What is the historical context surrounding presidential election of 1980 from the book Elections 1980 by Malcolm Mackerras?

Cons will make a lot of hay about Reagan like he was an upcoming GOD or something.

That wasn't it at all. Reagan was seen as an absolute JOKE at the time....and Bedtime for Bonzo Jokes abounded.............he was barely considered a serious candidate.....and a B actor , at best.

The actual problem was..............Carter inherieted a recession from 8 years of Vietnam, then Watergate and the usual republican BUMBLING....Nixon's crimes, and then Ford's pardon and so forth. .

Cons like to forget that CARTER, Not Reagan, not Bush Sr, Not Nixon........but CARTER worked one of the only Middle East Peace deals in existence, that stood for over 30 years........
a feat no other president since has been able to do.

CARTER, also won a Nobel Peace Prize , and it was CARTER, in what would be the waning days of his presidency who worked and signed the deal that got all the hostages home ALIVE----at a time when that was NOT a guarantee.

Cons like to claim it was Reagan who got them home. No, he did not. CARTER worked the deal, and the condition was, they would be turned over *to* Reagan, on the first day of his presidency, and Carter said FINE. He didn't care about his EGO.......he just wanted them all home ALIVE.

But what actually happened was........Ted Kennedy got it into his head that *HE* had a shot of winning the nomination from Carter for re-election.

the fight broke the party in two.......and divded democrats. -----as at that time, there were STILL a lot of Kennedy loyalists who saw it as the last shot at Camelot and all that.

But the 1969 Chappaquidick incident was NOT all forgotten, and it weighed Kennedy down, and he LOST the Nomination fight.

So with just months to the election.......the democrats were heavily divided.

and as we all know..............a house divided cannot stand......and the in-fighting among themselves, was the Whole show..........while Reagan just stood there.........and watched them battle each other.

needless to say.......Reagan cake walked to a victory, he did NOT deserve.

and the rest, as they say is history.

This is why, to this day, and ever since..........no party has ever again challenged their own sitting president for re-election.

Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton, Bush Jr, and Obama, were all just presumed to be their party's candidate......and no one seriously CHALLENGED.

*BECAUSE* of the 1980 débâcle. Fighting your own party , is a lose-lose situation.

That's why NOW , in 2020.......it seems cons are forgetting their history lesson.......and are talking of challenging Trump in 2020.

They see him mired in scandal after scandal, and think he's easy prey. They see the White House within reach........and a few are talking about it.

But they will have to divide their own party, to wrestle the nomination from the sitting president.

It's the same mistake Dems made in 1980.

Trump, like Carter , might suck.....(if you're of that opinion)-------

but fighting your own party will NOT end well. Not for the candidate and not for the party.

and that's the historical context that is relevant today......as several republicans are starting to shout that Trump needs to go.

That may be so........but that doesn't mean it's a winning strategy.

Carter was seen as a failed weak president who allowed hostages to be taken and wouldn’t stand up to Iran. Plus he pulled the USA Olympic team out of the olymics in Moscow in protest of the Soviet Union invasion of Afghanistan. The economy had become stagnant and gas lines irritated many people; Reagan brought a new energy and strength that many Americans were looking for to counter Carter. Plus John Anderson the third party candidate seemed to drive the nail into Carter’s coffin even farther.

Maybe you should read the homework assignment instead of expecting someone to do it for you.