Who would you prefer to have won? (1980s version)

[Mad Deadly Worldwide Communist Gangster Computer God]

Vote.

[Dr. Cynic]

Mondale I think would have been a much better candidate against a different President. People forget that Mondale trounced Reagan in the first debate and could be razor sharp. He was just up against Ronnie...

Dukakis didn't have any stones. Lloyd Bentsen would have won that election with a 20 point lead that the Dems had. The ticket should have been reversed.

[politicallefty]

I think Mondale would've been the better President, not to mention the huge difference with having him instead of Reagan.

As far as Supreme Court nominations go, having either or those terms would've been great. Mondale could have replaced conservatives Burger and Powell, while Dukakis could have replaced staunch liberals Brennan and Marshall. If Democrats were just going to have one of those terms, it's pretty much a wash. Either one would have made the Court quite a bit more liberal than the Republican-nominated alternatives.

[Maxwell]

Dukakis.

[TDAS04]

Mondale.

[Goldwater]

Dukakis.

[TNF]

What would be the difference? Both were dyed-in-the-wool corporate Democrats who would not have fundamentally altered the Reaganite trajectory of the country at that point in American history. Mondale would have been a one-termer brought down by the '87 stock market crash (he doesn't have the charisma to pull off a come from behind victory like Bush did, nor would he likely have the benefit of running against a dunce like Dukakis), and Dukakis would have basically done the same things Bush did in office, invading Iraq and then watching as the economy floundered and a Republican replaced him.

[Cryptic]

Mondale.  Making Reagan a one termer would discredit supply-side and might limit the influence of the religious right. 

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Dukakis.

[Illuminati Blood Drinker]

Mondale.

[ElectionsGuy]

Dukakis.

[H. Ross Peron]

Mondale.