A true American presidential wipeout. Jim On History Episodes: / jimheathchannel Jim on Twitter: / jimheathtv Jim on Facebook: / jimheathtv Jim on IG: / jimheathtv Latest Fact News: www.jimheath.tv
@@augustopinochet42069 I was a democrat back in the 70s, 80s, 90s and the 00s. It wasn't until 2014 I switched by party. I did vote for Reagan and at the time I was living in the very liberal state of Tennessee. Weird to say that now haha.
@@stephenbates8111 do you think the southern strategy had an impact with southerners voting for liberal economics in the 20th century, then switching to conservative economics as a result of the republican party becoming socially and economically conservative?
@@stephenbates8111 - I live in TN as well. It's so weird going through each election and seeing TN go from red to blue to red again. We went with the winner of every election from 1964 to 2004.
...Reagan only lost Minnesota by about 4000 votes...Ron always heard, he would have win Minnesota too, had he pushed a recount...but he saw no need to further humiliate Mondale in his own home state...
@@anarchorepublican5954 Minnesota was irrelevant because Reagan Won the Most Populated State in the Union: California. With CA won by Reagan, his Re-Election was completely fully secured.
@@Tornado1994 ...I remember that night ..Reagan's re-Election was secured ...long before Minnesota...or California..in fact it was called nearly 2 hours before the polls closed in California...angering down ballot Democrats..TV hasn't done that early of a call since...
fewer votes to count and wider margin of victory allows for early 'proections' the same projections some people bitch about as being undemocratic because 'not all the votes' have been counted. lol.
Dude was a chad. He was probably one of the most genuinely electable people ever. It’s strange to think people thought he was an a extremist warmongerer in 1980. I’d say that shows the downright stupidy of Americans from time to time
Are you aware of what Reagan’s beliefs and policies were? He was pro gun law-reform, he was anti nuclear weapon, he was ANTI requiring social security, he was anti-tax increase on income, he was pro tax increase on corporations, and lastly he was pro UNIVERSAL healthcare. Now I ask you this, if he were running today, which party would he align with? Furthermore, if he were running today with these same beliefs, would you vote for him? I can say this, he would win NY, easily.
@@joshuacoldwater He was anti government. He was not anti nuclear weapon, was continuing to stockpile nukes until he got the agreement with the Soviet Union. He also spent trillions on black budget projects and Star Wars. He was also a globalist that continued getting U.S involved in other conflicts, which was nothing more then power projection. His economic policies were not great they were tailored towards the top end and business not the average working class. He was average at best if you look back, short boom then bust. Lot of little wars going on during his time. No he would not win NY CA, MASS or the traditional leftist states. None of the R Gov that won Ca would ever win it today. CA has gone so far left along with NY that I doubt we ever see a R win either ever again.
@@mike197714Were these the Good Old days or What? If I Could go Back in a Time Machine and Be Put Back in the 80's I'd Stay there!! Anyone else ever Feel this Way?
Washington, DC has voted Democratic since 1964 after the 23rd Amendment was approved. Similarly, the state of Utah has voted Republican in every election since 1968.
@@JimHeathChannel so what I’m hearing is pick one representative from Washington DC and one representative from Utah to fight to the death, winner gets our country
one thing ive noticed is that this news station is straight forward and to the point in this video, the man here shows no bias and speaks in a consistent voice. i'd love to watch a news station like this this is really nice.
Reagan could have won Minnesota if he campaigned more there, but since he already knew that Mondale was gonna be humiliated since the other 49 states were literally gonna go to him, he let Mondale have the chance to win his home state. Tho after all, you can pretty much say that the election was decided after the second debate. All Reagan had to prove was that he still had the physical and mental capability at 73 years old to be the commander in chief. The joke he cracked, plus Mondale's reaction, says it all. Walter actually did really well in the first debate, which led people to question Reagan's physical state as a candidate. A 50 state sweep would have been narly tho. At least Walter could have taken pride in having DC vote Democrat literally every time 😂
It would be nice if we could go back to a time when people voted based on the candidate and not just blindly vote for the person with a D or R next to their name.
@@bigpapi6688I don't think it would be possible. This country is soooooooo divided by political party lines. I think you could put Ted Bundy up there and a majority of the right would vote for him over Biden, and you could put Jeffery epstien up there and the majority of the left would vote for him over Trump. Most voters literally vote for the R or D.
Interesting you mention that, because the Republican color was blue on some TV stations up until the 2000 election. You can see this around the 10-minute mark of this video. But ABC was using red for Republicans even in 1984. The rest of the media changed blue to mean Democrats as of the 2000 election, so today's younger generations only know Democrats as the blue party.
@@Adriaantje2008 even if you just consider the popular vote, it was something like 58-41 Reagan, no president I can think of has had that wide of a margin.
