The liberal Republic

[OSR stands with Israel]

Reagan 1972

[OSR stands with Israel]

Go Reagan!

[OSR stands with Israel]

Go Reagan

[OSR stands with Israel]

Go Reagan !!!

[OSR stands with Israel]

I’m pretty surprised you gave Rocky a win on Economics but Reagan a win on Foreign Policy , because Reagan biggest support usually came from people who valued economic policy while he lost on foreign policy .



In 1980 the Economic/Buisness Establishment supported Reagan from day 1 while the Foregin Policy establishment was more reluctant to support him

[OSR stands with Israel]

Will Reagan choose a vp before the convention again



I would say these would be good candidates :

Howard Baker
George Romney
George HW Bush

[OSR stands with Israel]

If I had to guess, California seems like the place to go more to Rockefeller (seeing as it was a more-often-than-not Republican state in those days), though I can see the Schmitz/John Birch types in Southern California detracting from crucial otherwise-Republican votes. In either case, I have no dog in this fight; if I know President Johnson (the poster), it'll be a Rockefeller win--particularly since the alternative is a resurgent conservatism that kinda sorta gets in the way of the title of this piece.

You could argue though California was Republican because of Nixon and Reagan (both being from CA ) .



1976 was due to Carter being a terrible fit for CA and 1988 was due to HW being VP of a popular president from CA

[OSR stands with Israel]

This was great! Might even be for the best- without Watergate and Reagan, perhaps the era of polarization will never come in the intensity we're seeing today.
Rocky '76, RFK '80, RFK '84!

if you want to stop that , have some other GOP congressman become the Speaker of the House in the mid 1990s.

[OSR stands with Israel]

This was great! Might even be for the best- without Watergate and Reagan, perhaps the era of polarization will never come in the intensity we're seeing today.
Rocky '76, RFK '80, RFK '84!

if you want to stop that , have some other GOP congressman become the Speaker of the House in the mid 1990s.

Agreed, though Reagan laid the ideological groundwork and moved the party to the right on many issues. But he understood how to make deals with Democrats and hold common-sense positions on some other topics (like gun control) and was pretty liberal in immigration. With this stance, he'd likely perform poorly in today's Republican Party (Reagan is actually some Jeff Flake with more charisma).

Rocky 76 and then RFK seems likely at this moment of history, but I'd just like to remind that several leaders including presidents came out of nowhere within a short period of time. Who heard of Barack Obama in 2000 or Bill Clinton 1984 outside of their constituencies? However, it's weird or funny to think about RFK being a major figure in the 1980s.

I would say more of a John Kasich with Charisma(Remember Kasich was considered pretty conservative when he was in Congress, now he is considered a moderate).


I would say he could do well in the GOP primary for these reasons: He was very charismatic, he was very good of appealing to conservative and moderate voters without looking like a flip-flopper, and he probably would get a lot of support from the establishment.

[OSR stands with Israel]

This was great! Might even be for the best- without Watergate and Reagan, perhaps the era of polarization will never come in the intensity we're seeing today.
Rocky '76, RFK '80, RFK '84!

if you want to stop that , have some other GOP congressman become the Speaker of the House in the mid 1990s.

Agreed, though Reagan laid the ideological groundwork and moved the party to the right on many issues. But he understood how to make deals with Democrats and hold common-sense positions on some other topics (like gun control) and was pretty liberal in immigration. With this stance, he'd likely perform poorly in today's Republican Party (Reagan is actually some Jeff Flake with more charisma).

Rocky 76 and then RFK seems likely at this moment of history, but I'd just like to remind that several leaders including presidents came out of nowhere within a short period of time. Who heard of Barack Obama in 2000 or Bill Clinton 1984 outside of their constituencies? However, it's weird or funny to think about RFK being a major figure in the 1980s.

I would say more of a John Kasich with Charisma(Remember Kasich was considered pretty conservative when he was in Congress, now he is considered a moderate).


I would say he could do well in the GOP primary for these reasons: He was very charismatic, he was very good of appealing to conservative and moderate voters without looking like a flip-flopper, and he probably would get a lot of support from the establishment.

Maybe the GOP has moved so far right than Kasich or even Reagan look so moderate now. I'd actually find Kasich to be more of a Gerald Ford for his kindness and moderate views (though was actually more of a centrist and as far as I remember, Kasich once said he supported Reagan in 1976). Reagan would certainly do better than Jeb or Rubio, but I'm not sure he could beat Donald Trump.

It really depends on how large the field is . If its 1 on 1 vs him and Trump from the beginning he can win as he can win IA ,SC, and NV(Reagan being from the West will help him win this state) and use that momentum to cruise towards the nomination, but if he has to go through a 17 candidate field he wont win.


The problem is this should have been the establishment's strategy from around late October 2015 if they wanted to stop Trump:


Support Cruz in IA(Yes Cruz is terrible but IA was really only going to be won by either him or Trump)
Support Kaisch in NH
Support Rubio in SC and NV

Then with Trump loses in each of the first four primaries he doesnt have any momentum going into super tuesday and its a race between Kasich, Cruz , Rubio for the nomiantion.  Instead they backed Jeb all the way until it was too late(Like after SC).


