1980 Presidential Election
The 1980 election in the United States saw Republican candidate Ronald Reagan defeating incumbent President Jimmy Carter. Reagan's victory marked a shift towards conservative policies and a more assertive foreign policy. The election is often remembered for its focus on economic issues, the Iran hostage crisis, and the beginning of a new era in American politics.
8 Key excerpts on "1980 Presidential Election"
eBook - ePubRonald Reagan
The American Presidency
- David Mervin(Author)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...To be an effective leader, to get bureaucrats and legislators to do what he wants them to do a president must retain the support of the public and, in the modern age, that is hardly possible without consistent command of television. THE 1980 GENERAL ELECTION Reagan’s victory in the 1980 General Election was of landslide proportions. He won 51 per cent of the popular vote against 41 per cent for Jimmy Carter and in the Electoral College led by 489 to 49. At the same election the Republicans gained twelve seats in the Senate and won control of that chamber for the first time in twenty-five years. In elections to the House of Representatives the Republicans made a gain of 33 seats and managed to defeat four incumbent committee chairmen. For Republicans this was a particularly rewarding set of results; in recent decades they had enjoyed considerable success in presidential elections, but the victories of Eisenhower and Nixon had not, with the fleeting exception of 1953–55, been flanked by success in Congressional elections. However 1980, it seemed, just might represent a genuine national shift towards conservatism thereby providing the underpinning for a new alignment of electoral forces to replace the Democratic coalition founded by Franklin Roosevelt. There are no simple explanations for complicated events like general elections, but we shall take as our starting point V. O. Key’s learned view that elections are determined largely by retrospective considerations. 37 The 1980 election, in other words, is to be seen primarily as a referendum on Jimmy Carter’s stewardship during the previous four years. For most voters, evaluations of Carter’s record turned primarily on economic matters. For many years prior to 1976, foreign policy questions had headed Gallup polls as the most important issues in presidential campaigns, but all this had changed by 1980...
- Jerald Podair, Darren Dochuk, Jerald Podair, Darren Dochuk(Authors)
- 2018(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...These events provide a bookend to the decade that one does not find with the Fifties or Sixties, for instance. Historians are constrained by the concept of the decade, but also forced to look for broader patterns and themes that liberate us from that constraint. This chapter will try to do both. First, it will take the 1980s as an important period itself for the rightward political shift represented by Reagan and the GOP, for the economic transformations that exploded during the decade and for the important global events that marked the end of the Cold War but at the same time displayed a rising concern with Middle East politics and the threats of terrorism. But it is also important to enlarge our understanding of the 1980s beyond just those events that fall within the decade. It is increasingly difficult to separate out the events of the 1980s from the previous two decades—as well as from the years that follow. The 1980s are an important era in American politics and society for what they tell us about larger economic and cultural trends that began in the years before 1980. For instance, Philip Jenkins argues that Ronald Reagan’s “opportunities to impose his particular vision were shaped by a wide variety of developments, social, economic, demographic and cultural, which were all under way well before the critical 1980 election.” 1 Similarly, the impact of the 1980s can been seen in subsequent decades, with the 1990s in many ways a continuation of political and economic policies, as well as cultural debates, that dominated the earlier decade. Yet, viewing this period after 2008, that interpretation is in some doubt. On every front, the apparent political, economic and cultural realignment brought about by the election of Ronald Reagan looks less certain, less sturdy and more ephemeral...
eBook - ePubAmerican Political Movies
An Annotated Filmography of Feature Films
- James Combs(Author)
- 2013(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...Chapter Eight The 1980s: The Politics of Renewal and Decline The 1980s was a political period deemed to be governed by a “new conservatism,” and there was much official breastbeating about “American Renewal,” “standing tall,” “New Beginnings,” and other rhetorical investitures. The president who presided over this political “movement” reassured us through his very physical longevity and folkish memory that we were to enjoy not only political and cultural continuity into the future, but also fulfill our self-defined national destiny. If there was renewed optimism and sense of purpose in the land, clearly the corollary to that was a massive denial of the recent past, and also a refusal to admit the possibility of anything less than a grandiose future of expansionary capitalism and benevolent empire. The elections of 1980, 1984, and 1988 were won on the basis of claims to represent a kind of militant positivism about national values and destiny that was at once metapolitical and monarchial. The presidency became an office that was “above politics” in the sense of contempt for the process (Reagan left office condemning the politics of Washington as if he had never been president). A But he left a legacy for an imperial presidency known only through staged appearances in ritual settings or dramatic formats of foreordained heroic actions that his successor would attempt to emulate. In an odd sense with which historians will long grapple, the Reagan presidency was both a success and a failure, on the one hand achieving popularity and promoting its agenda, but on the other failing to make a dent in the political establishment for which it had so much contempt, nor solving, or often even admitting, the problems that were to be magnified years later by their denial and neglect. There is something even more politically fundamental about the history of the 1980s that will be the stuff of historical debate...