Back when elections were easy to call. Close elections have always taken a lot of time to count and verify every vote. See election 2000, which took over a month, as an example.
What do you mean the last election wasn't the least bit sketchy at all. It's totally normal to take forever and extend deadlines and count unsolicited votes and rewrite the ballots and not audit anything.
Mr.Reagan cleaned house. I remember this election night like yesterday. Btw I love the way they showed election results back then, very simple and straight to the point.
@@bigverybadtom I mean surprise is one thing, but just the feeling of seeing your results being absolutely OBLITERATED like nothing before, all for the world to note and witness live.
I started my documentary on Election '84 with a press conference Mondale had the morning after the election. He was very pragmatic about it: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-CzWEMX2RIV0.html
Yeah basically embarrassing yourself in front of the entire nation and the world. Although there’s nothing embarrassing about making it to the final vote
Legend has it that Reagan won every province in Canada also that night. Along with Mexico, Zimbabwe, Bermuda and the United Kingdom. Even the planet of mars voted for him.
May I remind you that any thought of 'winning' the United Kingdom would have been firmly rebuffed by a certain Mrs Thatcher. It is fortunate indeed that they had a good relationship and mutual understanding.
Well he did later serve as US Ambassador to Japan during the Clinton years and was an elder statesman of the Democrats Party due to his long public service career and maintaining his dignity in crushing defeat. Responding with grace after a bitter lose rather that be a 49 state blowout or a 500 vote lose in Florida used to be a respected public example of good character vs spending the next 4 years taking a flamethrower to our government institutions
@@josephr.bidenjr9908 key word: more I said it’s good that America has been voting more along their party lines when it comes to federal offices. Such as voting for president and senate.
@@Raspberries9372 But why? I'm an environmentalist and I believe in tax sponsored healthcare. But I also believe in gun rights and I am a christian. There isn't really any place in either big party for me.
@@serronserron1320 it’s good thing because it makes republican and democrat party unite on their own sides to fight in battle ground states and districts. It makes them go out their way to gain voters to fight, gain and conquer. Look at Reagans Presidency. He won by landslide but the house congress was majority democrat. Weighing down a lot of what he wanted. Same can be said about Richard Nixon, bill Clinton and Barack Obama.
@@patbrooks9823 Oh come on man, it’s time to give it up. Just because your favourite candidate loses doesn’t mean it was rigged. I’m sure if they win next time then it will be a legit win and won’t be rigged this time?
There was mail-in voting in 1984. Republicans, including Reagan, loved the idea of allowing as many people to vote early as possible because in those days the GOP had a big tent and they wanted every vote. Times have changed.
Yes, it was called 'absentee voting.' It wasn't the vote-harvesting cheat-machine train-wreck that the establishment uses to empower itself, today.@@JimHeathChannel
It also really exemplifies the issue with our electoral college. Reagan actually only had 60% of the popular vote. If you go by electoral college numbers however, which most people will, you'd think he was somewhere closer to 90% of the popular vote. This probably warps people's views about Reagan and the political landscape he lived in.
Ironically the fairness doctrine was revoked under Reagan which is why they are so biased today, and he even vetoed it when congress tried to bring it back in 1989.
@@dandeluxe8731 Don Lemon cried in 2020 even though he claimed his side won. No one on the right cried. Trump came out and yelled, Tucker and Hannity were angry, but no one cried like Maddow.
@brandonneumann5294 it goes back before tv. Labor rights parties were always associated with red and conservative with blue. I think they still are in England. It all changed after Reagan turned the whole country blue on tv in the 80's. That visual was too obviously associated with a wave or tide of Republicans washing across the country, and we can't have that, can we?
@@JeffBujak no. They don’t. Plenty of MSM still sticks to the facts. AP is a great example. PBS. ABC and CBS news are very Americanized news centers, but they’re “centrist” in the way of not challenging right wing extremist and pretending there are extreme leftists in the US But still, they stick to facts. Get with reality bud
As a fan of the team who won it, thanks for bringing that memory in the comment section. As a republican, it’s just satisfying to remember we won an election by this much
Man I can't even imagine how amazing that Superbowl must have been for Seahawks fans where let's be honest that game was over after that first snap by the Broncos Halftime up 22 points second half starts with an 87 yard kick off return 😂 end up being up 36 Points by the time the Broncos scored their first and only td in garbage time let's be honest but man that must be cool games only half over and yet the result is clear just chilling waiting for the game to end and your team officially declared world champions
At least he was honest though, even if that totally killed off whatever miniscule chance he ever had at winning! That of which was also a big reason as to why he might as well be the first major party candidate to select a woman as his running mate, knowing there wasn't a snowball's chance in Hell that Reagan was going to possibly lose this election, while having virtually no ammunition to throw at his opponent for that matter either. Yet you gotta admit it was fairly impressive that four out of ten voters actually preferred Mondale over Reagan. Not bad for someone who just BARELY won a mere single state if you ask me too! L.O.L.!
