrats in 1978, I'd say they still pickup Massachusetts, Michigan, Nebraska, New Jersey, and Oklahoma as in the OTL. Texas and Virginia were both decided by a half a percent or less, so with a national swing of a few points those should be pickups for the Dems too. Illinois, New Mexico, and North Carolina would be much closer, giving the Democrats a chance to win some of those seats. I think Helms survives in North Carolina, but Democrats win Illinois and New Mexico. So that's 9 possible pickups for the Democrats.

Without Mondale becoming VP the clusterfuck in Minnesota doesn't occur, with Governor Anderson resigning office to take the seat and new Governor Perpich being involved and both of them losing their elections in the midterms. Now Mondale stays in office and should win re-election in 1978. Humphrey still dies, and his wife is still appointed to fill the office until the special election in 1978. But now Anderson can run for that seat while finishing up his second term as Governor, and Perpich will run for Governor and both probably win in this timeline. Then there are some of the close races Democratic incumbents lost that could switch in this timeline. A shift of just a couple of points from Republican to Democrat should save Dick Clark in Iowa, and McIntyre in New Hampshire.

So after the 1978 midterms we have 9 Democratic pickups to 4 Republican, giving Democrats a net gain of 5 seats, to bring their numbers up to 66 seats in the Senate, while Republicans have 33, and Harry F. Byrd, Jr. of Virginia as the lone Independent who caucuses with the Dems.

The 1980 Senate races will have even bigger changes without the Reagan wave to bring in 12 new Republican Senators. Even if Reagan runs in this timeline and gets the nomination, the conditions will not be there for a Republican wave election. If anything the momentum would be with the Democrats after 12 years of Republican Presidents. Democrats would be defending a bunch of the seats held by the Watergate Babies, so there aren't too many pickup opportunities. The only possible close races of Republican controlled seats are in Arizona, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Pennsylvania. Goldwater held his seat by just 1.1% in a Republican wave year, so he's toast. Al D'Amato defeated Elizabeth Holtzman in New York by just 1.4%, so he will lose too, and Holtzman becomes the first Female Senator from New York instead of Hillary Clinton 20 years later. I think Don Nickles still holds Oklahoma for the Republicans in this timeline. He won by 10% in the OTL, and even though it is much closer this time, that's a big gap to make up. Packwood probably wins re-election in Oregon in a squeaker, so another Republican hold. In Pennsylvania, Specter won the seat of retiring Schweiker by just 2% in the OTL. If Schweiker still retires then Flaherty probably beats Specter. So we have 3 likely pickups for the Democrats in 1980.

As for possible Democratic holds, there are 6 seats that Republicans won by less than 3.5%, so I say they definitely stay Dem this year. Those are Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, North Carolina, and Wisconsin. Another 5 were won by less than 8.4%, so when you take out the wave those become much closer. I think Democrats could hold all of those as well if this becomes a Democratic wave election. The only seat Democrats will probably lose is McGoverns in South Dakota, which was lost by 18.8% in the OTL. So we have a possible Republican pickup of 1 seat.

That means the Democrats win 3 to the Republicans 1, for a net gain of 2 seats, bringing their numbers up to 68 Senate seats, against 31 Republicans, and Independent Harry F. Byrd, Jr. of Virgina who caucuses with the Democrats. With 68/69 votes in the Senate as well as even bigger control of the House, and the Presidency, the Democrats could pass a lot of their agenda in 1981-1982.
That's near the high end of what a good Democratic midterm followed by a Democratic wave in 1980 would bring in the Senate. If you want to make it closer then you can have the Republicans hold the three seats in Illinois, New Mexico, and North Carolina in 1978 making the Senate 64D-35R-1I. Then have the Republicans win Alaska, Indiana, Iowa, and Washington in addition to South Dakota in 1980 for a net gain of 2 seats for a 62D-37R-1I Senate after 1980.
 
Top