- Eric R. Crouse(Author)
- 2018(Publication Date)
- Palgrave Macmillan(Publisher)
...© The Author(s) 2018 Eric R. Crouse America's Failing Economy and the Rise of Ronald Reagan https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70545-3_10 Begin Abstract 10. The Presidential Campaign of 1980 Eric R. Crouse 1 (1) Tyndale University College, Toronto, ON, Canada End Abstract In the early summer of 1980, President Carter was “quietly confident” about winning a second term. One Carter advantage was the media. As press secretary Jody Powell acknowledged, most reporters were liberal Democrats. For the Carter years, missing in media sessions was the level of bitterness and tension of the Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford era. 1 Even those journalists who were unenthusiastic about Carter often failed to grasp basic economics in their reports on the economy, so, consequently, Carter did not receive the criticism that conservative economists believed was necessary. 2 Meetings with Wall Street leaders reassured Carter that his economic policies were on the right track. It also pleased Carter that Ronald Reagan became the Republican nominee: “At the time, all my political team believed that he was the weakest candidate the Republicans could have chosen.” Carter looked forward to the challenge of the 69-year-old former actor and his “ridiculous theory” of enormous tax cuts and other proposals that “defied economic logic.” 3 The Nation wrote of Reagan’s “radicalism,” and of Republicans “determined to commit political suicide” in choosing him as their leader. 4 James Reston of The New York Times was another who thought the choice of Reagan was a gift to Democrats: “Seldom in the history of American politics has a party out of power shown so much generosity to a President in so much difficulty.” 5 Carter’s “managerial penchant for rationality and problem-solving” had not led to governing that was any better than his immediate predecessors. His technocratic approach combined with unrealistic deadlines failed to inspire confidence...
eBook - ePubRonald Reagan
Champion of Conservative America
- James H. Broussard(Author)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...Unfortunately for Mondale, few people considered these questions very important in deciding their presidential vote. Americans were much more concerned about the economy (58 percent) than foreign policy (19 percent), social issues (10 percent), or the candidates’ personal qualities (6 percent). These results on major issues do not mean, however, that people approved of all the president’s specific actions. A survey by The New York Times, for example, was not unusual in finding that voters were critical of Reagan’s help for the contras in Nicaragua and blamed him for American military deaths in Lebanon. But most people doubted that Mondale would do any better because Reagan continued to have a substantial lead on the generic question of “who do you want handling foreign policy?” Some journalists and political analysts described Reagan’s victory as an issueless campaign, leaving him without a mandate for his next four years. If one compares the promises Reagan ran on in 1980 with what he accomplished—or, at least, what occurred while he was in office—there appear to have been quite a few “issues” in 1984. He promised to revive the economy, and he did. He promised to rebuild American military power, and he did. He promised to cut taxes, to cut inflation, and to cut discretionary federal spending, and he did all three. The fact that these problems were no longer “issues” in 1984 was a sign, not of a meaningless election, but of a successful presidency, at least as Reagan—and the voters themselves—defined success. The one great failure was the promise to balance the federal budget, and that apparently could be overlooked as long as there was no war and no recession...