@@freakyfornash Right, reagan on the other hand didnt tell us about his plan for Iran Contra which very well could have been going on during this election. And yes, people look at the electoral map and call this a blowout but Mondale did actually win 4/10 voters which if the electoral vote mimicked that, reagan would have won 323 EV's. Still a solid win but nowhere near the blowout people try to say this was.
I was born in and still live in Massachusetts to this day. I was born in the '90s, and could never imagine this state voting for a Republican president. Obviously President Reagan is the exception.
@@backtobasic8566 different back then. Democrats weren’t complete victim players constantly and radical! There was no antifa and BLM burning cities down while they buy million dollar houses in white communities. Back when we took care of Florida 1st instead of Ukraine which has never helped us in any way. It has helped Joe and Hunter get rich though. We had secure boarders back then and out America 1st! I miss those times! When only women could get pregnant and we could clearly define what a woman was.
We had a 3.2% unemployment rate, interest rates were down, gas was cheap, no inflation and rising wages. It was a fantastic time in America, following the Jimmy Carter 4 year nightmare.
I can't imagine being in a world where the news is straightforward and just told the news as it is, and people voted whoever without antagonizing each other's candidate or party.
News broadcasters not telling us how one candidate will be the end of democracy? The country unified behind a leader? What kind of alternate timeline is this?
@@3dartistguy the thing to remember this was before cable tv all the tv networks in the country blocked off the date for the election coverage. From the : us election night 1984 nbc live coverage they called it at 1h15m into the broadcast. Also by 9pm they were seeing if Reagan was going to sweep all 50 states.
Yeah I mean Reagan refused to campaign there more than once as he wanted Mondale to win out of respect. If he wanted the 50 state sweep he could have campaigned up there and won it but didn’t. I kinda wish he did.
@@SilverSceptile yeah Reagan was a decent man despite what people say today. He did the same with Carter. He never campaigned in GA in 1980 as he wanted Carter to have his home state. The idea in 84 was to get Reagan to campaign for the senate race but he said no. But just imagine if reagan did the 50 state sweep he’d of been crowned Jesus Christ. We will never see anybody as popular as Ronald Reagan was in the 80s. It’s sad to see but the reality
The reason he won this big wasn’t because of political view in fact a good amount of people didn’t agree with him but they trusted him. My parents were in high school during the 80s and they said that even though people disagreed with Reagan they still liked and trusted him. Much different from what we see today with politicians.
Can you imagine the meltdown ABC would have if they had to call an election where a Rebulican just dominates like that now!? They would lose their minds.
I am already imagining CNN, MSNBC, TYT, ABC, and CBS melting down like lava if Trump gets his redemption like a 1980/1984 scenario. But I'd doubt that would happen. I am uncertain he can win California and New York, but at this point, with everything being thrown at him right now, the possibilities of winning those 2 states are endless. New York hasn't been Republican since 1988, and California hasn't been Republican since 1992.
I remember 1984 election and when the networks called Minnesota for Mondale fairly late in the evening, my dad says "isn't that nice that he finally won a state and it's his home state."
I remember this. It was pretty amazing. My parents liked Mondale but voted Reagan as so many others did. They did not like what the Democratic Party was becoming. And just 15 years earlier they were staunch democrats. Most tv stations used blue for republicans and red for democrats. I think only abc did the opposite.
@@bemhibbits4157 Thanks! To this day I have mixed feelings about Reagan. No president is 100% bad or 100% good. His second term was way more problematic than his first - probably due in part to his age.
@@bigverybadtom Economic prosperity?? In 1986, unemployment was at 7%. Interest rate on a 30 year mortgage was at 9%. A year of slow growth and moderate inflation, and the dollar was weak. WTF are you talking about?? Did you hit your head? the only reason the cold war ended was because the Soviets finally went broke. Reagan had nothing directly to do with it. Anymore than Clinton had anything to do with the booming tech economy. You thank Reagan for ending the Cold war, you better thank Clinton for the internet.
My 1st time voting was 1984 and I remember having a Reagan/Bush bumper sticker on my car. N.J. was a different state then. Great memories and yes America loved President Reagan
@@travisdarko5781 🔴254 Electoral Votes REAGAN to 🔵3 Electoral Votes MONDALE ...that was what was truly embarrassing... 📺⇠😆 even liberal SNL did a hilarious skit..." since Everyone was voting for Reagan...they asked Mondale, why not you Vote for him too, and make it unanimous?"
Too bad. Given that trickle down economics slowly gutted our economy, how does one profiteer 2 separate world wars and still manage to squander that generational wealth in one lifetime?
It wis so intriguing to me to see the Nation as a whole all agree on someone for the most part. I don't think I've lived in a time where it wasnt a razor edge majority.
