1980 American Union National Convention

[Mr. Smith]

Whoever makes it easier for a reverse IRL 1980 that gives the landslide to Frank Church/Jimmy Carter

NOTE: What, I can wish can't I?

[Mr. Smith]

For people from the, er, opposite camp who might strategically vote a certain way, that has its own repercussions.

Truth be told, I would've sat it out if the results would've been open without voting.

But since I'm number crunching from initial lead to the end, I have to vote to see the direction things will be going.

And I'd have done the same thing to the DA under the same circumstances had Church not been not been solidly nominated.

[Mr. Smith]

Whoever makes it easier for a reverse IRL 1980 that gives the landslide to Frank Church/Jimmy Carter

NOTE: What, I can wish can't I?

Why would Church's runningmate be Carter?  The only vote for VP from a Church supporter was for a Church/Metzenbaum ticket and Carter is in a different party than Church (and one that just nominated LaRouche of all people).  It's not like Church would realistically need Carter's support (or any sort of unity ticket) to win over non-LaRouchies from the WP. Also can we please not do strategic voting?  It just makes the elections less interesting.  I'm not even voting in this primary for that very reason

He wouldn't (hence "I can wish can't I?"):

But keep in mind:

 The DA formed on an ideological fallout in the first place, and easily could've not chosen Morse the first time around as Running Mate.

Yes he's not needed for non-LaRocuhie support, but why stop there? The DA have NEVER won the South, and sans 1972 lefty-split that allowed  Taft a landslide, the AU have been losing the Northeast (and even then McCarthy stole votes from the otherwise solidly Muskie rural areas, and otherwise solidly Kennedy urban areas).

1976 before the final hour had Sanford holding up in the Northeast and dominating in the South, and in the end, he still had the South, barely lost Pennsylvania to Bayh, and Vermont to Taft, and he kept Maine.

Carter could pretty much do that for the DA, that Metzenbaum couldn't.

WHY would either party deliberately rule out a chance to remain competitive in a weak region and fortify the strong regions?


...But I know that won't happen.

[Mr. Smith]

Whoever makes it easier for a reverse IRL 1980 that gives the landslide to Frank Church/Jimmy Carter

NOTE: What, I can wish can't I?

Why would Church's runningmate be Carter?  The only vote for VP from a Church supporter was for a Church/Metzenbaum ticket and Carter is in a different party than Church (and one that just nominated LaRouche of all people).  It's not like Church would realistically need Carter's support (or any sort of unity ticket) to win over non-LaRouchies from the WP. Also can we please not do strategic voting?  It just makes the elections less interesting.  I'm not even voting in this primary for that very reason

He wouldn't (hence "I can wish can't I?"):

But keep in mind:

 The DA formed on an ideological fallout in the first place, and easily could've not chosen Morse the first time around as Running Mate.

Yes he's not needed for non-LaRocuhie support, but why stop there? The DA have NEVER won the South, and sans 1972 lefty-split that allowed  Taft a landslide, the AU have been losing the Northeast (and even then McCarthy stole votes from the otherwise solidly Muskie rural areas, and otherwise solidly Kennedy urban areas).

1976 before the final hour had Sanford holding up in the Northeast and dominating in the South, and in the end, he still had the South, barely lost Pennsylvania to Bayh, and Vermont to Taft, and he kept Maine.

Carter could pretty much do that for the DA, that Metzenbaum couldn't.

WHY would either party deliberately rule out a chance to remain competitive in a weak region and fortify the strong regions?


...But I know that won't happen.

Because there is no reason to assume a little known Governor of Georgia who is way to the right of the DA would lock up the South.  Plus Carter had a terrible temperament for elected office and was a pretty bad President IRL.  Metzenbaum would've been great and locked up Ohio!

Agreed about the temperament and the lack of "need" of unity, but highly disagreed about the rest (mostly because the electoral history is vastly different here), and I'm leaving it at that.

[Mr. Smith]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=178971.msg4475270#msg4475270

This what things look like right now, one has to be nominated, so be mindful because right now there is a big tie, and a bunch of little ones.