Talk Elections

The Anderson/Kennedy thread gave me an idea: what if John Anderson had been Reagan's running mate in 1980 instead of George H. W. Bush?  This is actually two questions:  

1. Who do you think would have won?
2. Who would you have voted for and why?

My answers:
1. Reagan, by an even bigger margin than he did in real life (with Bush I).  Carter was such an incompetent president that he would have had trouble against nearly and Republican ticket.  Anderson on the ticket would've helped unite the GOP more and the moderates/liberals would have given Reagan even more support.

2. Reagan.  I would've been straddling the fence between the conservative wing of the GOP (support for traditional values) and the moderate and liberal wing (distrust of conservatives regarding race, gender, etc. because of some old wounds from the civil rights movement.)  But since Reagan offered the best of both worlds (and because Jimmy Carter was such a terrible president, although he's a a great man), he would have gotten my vote in a heartbeat (though he probably would have anyway had I been alive and old enough to vote in the actual election, with Bush I as his running mate.)

()

My guess. Carter loses MN, RI, and MD thanks to some OTL Anderson voters switching over. I left him with WV because, even though he took it with >40% margins, if you add up Reagan's and Anderson's totals, they're just shy of taking the state. As well, I gave Carter HI because I think a number of Anderson voters there would have been much more likely to go Carter than Reagan anyway. However, there's the chance that some Anderson voters in MN, RI, and MD would've stuck with Carter in this scenario as well. It's tricky given we son't know how much of Anderson's support was made up of otherwise loyal liberal Republicans, disaffected liberal Democrats, independents, and so on.

Also, and I'm not saying this is likely, but if Reagan goes a bit to the left, it's possible that Carter could pick up strength in the South. After all, a number of Southern states only went to Reagan with >40% margins.

Reagan/Bush vs Carter/Anderson might make a more interesting scenario, since there is no way Reagan would lose the title matchup.

Something like this, probably.
()

•   Chinese citizens feel that Obama is a terrible president who is arrogant and also anti American. We feel he will bring down the great country of America and turn it into a Muslim prong
). Posted by Joe
Supporter of the Presidential Election car Shade campaign on Indiegogo. Show your support with a car shade!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFods1KSWsQ

What does this have to do with anything related to Ronald Reagan, John Anderson, Jimmy Carter, or Walter Mondale?

Here's my map (assuming all the Anderson voters would have gone for Reagan):

()
Reagan/Anderson- 517
Carter/Mondale- 21

Probably not a safe assumption; maybe 60% would've gone for Reagan, maybe 20% for Carter, and 20% would have not voted. There would be a small (say, 2%) pro-Reagan swing in the North on top of that, directly from Carter to Reagan, and probably a small, 2% pro-Carter swing in the South. The shifts:

Alabama: Reagan does get increased support from Anderson voters, but then there's a small, 2% swing from him to Carter, which adds up to a narrow Carter victory.

Arkansas: See Alabama.

Hawaii: Increased support from Anderson voters probably gives Reagan a victory. Keep in mind Ford nearly won Hawaii in '76; it was much less Democratic back then.

Maryland: Yup, increased support from Anderson voters gives it to Reagan. There would be a small flip backwards, as parts of Maryland are culturally Southern, but it wouldn't be the full 2%; I calculated a 1% flip, which results in a narrow Reagan victory.

Minnesota: Increased support from Anderson voters. For those of you who note 1984, Mondale was the presidential nominee then; he would've had less of an effect in 1980.

Mississippi: Again, the Anderson increase does not make up for the Carter bump.

North Carolina: This would be the closest state of the election, but by less than 0.1% percentage points, Carter would eke out a victory here.

Rhode Island: The support from Anderson voters isn't enough to give Reagan a victory here, but a small shift of liberals who voted tactically from Carter to Reagan in Northern states (I hypothesized 2% up there) does, by an even narrower margin than in Maryland.

South Carolina, Tennessee: Narrow Reagan victories.

So, yeah, because of the South Carter actually gains: from 49 electoral votes to 76. However, this is still not very much, and they are more regionally concentrated:

()

No way that would happen. A majority of Anderson voters were more disaffected independent liberals who didn't wanna vote for Carter. It would be more natural to assume that Carter picks up most of the voters while there is a small split among the rest between Reagan, Ed Clark and simply staying home.