- Gregory Feldmeth, Christine Custred(Authors)
- 2015(Publication Date)
- Research & Education Association(Publisher)
...Mondale chose Geraldine Ferraro, a three-term congresswoman from New York, as his running mate. Mondale criticized Reagan for his budget deficits, high unemployment and interest rates, and reduction of spending on social services. The Reagan Victory The Republicans renominated Ronald Reagan and George Bush. Reagan drew support from groups such as the Moral Majority, founded by fundamentalist evangelist Jerry Falwell. (Evangelicals had become a major political presence, voicing opposition to abortion, advocating an amendment to allow prayer in public schools, and identifying with the cause of Israel and a strong military defense budget.) Reagan’s appeal also derived from an in-your-face anti-Soviet stance and decreased inflation, interest rates, and unemployment during his watch. He defeated Mondale handily, gaining nearly 60 percent of the vote by breaking apart the Democratic coalition of industrial workers, farmers, and the poor that had existed since FDR’s time. Yet his coattails proved short: the GOP lost two seats in the Senate and gained little in the House. Second- Term Foreign Concerns Libya Reagan challenged Muammar al-Qaddafi, the anti-American leader of Libya, by sending Sixth Fleet ships within the Gulf of Sidra, which Qadhafi claimed. When Libyan gunboats challenged the American ships, American planes destroyed the gunboats and bombed installations on the Libyan shoreline. Soon after, a West German nightclub popular among American servicemen was bombed, killing a soldier and a civilian. Reagan, believing the bombing was ordered directly by Qadhafi, launched an air strike from Great Britain against Libyan bases in April 1986. Soviet Union After Mikhail S. Gorbachev became the premier of the Soviet Union in March 1985 and took a more flexible approach toward both domestic and foreign affairs, Reagan softened his anti-Soviet stance...
eBook - ePubThe Climax of Capitalism
The U.S. Economy in the Twentieth Century
- Tom Kemp(Author)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...Chapter 9 The Reagan Era: the 1980s The Reagan administration which took over in 1980 consciously intended to reverse the economic policies of its predecessors and bring to an end the historical consensus which had existed since the Second World War. Against the drift toward a broader role for government in maintaining employment and providing greater security for its citizens, it posed the return to free market forces. It sought, therefore, to diminish the role and the cost of government, making possible tax reductions with a balanced budget. It wanted the state out of the economic arena as far as possible; but it also wanted a strong state to defend property and the social order, and to fight crime. Law and order were prominent among the aims of the conservative right, which provided philosophical support for the new administration. At the same time there had to be an increase in the military preparedness of the United States, which had allegedly slipped back, in the face of the 'evil empire' presumably bent on world domination. Increased military expenditure was thereforejustified, but other forms of government spending had to be cut, including the social programmes dating from the 'Great Society'. If market forces were given free rein, the economy would expand: there would be more jobs and less poverty as a result of the famous 'trickle down effect'. Although it was not clear to many of those who voted Republican, the Reagan policies, if carried out, would benefit the rich and the burden of reduced government expenditure would be mainly felt by the poor. In fact, the years of the Reagan administrations showed a definite increase in income inequality...
eBook - ePubThe Reagan Reversal
Foreign Policy and the End of the Cold War
- Beth A. Fischer(Author)
- 2013(Publication Date)
- University of Missouri(Publisher)
...In short, the Reagan administration policy toward the Soviet Union began to change for American domestic political reasons….” 3 There were a number of factors that caused observers to conclude that the administration's about-face was motivated by electoral concerns. One was the timing of the policy shift. Reagan reversed his approach to Moscow in January 1984, less than ten months before the presidential election. Not only was the speech delivered at the outset of an election year, it came just as the primary season was about to begin. The first caucus in Iowa was to be held in four weeks, and the New Hampshire primary was scheduled for February 28, 1984. 4 Moreover, Reagan's address coincided with a highly publicized debate among the Democratic contenders for the presidency. On January 15, 1984, the Democrats staged their largest debate up to that time. Held in New Hampshire, where the first primaries would soon take place, all eight Democratic contenders participated. News anchorman Ted Koppel and talk-show host Phil Donahue moderated the nationally televised debate and, as analysts predicted, it attracted a large audience. The main topic of discussion, moreover, was arms control and superpower relations. Since the Democrats were expected to criticize the Reagan administration's management of superpower relations, critics argued that the president's speech was simply an effort to draw attention away from the Democrats' forum. 5 Observers concluded that the election was behind the policy shift for another reason: many believed that Reagan's foreign policy was his Achilles' heel. While the president's domestic policies were popular, some argued that his approach to international affairs was a source of concern for many Americans. The president's foreign policy record was dragging down his overall approval ratings, they argued. 6 The number of Americans who approved of Reagan's overall job performance throughout his first term was never high by historical standards...
