Who Would Lose Less to Carter?

Riding tall after his victories in the past two weeks, facing still more sweeps of delegates in the next month, Ronald Reagan stands close to an even chance of capturing the Republican nomination. And any major party nominee -no matter how far back he starts - has the possibility of being elected President. This prospect raises several provocative questions for the Republican Party and for the nation. Can Reagan really edge out Gerald Ford, and if so, how? Which Republican would be a tougher opponent for Jimmy Carter? And would Candidate Reagan help or hurt other Republican office seekers in November?

The confident challenger and the apprehensive incumbent clashed for delegates at three state conventions last weekend. Ford took Iowa by a hair, 19 to 17, and won 13 delegates in friendly Delaware. But in Washington state, Reagan captured 31 delegates to the President's seven. Typically, the Reaganites simply outorganized and outworked the somnolent Ford forces in Washington.

After last week's divisive battles, Ford led Reagan in committed delegates 1,050 to 977 (needed to nominate at the convention in August: 1,130). But Reagan has been catching up, and he will further narrow the President's lead in the eight state conventions between now and mid-July. In these, the Californian should win between 86 and 97 delegates, v. Ford's 64 to 75. The future contests:

This weekend: Reagan will probably get all of New Mexico's 21 delegates, and certainly no fewer than 17 of them. In Montana, he will capture at least 13 of the 20 seats, and maybe all. He will add all four at-large delegates from Idaho. But in Minnesota, where moderates are in the saddle, Ford should gain 15 delegates to Reagan's three.

July 9-10: Reagan should take 18 of the 25 Colorado delegates. North Dakota may divide evenly: Ford nine, Reagan nine.

July 17: Reagan should carry Utah 17 to 3, but Ford stands to recoup in Connecticut, carrying at least 30 of its 35 delegates.

If those contests go as expected, Ford will have just over -and Reagan just under -1,100 delegates. But some of Ford's support is amazingly soft. For example, most tallies give the President all of New Jersey's 67 delegates because a pro-Ford "uncommitted" slate swept the state primary; but six to ten New Jersey delegates stand to vote for Reagan anyway. Illinois Senator Charles Percy, a Ford fan, has surveyed all the state delegations and concludes that some 55 Ford delegates are wavering and vulnerable to Reagan. The challenger's aides claim that they have already lured away some delegates who are committed to Ford but are not legally bound to vote for him.

In addition, many Ford-bound delegates really prefer Reagan. They are Republican right-wingers who have been assigned by local party leaders to vote for the President because he won a proportion of their state's popular vote in the primaries. If the voting at the Kansas City convention goes to a second ballot, a number of Ford's 18 Vermont delegates would shift, and all but two of his 25 North Carolina delegates would jump to Reagan.

The finish will be so tight that John Sears, Reagan's campaign manager, predicts that his man will be ahead, but perhaps by three votes -1,131 to 1,128. Ford's aides forecast a squeaker victory for the President, but last week were not speculating on numbers. Both sides agree that the party's nominee will be determined by the 60 to 70 truly uncommitted delegates.

Most of those delegates will swing to whichever candidate the polls and the pols say can run better against Jimmy Carter. Reagan's partisans argue tirelessly that only he can give Carter a stiff battle in the South, beat him in the West, draw off some of his blue collar, ethnic support in the industrial North. Besides. Reagan is even more "anti-Washington" than Carter and would at least match his argument that he can cut down the bureaucracy.

But all the polls show Ford running stronger than Reagan against Carter, though neither Republican could beat him at the moment. A nationwide NBC poll taken June 10-11, just after the Super Bowl primaries, put Carter ahead of Ford by a staggering 52%-37% and in front of Reagan by an even greater 55%-32%. The latest Gallup pairing, taken in late May, had a similar result: Carter over Ford, 52%-40%, and trouncing Reagan 55%-37%. An earlier Harris survey also showed Carter beating Ford by smaller margins than he would top Reagan. Says California Pollster Mervin Field: "I'm hard-pressed to rate Carter worse than even in any of the 50 states, and he is clearly the favorite in 25 to 30. It's difficult to diagnose anything other than a sweep."

Figuring that they cannot top Carter anyhow, right-wing purists argue that they might as well nominate their ideological favorite, Reagan. At the Missouri convention, Governor Kit Bond repeatedly cited a poll showing Ford running twelve points better than Reagan in the state; delegates were unmoved because they knew that the same numbers indicated that both men would lose to Carter. What the delegates overlooked is that if a presidential candidate crashes, a lot of his party's candidates for state and local offices get bumped off too -as happened when Barry Goldwater ran in 1964. The whole "electability" issue comes down to which candidate will least hurt other Republicans.