It is a good thing. Having closer elections means two things - people making laws are careful about whether they have a public mandate for them, and the opposition is not left as merely a symbolic one, they still have influence, so their supporters are not completely alienated. It also is a symptom of there being a larger clash of ideas and visions for the country, which is good for democracy.
@@shotguncreeper i love when a minority of voters get a majority of the electoral college votes, allowing a deeply unpopular party to remain in power. What an awful system of government.
Mondale BARELY carried his home state of Minnesota by about 4,000 votes. To put it another way, we came within one vote per precinct of carrying the state for Reagan. We did re-elect Sen. Rudy Boschwitz and took control of the MN house.
Minnesota did go for Nixon in 1972, though :) That race was actually more lopsided than 1984 from a popular vote standpoint. Richard Nixon received over 60 percent of the vote that year, a feat that Reagan was (barely) unable to duplicate.
@@mirzaahmed6589 I can believe that, many cities in the U.S tend to vote Democrat while the parts of the states that they're in that aren't big cities tend to vote Republican. Just look at Washington and Oregon, the big cities like Seattle and Portland vote Democrat (which has caused them major problems) while the rest of their states vote Republican but because they're outnumbered population wise, those states go to whoever the Democrat candidate is in U.S presidential elections.
@@girlgardelook at IL. It’s red everywhere baring Chicago and some suburbs. Or as a better example PA, it’s so red it’s a joke but Philly and the suburbs made jt blue. When you don’t appeal to suburbs you can’t expect rural areas to save you
Yes, when elections aren't close it doesn't take long. But see election 2000 for an example of when every vote counts. That election wasn't called for over a month and was decided by a Supreme Court decision. Thankfully Al Gore did the right thing and conceded defeat when he lost.
@@_Quxyz That’s how you think. If we require ID to buy alcohol or travel on airplanes it should be required to vote everywhere. The irrational people are the ones filling out multiple mail in ballots and/or voting in multiple locations.
@@skyserf Amen. if the dems weren't still able to get away with massive election fraud, Trump would have had 350+ electoral votes in 2020 and 2016 and Obama wouldn't have won a second term although it would have been close.
@@_Quxyz Very different from what Skyserf said. If we had a real election today (meaning not letting dead people vote), don't you think Trump would win at least 45 states, if not 50?
@@JimHeathChannel Don't give us that garbage. They can get the votes counted in one night. The problem is that these days, they have to wait to find out how many fake votes they need to manufacture and feed into the machines for the next day or two or three... It doesn't get any more obvious what they did in 2020.
@@mwrspetsnaz5977 Yes, as I wrote all the votes weren't counted on election night. The day after the election there were zero contested states, thus no need for any recounts.
@@mwrspetsnaz5977 It was not a close election. That's the difference. The 1876 election took four months to sort out. In 1884 it took over a week. In 1916 it took two weeks because it was so close.The Nixon team could have challenged the 1960 results if they had wanted to because it was so close. And it took a 5-4 Supreme Court decision to end the 2000 election after over a month. If the 1984 election had been a nail biter, which it certainly wasn't, the process would have slowed and there would have been mandatory recounts, just like what happened in 2020. Except there are an additional 50 million voters since 1984. Everything is faster in an election that isn't close.
I worked on the campaign and was at Reagan HQ at the Onni Shoreham Hotel on Pennsylvania Ave that night. The place got louder and louder as each state was announced. I cannot believe I was there when a Republican won 49 states! Actually it was 50 but Reagan did not want to embarrass Mondale and did not ask for a recount in his home state of Minnesota. I still have my hat and button and a bag of jellybeans. It is sad how low we have fallen. Never again will we see such a landslide victory again. It was an amazing time.
This was back in the 80's and they were done in one night. It's 2020's and now it takes over a month to tally all votes. Something is very wrong with our voting system!
They were not done counting in one night, but the projections were easy to make earlier because the election wasn't close. In close elections it takes time because every vote counts and you can't make the call. In 2000 the election wasn't called for over five weeks and it took a Supreme Court decision to stop it because it was that close. Close elections take time. Nothing is wrong with our voting system.
Exactly, country is way too divided lol there's no way in hell there'll be another president who can appeal to smug liberals in Massachusetts and hillbillies in Mississippi at the same time.
@@peterp2153 Yes. Could we please get someone *under the age of 65* to run? Biden vs Trump? One is likely to die; one is likely to get a terminal case of "tapioca-brain."
I was 16 years old during this election. I remember watching the election results at my parents' kitchen table during dinner on one of those small 13 inch black and whites (we had a bigger color console in the basement den). It was over before we finished.
I was serving at Checkpoint Charlie Berlin Germany in the 80s and the Great President Reagan paid us a surprise visit . Kindest man I ever met . Made us feel we could be more than we were . Loved that man . RIP
