October Surprises: 1980-Carter vs. Reagan
An "October surprise" is defined as "any political event orchestrated (or apparently orchestrated) in the month before an election, in the hopes of affecting the outcome." Since presidential elections are held in November, these "surprises" generally occur during the time just before voters go to the polls, but with enough lead time to make the rounds in all the news media cycles, hence October is when most of these occur.
Given that it is now October, and today is 24 days before voters go to the polls, and given that this community is not about politics, but about history, I'd like to use some of the time between now and election day to look back on some of these "October Surprises". In some cases they had a very significant impact on the outcome of the election, becoming the deciding factor to tip the balance in favor of, or away from, a particular candidate. In other cases (such as in 1968 and 2000) they made the outcome of an election much closer than predicted. In other cases (such as in 1964), it made no difference at all.
One of the most famous "October surprise" incidents occurred during the 1980 campaign between Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. Carter was already in trouble at the start of the campaign, with America facing a struggling economy with the double whammy of high interest rates and a high rate of inflation. But the nation did not trust Reagan either, and Democratic Party spin doctors sought to portray Reagan as a war hawk with an itchy finger on the nuclear button, similar to the campaign run against Barry Goldwater in 1964. Still, as the primaries came to an end, Reagan led in the polls with 58% support among voters.
In November of 1979, a number of U.S. hostages were captured in Iran during the Iranian Revolution. The Iran hostage crisis continued into 1980, with 52 Americans still held hostage. As the election approached, there were fears among Republicans that a resolution of the crisis could give incumbent Jimmy Carter enough of a bump in the polls to get him re-elected. Carter continued to pursue efforts to rescue the hostages, but also to negotiate for their release. While success would have obvious political benefits for Carter, I have no doubt that his real motivation was concern for the captured Americans. Carter was unsuccessful in securing the release of the hostages, and this made him appear weak to the electorate as he campaigned for re-election.
Carter lost the election by a landslide, with Reagan winning 489 electoral votes to 49 for Carter. Reagan captured 50.75% of the popular vote, with Carter winning just over 41%. On January 20, 1981, just minutes after Ronald Reagan's inauguration, the hostages were released. At the time, and to this day, many conspiracy theorists believe that the Reagan campaign had made a secret deal with the Iranian government whereby the Iranians would hold the hostages until after Reagan was elected and inaugurated.
These allegations were raised during an investigation by a House of Representatives Subcommittee into how the 1980 Reagan Campaign obtained debate briefing materials of President Carter. During the investigation the incident, which the media called "Debategate", the committee obtained access to Reagan Campaign documents and discovered memorandum referencing a monitoring effort for any such October Surprise. The subcommittee, chaired by former Democratic Representative Donald Albosta, issued a report on May 17, 1984, describing each of such documents that was found and their possible source.
In the final analysis, the committee found no evidence to support the notion that the Reagan team subverted the government's attempt to resolve the hostage crisis. The issue was considered to be an unsupported conspiracy theory and remained such until the Iran-Contra affair in 1986. At that time it was discovered that the U.S. government had made a secret deal with the Iranian government in 1985 to covertly supply Iran with arms, with the sale proceeds being used to support the Nicaraguan Contras. Investigations of the Iran-Contra affair, in which the Central Intelligence Agency played a central role, once again raised new accusations about possible interference by the Reagan campaign in 1980.
According to author Joseph Trento, in March of 1980, an international arms dealer named Jamshid Hashimi met with William Casey at Washington's Mayflower Hotel, and that Casey tried to arrange a meeting with "someone in Iran who had authority to deal on the hostages". The following month Donald Gregg, a National Security Council aide, meets Hashimi's brother in New York's Shazam restaurant, near Hashimi's bank. In July of 1980, a meeting took place in Madrid, arranged by the Hashimi brothers at which it was alleged that that Casey told the Iranians that if Iran could assure that American hostages were well treated until their release and were released as a "gift" to the new administration, "the Republicans would be most grateful." It is alleged that at that time, the Iranians could not make such a commitment. In August of 1980 it is alleged that the Iranian representative met with Casey, this time saying that Khomeini has agreed to the proposal. Hashimi was named as middleman to handle the arms transaction and the delivery of arms valued at $150 million was arranged. From October 15 to 20, meetings were held in Paris between emissaries of the Reagan campaign, with Casey as key participant. The following day, on October 21, for reasons not explained, the Iranian government ended its secret negotiations with the Carter administration.
Gary Sick, a retired Naval Captain who served on Ford's, Carter's, and Reagan's National Security Council, authored a book on US-Iran relations called "All Fall Down" in which he claimed that in October 1980 officials in Ronald Reagan's presidential campaign including future CIA Director, William Casey, made a secret deal with Iran to delay the release of the American hostages until after the election.
But the US Senate’s 1992 report concluded that "by any standard, the credible evidence now known falls far short of supporting the allegation of an agreement between the Reagan campaign and Iran to delay the release of the hostages."
A U. S. House of Representatives’ 1993 report concluded “there is no credible evidence supporting any attempt by the Reagan presidential campaign—or persons associated with the campaign—to delay the release of the American hostages in Iran”. The task force Chairman Lee H. Hamilton added that the vast majority of the sources and material reviewed by the committee were "wholesale fabricators or were impeached by documentary evidence". Their report also expressed the opinion that many who had testified about the existence of such a conspiracy had committed perjury.
