Would the following people have won re-election if they could?

[morgieb]

Well?

[Donerail]

Eisenhower and Clinton. Polling around that time was average for Reagan, but more than that, he was 77 years old and not up for vigorous campaigning, and would more than likely have declined a third term.

[Supersonic]

All but Bush.

[Sasquatch]

Clinton and Eisenhower would be slam dunks. Reagan is iffy due to his age. Bush would be DOA.

[Wisconsin+17]

Bush, Reagan, and Eisenhower.

All three stepped down for far less popular successors in Nixon, McCain and Bush Jr.

[NHI]

Eisenhower, Reagan, Clinton easily.
No on Bush.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The first three would have won if they ran, but Reagan would not have run and Ike most likely would not have.

[Maxwell]

Clinton and Ike would win easily, but only Clinton would do it.

Reagan's age would've made it difficult.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Bush

ROFLMAO

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Everyone except Bush.  If Kennedy hadn't been assassinated, then he would have, too.

[Stranger in a strange land]

The first three would have won if they ran, but Reagan would not have run and Ike most likely would not have.

Everyone except Bush.  If Kennedy hadn't been assassinated, then he would have, too.

That's hard to say, because there's no way of knowing what a 2nd JFK term would have looked like.

Bush

ROFLMAO

The question with Dubya is how badly he would have lost.

[Maxwell]

Bush would've been beat in the primaries methinks.

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

Eisenhower - Probably not
Reagan - Yes
Clinton - Yes
Bush - No

[Jerseyrules]

Clinton and Eisenhower would be slam dunks. Reagan is iffy due to his age. Bush would be DOA.

Not so much.  Eisenhower was pretty old too - if memory serves approaching 70.  He'd also had 2 heart attacks.  We also can't assume all these people would've had second terms identical to IOTL; they might've governed a bit differently if they were running for re-election, and the opposition party's candidates might've been completely different as well

Conversely, Bush's second term might be much different - no surge, stricter regulations on fanny and Freddy, etc might've helped keep his approvals over 40%.  He'd fight a very difficult battle, but all in all I wouldn't completely discount it if the financial crisis is kept at bay and the Dems nominate someone very lackluster.  (Kerry v. Bush or Bush v. Gore rematch anyone )

Finally, with Clinton, I don't understand why everyone thinks a third term would be a slam dunk.  Lewinsky would've hit him harder, and W campaigning as a family values crusader would've been pretty appealing to people disgusted with Slick Willy's conduct.  Maybe the GOP realizes the best strategy is to allow people to be outraged but not politicize it too much by impeaching him = no "poor me" effect.  Finally, Bill had some health problems of his own - the otl stress of Lewinsky, governing the country for 8 years, etc, and add to that the task of what would likely be a very close re-election bid, it's possible he makes it out 3 terms alive, but things don't look too good.  A fourth term bid might kill him.

[Paul Kemp]

I'd say Clinton and Reagan would be almost locks (albeit by much smaller margins than their previous elections). I don't think Eisenhower would've even tried.

[NVGonzalez]

All but Bush. The only man who would have tried though is Clinton.

Bush like someone said before would lose in the primary to either McCain or someone more conservative.