What if Ronald Reagan Had Never Been Elected

Plausible, but i think some form of neoliberal alignment is inevitable with a post 1970 POD. Carey as a 1980 Democratic President is an idea i haven't seen before, but certainly makes sense. Its worth noting Carey was fairly fiscally conservative - much more so than his long serving Republican predecessor Nelson Rockefeller - as was his Democratic successor as Governor of New York Mario Cuomo, who was actually able to balance the state budget. I can imagine Carey governing somewhere between Bill Clinton and Bob Hawke, as a kind of forerunner to the third way, he might even say something along the lines of 'the era of big government is over', but i agree with the video there wont be those horrific Reagan era tax cuts and a ballooning budget deficit.
A northern Democrat running in 1980 would need a southern running mate to balance the ticket, Reubin Askew is an interesing choice but if Carey were the nominee he'd perhaps be more likely to pick a Senator with a bit of legislative experience in Washington, someone like Lloyd Bentsen or Dale Bumpers.
One thing not mentioned in the video, and that doesnt seem to be discussed that much generally in 'Ford wins in 76' scenarios is what the congressional situation would be. The '78 midterms are likely to see the dems extend their house and senate majorities due to the poor state of the economy. The OTL 1982 midterms were quite bad for Reagan with the Democrats winning 26 seats in the house, and with a Democratic president the GOP would gain control of the House in either 1982 or 1986, and probably the Senate as well. That would further force Carey's domestic agenda to the right - as was the case with Clinton in the 90s OTL.
 
horrific Reagan era tax cuts and a ballooning budget deficit.
As an economics student I would like to stress that while Reagan's tax cuts did have huge effects on the United States in areas such as income inequality, they're not the most significant cause of the budget deficit ballooning in the 80s. That was due to the rapid decrease of inflation in Reagan's first couple of years. At the time it was generally thought that it would take a decade or more to fully stamp out inflation. Going off these projections, budgets were planned out with the thought that spending would have to increase by massive amounts every year just to keep up with inflation and that the revenues would also be increasing due to inflation so it would balance out. However as we now know, inflation fell dramatically in the Reagan first term, leading to a situation where the revenues were coming in far below projections and thus the deficit balloon. The tax cuts absolutely had some effect on that, but the deficits would've ballooned anyway even without the tax cuts.
 
The OTL 1982 midterms were quite bad for Reagan with the Democrats winning 26 seats in the house, and with a Democratic president the GOP would gain control of the House in either 1982 or 1986, and probably the Senate as well. That would further force Carey's domestic agenda to the right - as was the case with Clinton in the 90s OTL.

Not necessarily. Assuming that 1978 and 1980 are Democratic years in Congressional elections, it would take a massive GOP wave in 1982 for them to take the House in 1982. You could make a comparison with 1994 or 2010, but both were the result of unique circumstances. '94 happened because Clinton was seen as inept and numerous Southern Democrats decided to retire, while 2010 was largely a reaction to Obamacare and the perception that the stimulus had failed. These generally wouldn't apply in ATL in 1982 (unless a Democratic President screws up) so while the Dems would definitely lose seats I doubt their losses would be on the scale of 1994 or 2010.
 
Carter's flopping imo discredits neoliberals within democrats. IMO you get even with Carey a democratic party to the left of OTL 1976 on economic assumptions om 1980. I strongly suspect we're more likely to hear talk about the era of small government, of business-oriented politics being over than anything like clinton's "era of big government speech".
 
Not necessarily. Assuming that 1978 and 1980 are Democratic years in Congressional elections, it would take a massive GOP wave in 1982 for them to take the House in 1982. You could make a comparison with 1994 or 2010, but both were the result of unique circumstances. '94 happened because Clinton was seen as inept and numerous Southern Democrats decided to retire, while 2010 was largely a reaction to Obamacare and the perception that the stimulus had failed. These generally wouldn't apply in ATL in 1982 (unless a Democratic President screws up) so while the Dems would definitely lose seats I doubt their losses would be on the scale of 1994 or 2010.
If we're assuming a "Ford in 76" scenario, and he faces broadly similar problems as Carter (stagflation) with similar lack of results, then I don't see a situation where 1982 isn't a GOP wave at least to some extent, they likely may not take the house but they could definitely win a ton of seats and have a good year in the senate races. The reason I say this is that if the democrat who wins in 1980 is successful at beating inflation, then there inevitably will be a recession. If they are unsuccessful at fighting inflation, then stagflation continues (maybe improving slightly) but they're seen as not doing anything. Either way, the GOP is in a good position for 1982.

That being said, if they do successfully fight inflation, then even though they might suffer in the midterms the dems are set up for a wave of their own in 1984. Similar to Reagan's, but with much wider down ballot effects due to the democrats structural advantages in the house during that period.
 
Carter's flopping imo discredits neoliberals within democrats. IMO you get even with Carey a democratic party to the left of OTL 1976 on economic assumptions om 1980. I strongly suspect we're more likely to hear talk about the era of small government, of business-oriented politics being over than anything like clinton's "era of big government speech".

Pretty much. Neoliberalism rose in prominence because of the dominance of 2nd wave neoconservatism through Reagan and the old guard being defeated, paving the way for Clinton.
 
Either way, the GOP is in a good position for 1982.

Yes, but my point is that after 12 miserable years under Nixon/Ford I doubt the GOP can actually retake the House in 1982. Though they could eliminate the liberal majority and unite with Southern Dems to block progressive legislation.
 
Top