TIME queried its bureau chiefs for their soundings on whether Ford or Reagan would do better in their regions:

THE MIDDLE ATLANTIC. Laurence I. Barrett reports: If the election were held today, Reagan would have virtually no chance against Carter in New York, Pennsylvania and New Jersey; his prospects in Maryland and Delaware would be very slim. Ford would probably not win these states either, but he would make it a closer fight and might just take New Jersey. Voters in this region consider Reagan to be too conservative, too disdainful of the asphalt agonies of Buffalo, Newark, Philadelphia and New York. Ford finally did help keep New York afloat, and he is considered safe and sensible on foreign policy. Party leaders are petrified that Reagan would drag other Republicans to defeat. Says one state chairman: "It would be an absolute disaster for us." Adds New York Republican Chairman Richard Rosenbaum: "Even some of our relatively conservative officeholders are scared about running with Reagan."

NEW ENGLAND. Sandra Burton reports: Reagan is also weak here. Ford defeated him in all four New England primaries -New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island -and in the Maine convention. The President will also win the Connecticut convention. In November he would stand a good chance of beating Carter in New Hampshire, Vermont and Maine; Reagan would have little. Maine Republican Chairman John Linnell insists: "I don't think Reagan is electable." Adds New Hampshire's former attorney general, Warren Rudman: "If Reagan runs, it will be worse than 1964."

THE SOUTH. James Bell reports: Reagan would run more strongly than Ford everywhere except Florida, Tennessee and Virginia, but neither man can beat Carter in the eleven states of the Confederacy -unless that Georgian picks a flaming liberal for Vice President. Reagan won five of the South's primaries and all four caucuses, capturing 407 delegates to Ford's 113. But he won in states that he has no chance of carrying in November: Alabama (George Wallace has embraced Carter), Georgia (Carter's home turf), Arkansas, Louisiana, North and South Carolina. Though Reagan walloped Ford in Texas, the Californian got only 278,000 votes; Carter won 736,000 votes in Texas. Even if John Connally is the Republican nominee for Vice President, Texas seems safe for Carter. But either Ford or Reagan might carry Tennessee if one of its Senators, Howard Baker or Bill Brock, is picked as Veep.

THE MIDDLE WEST. Benjamin W. Gate reports: Most Republican professionals share the view of Senator Percy: "If the Republican Party does not nominate Gerald Ford, we will be badly beaten in November." Neither Ford nor Reagan is given much of a chance against Carter in Illinois, Michigan and Ohio, but in all those states Ford is clearly the stronger G.O.P. candidate. He is also much more formidable than Reagan in Minnesota and Wisconsin, and somewhat stronger in Iowa, Indiana and West Virginia. Only in Kansas and Oklahoma would Reagan run better than Ford, though Carter is ahead of them both. Sums up Michigan Republican Chairman William McLaughlin: "If we're to win, Ford is the only one who can do it."

THE WEST. Jess Cook reports: Reagan could do better than Ford in Arizona, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada and Utah -all conservative bastions. Moreover, Reagan would beat Carter in most of them and come close in the rest. Reagan is narrowly ahead of Ford in Colorado. On the other hand, Ford would do better than Reagan in Oregon, Washington, Hawaii and Alaska, though Carter stands to win them. The same is true in California, where Ford could attract more independents and Democrats than Reagan -but still lose to Carter. Even so, Reagan has more vote growth potential than Ford in the West. No matter how desperate the Republican cause looks now, Reagan -if nominated -could become President. Thus the ultimate question for Republicans is whether he would make a better President than Ford.

No doubt the challenger is a more exciting and moving campaigner. But there is a difference between running and governing, between firing up the campaign crowds and dealing with Congress or the Kremlin. Though Reagan was a reasonable and effective Governor of California, not even his most passionate supporters argue that he has great intellect, depth or appetite for hard work. Commerce Secretary Elliot Richardson, who is hardly neutral, charges that Reagan suffers from "a tendency to shoot from the hip and talk in terms of the sound and the impact of an idea rather than the substance."

Ford is more stolid and less articulate, but nobody can question his depth of experience. For all his widely publicized flaws and stumbles, .he has been a better President than he has been given credit for. His moderate-growth policies have helped lift the nation out of recession and curb inflation. With Henry Kissinger, he has handled foreign affairs capably, and he has restored a measure of trust and faith in the White House.

To build up presidential stature, Reagan is considering buying space for another half-hour TV speech in July, and for policy articles carrying his byline in magazines and newspapers. Win or lose, he is determined to market his ideas. His forces are maneuvering to gain a majority on the Republican Platform Committee. When it meets the week before the August convention, it may well adopt Reagan-sponsored planks opposing abortion, the exchange of ambassadors with China, and further negotiations over the future of the Panama Canal. Even if Ford squeezes out the nomination, he may be stuck with a platform promising to undo some of his own policies.

The race is so close and feelings are so bitter that one high White House adviser says: "The convention will be a bloodbath." Adds another top Republican in Washington: "Whoever wins the nomination, the other side will claim it was stolen."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.