I would say the Establishment's arrogrance with trying to crown Jeb is a huge part what led to Trump.

[OSR stands with Israel]

This was great! Might even be for the best- without Watergate and Reagan, perhaps the era of polarization will never come in the intensity we're seeing today.
Rocky '76, RFK '80, RFK '84!

if you want to stop that , have some other GOP congressman become the Speaker of the House in the mid 1990s.

Agreed, though Reagan laid the ideological groundwork and moved the party to the right on many issues. But he understood how to make deals with Democrats and hold common-sense positions on some other topics (like gun control) and was pretty liberal in immigration. With this stance, he'd likely perform poorly in today's Republican Party (Reagan is actually some Jeff Flake with more charisma).

Rocky 76 and then RFK seems likely at this moment of history, but I'd just like to remind that several leaders including presidents came out of nowhere within a short period of time. Who heard of Barack Obama in 2000 or Bill Clinton 1984 outside of their constituencies? However, it's weird or funny to think about RFK being a major figure in the 1980s.

Hm, that might be the way we see him today, but Reagan did move the Republican party far to the right and basically erased the Rockfeller Republicans from existence. He's the founder of modern-day Republicanism, all of them are in his mold in the end. So without a President Reagan, I believe that we'd have a very different Republican party.

No they are much more like Gingrich than Reagan. Reagan was bipartisan, believed in working with both sides and wasnt that culturally conservative.

The fact is in OTL  the Republican party moving towards Reaganism(on economic issues) was inevitable at some point. After FDR the GOP's old coalition completely crumbled(Due to the North East becoming Democratic ) and the GOP were in the wilderness for 36 years(Rockefeller Republicanism was basically the only way that they could win elections and thats why that wing was powerful). During this time the South West and the Suburban population was growing rapidly and they were getting pretty disillusioned with big government, high taxation, and powerful union politics which dominated during that era and by the late 1970s had grown too strong for the Rockefeller Republicans to stop.


Now in this TL things may change since Nixon does not win in 1968 (as that was the year things started to change not 1980)

[OSR stands with Israel]

Reagan 1974!!!!

[OSR stands with Israel]

Will you do full midterm coverage


Anyway go Wilson

[OSR stands with Israel]

Will you do full midterm coverage


Anyway go Wilson

Should I? I planned just to post the results with maps and give some analysis. I'll do a full coverage in 1976 of course.

Would be interesting but it would be better if you do what you have already planned

[OSR stands with Israel]

I would guess I would have been a bigger fan of Rockefeller's foreign policy than Domestic

[OSR stands with Israel]

I would guess I would have been a bigger fan of Rockefeller's foreign policy than Domestic

May be true for a lot of conservatives, though many opposed detente and the Panama Canal treaties that he and Ford advocated.

Foreign policy is usually less ideological; I think Reagan's second term foreign policy was not bad if you exclude Iran Contra.

I probably would have supported Detente until 1978(though not to the extent Carter supported it until then) until Communist Revolutions in Afghanistan and Central America probably would have made me turn against the policy of Detente. By 1979 I would have turned fully against it after the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan.

[OSR stands with Israel]

How ironic would it be that the first Republican ever to dominate in the south would be Rockefeller(Due to McGovern being the Dem Nominee)

[OSR stands with Israel]

Here's my Rockefeller vs McGovern prediction:

It turned out differently now But I think Rocky would carry the state of Massachusetts, since he is a very good fit for New England. Even Reagan won the state in 1984 (and 1980, but only because of John Anderson).

MA though moved hard right(Relatively for the state not compared to the Nation Overall) in the 1980s


Here is a good thread about the state's shift: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=298173.0

[OSR stands with Israel]

The only state in the former Confederacy I can see Muskie winning is GA

[OSR stands with Israel]

Looks like the GOP will sweep the south for the first time in history

[OSR stands with Israel]

Go Rockefeller

[OSR stands with Israel]

With that large of a lead I believe Muskie would be losing MN and GA as well. Only state I would see him winning were MA and WV

[OSR stands with Israel]

Will WV be the only state the Dems will win

[OSR stands with Israel]

Wait Rockefeller supported Single Payer,


I thought he supported something like a public option not single payer

[OSR stands with Israel]

Wait Rockefeller supported Single Payer,


I thought he supported something like a public option not single payer

I don't think a public option was a serious healthcare proposal in that time.

As for single payer, yes Rockefeller's staff helped drafted a single payer health bill.

https://www.nytimes.com/1970/04/15/archives/medicare-for-all-is-asked-by-javits.html

Thanks for posting the link. Yes, Rocky supported universal healthcare. He also called for a national healthcare program in his 1971 State of State Address. Interesting is that Nixon supported something similar to Obamacare.

Wow thats pretty surprising.


Anyway I hope this bill does not get passed and like Governor Reagan , I am disappointed in the President here. Lastly lol at Senator Humphrey for the comparison he made.