As the Bush-Cheney campaign looks to define John Kerry's partnership with John Edwards as yet another flip flop, it hopes that a historical echo will go unheard. "When John Kerry's first choice for a running mate turned him down, he turned to the polls," today's Bush-Cheney press release reads. "John Kerry's selection of John Edwards is a flip flop on the most important decision a candidate for the presidency makes in the course of his campaign."
Except for the names, however, the criticism would more accurately assail another opposition ticket: Reagan-Bush '80. After a high-profile rejection by former President Gerald Ford during the Republican National Convention in July 1980, Ronald Reagan settled on the moderate George H.W. Bush, his main rival in the primaries. July 16, the day on which Reagan was to be officially nominated, found Reagan and his aides in serious negotiations with Ford to assemble a seemingly unstoppable ticket, expected to result in an unusual "shared presidency" with Ford acting as the "chief operating officer." But as the day wound down, the negotiations fell through; immediately after receiving the nomination, Reagan surprised the delegates with the announcement that he had chosen Bush.
The question immediately posed to the duo: How would they overcome the differences that had marked the primary season? Bush had run a surprisingly tenacious campaign. Despite beginning as an also-ran, his initial poll numbers barely meriting an asterisk, Bush won 5 states and was the final challenger to drop his candidacy. As Bush's prospects rose, both he and Reagan abandoned the so-called "11th commandment" -- "thou shall not speak ill of another Republican."
Bush had unleashed his most remembered criticism in 1979, long before any state had cast its votes. He famously derided Reagan's proposal to simultaneously cut taxes, increase defense spending, and balance the federal budget as "voodoo economics," an apt description that Jimmy Carter took great pleasure in citing during the campaign. (After his joining the ticket in July, Bush couldn't back away from the comments quickly enough. "Well, it's different than what I thought," Bush offered. "It's a very sensible program.")
But the gloves didn't really come off until New Hampshire. Bush won a surprising victory in the Iowa caucuses, then entered into a one-on-one debate with Reagan sponsored by the Nashua Telegraph. The debate itself was fairly harmonious, aside from veiled jabs at Reagan's foreign-policy credentials and the sincerity of his stance on the Equal Rights Amendment. Yet after the debate, Bush claimed that he was "set up" by last-minute rules changes; Reagan countered that it was he who had been "sandbagged." Bush advisers began telling reporters that they would try to "hit Reagan right between the eyes."
Cracks, as Reagan acknowledged, were beginning to show in the 11th commandment.
Then the tablet shattered. Bush attacked Reagan's campaign planks as "false promises," even "Jimmy Carter–type promises." Reagan's economic plans amounted to a "no-growth proposal." Reagan, in return, decried Bush's "bland generalities" and said that he could not recall Bush "ever being specific about anything." As the bitterness deepened, Bush savaged Reagan on issues such as the disposal of nuclear waste and challenged "whether the governor is giving a lot of thought to some of the things he's saying and whether he's really prepared to handle some of these problems we're going to face in the '80s." The campaign constantly referenced the upcoming decade, seeking to portray Reagan as too old to adjust to new realities.
Bush's most strident criticisms were reserved for foreign policy. He charged that Reagan would incite war with Cuba, that Reagan was overplaying his intelligence credentials, and that Reagan misunderstood oil politics. Reagan's reaction to the Iranian hostage crisis would be nothing more than a "line in the dust." Bush roundly condemned Reagan's approach, again claiming Reagan was not qualified to lead America into the next era; "in the decade of the '80s," Bush warned, "a foreign policy based on bluff is as ineffectual as it is dangerous."
As late as May 10, Bush was rejecting the idea of a vice-presidential run and bristling at suggestions he drop out of the race: "I've worked in this party on every level, including national chairman. I don't need any lectures from the Reagan people on party loyalty." But just two weeks later, he gave up the campaign and began pitching himself as a running mate.
In comparison, the Kerry-Edwards primary looks more like a genial footrace than the Reagan-Bush wrestling match of 1980. The only genuine barb was on Edwards' relative experience; Kerry, at times, questioned whether one Senate term was enough to base a run for the presidency. After Kerry's most derisive offhand remark -- "When I came back from Vietnam in 1969, I don't know if John Edwards was out of diapers" -- he called Edwards to apologize, according to The New York Times.
More often than not, the two highlighted their similarities on trade, economic, and foreign policy. Unlike in 1980, there will be no "voodoo economics" for the Bush-Cheney campaign to seize upon to mock the Kerry-Edwards ticket -- although they will doubtlessly try.
Jeffrey Dubner is an associate editor at The American Prospect.