The official last word on the subject is that no such conspiracy existed in 1980 as alleged, but many conspiracy theorists disagree. Given the margin of Reagan's victory, it is unlikely that even if Carter had arranged for the release of the hostages in time for election day, this would have been sufficient to overcome a crippled economy, an energy crisis and Carter's perceived weakness for failing to bring the hostages home sooner.
Given that it is now October, and today is 24 days before voters go to the polls, and given that this community is not about politics, but about history, I'd like to use some of the time between now and election day to look back on some of these "October Surprises". In some cases they had a very significant impact on the outcome of the election, becoming the deciding factor to tip the balance in favor of, or away from, a particular candidate. In other cases (such as in 1968 and 2000) they made the outcome of an election much closer than predicted. In other cases (such as in 1964), it made no difference at all.
One of the most famous "October surprise" incidents occurred during the 1980 campaign between Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan. Carter was already in trouble at the start of the campaign, with America facing a struggling economy with the double whammy of high interest rates and a high rate of inflation. But the nation did not trust Reagan either, and Democratic Party spin doctors sought to portray Reagan as a war hawk with an itchy finger on the nuclear button, similar to the campaign run against Barry Goldwater in 1964. Still, as the primaries came to an end, Reagan led in the polls with 58% support among voters.
In November of 1979, a number of U.S. hostages were captured in Iran during the Iranian Revolution. The Iran hostage crisis continued into 1980, with 52 Americans still held hostage. As the election approached, there were fears among Republicans that a resolution of the crisis could give incumbent Jimmy Carter enough of a bump in the polls to get him re-elected. Carter continued to pursue efforts to rescue the hostages, but also to negotiate for their release. While success would have obvious political benefits for Carter, I have no doubt that his real motivation was concern for the captured Americans. Carter was unsuccessful in securing the release of the hostages, and this made him appear weak to the electorate as he campaigned for re-election.
Carter lost the election by a landslide, with Reagan winning 489 electoral votes to 49 for Carter. Reagan captured 50.75% of the popular vote, with Carter winning just over 41%. On January 20, 1981, just minutes after Ronald Reagan's inauguration, the hostages were released. At the time, and to this day, many conspiracy theorists believe that the Reagan campaign had made a secret deal with the Iranian government whereby the Iranians would hold the hostages until after Reagan was elected and inaugurated.
These allegations were raised during an investigation by a House of Representatives Subcommittee into how the 1980 Reagan Campaign obtained debate briefing materials of President Carter. During the investigation the incident, which the media called "Debategate", the committee obtained access to Reagan Campaign documents and discovered memorandum referencing a monitoring effort for any such October Surprise. The subcommittee, chaired by former Democratic Representative Donald Albosta, issued a report on May 17, 1984, describing each of such documents that was found and their possible source.
In the final analysis, the committee found no evidence to support the notion that the Reagan team subverted the government's attempt to resolve the hostage crisis. The issue was considered to be an unsupported conspiracy theory and remained such until the Iran-Contra affair in 1986. At that time it was discovered that the U.S. government had made a secret deal with the Iranian government in 1985 to covertly supply Iran with arms, with the sale proceeds being used to support the Nicaraguan Contras. Investigations of the Iran-Contra affair, in which the Central Intelligence Agency played a central role, once again raised new accusations about possible interference by the Reagan campaign in 1980.
According to author Joseph Trento, in March of 1980, an international arms dealer named Jamshid Hashimi met with William Casey at Washington's Mayflower Hotel, and that Casey tried to arrange a meeting with "someone in Iran who had authority to deal on the hostages". The following month Donald Gregg, a National Security Council aide, meets Hashimi's brother in New York's Shazam restaurant, near Hashimi's bank. In July of 1980, a meeting took place in Madrid, arranged by the Hashimi brothers at which it was alleged that that Casey told the Iranians that if Iran could assure that American hostages were well treated until their release and were released as a "gift" to the new administration, "the Republicans would be most grateful." It is alleged that at that time, the Iranians could not make such a commitment. In August of 1980 it is alleged that the Iranian representative met with Casey, this time saying that Khomeini has agreed to the proposal. Hashimi was named as middleman to handle the arms transaction and the delivery of arms valued at $150 million was arranged. From October 15 to 20, meetings were held in Paris between emissaries of the Reagan campaign, with Casey as key participant. The following day, on October 21, for reasons not explained, the Iranian government ended its secret negotiations with the Carter administration.
Gary Sick, a retired Naval Captain who served on Ford's, Carter's, and Reagan's National Security Council, authored a book on US-Iran relations called "All Fall Down" in which he claimed that in October 1980 officials in Ronald Reagan's presidential campaign including future CIA Director, William Casey, made a secret deal with Iran to delay the release of the American hostages until after the election.
But the US Senate’s 1992 report concluded that "by any standard, the credible evidence now known falls far short of supporting the allegation of an agreement between the Reagan campaign and Iran to delay the release of the hostages."
A U. S. House of Representatives’ 1993 report concluded “there is no credible evidence supporting any attempt by the Reagan presidential campaign—or persons associated with the campaign—to delay the release of the American hostages in Iran”. The task force Chairman Lee H. Hamilton added that the vast majority of the sources and material reviewed by the committee were "wholesale fabricators or were impeached by documentary evidence". Their report also expressed the opinion that many who had testified about the existence of such a conspiracy had committed perjury.
The official last word on the subject is that no such conspiracy existed in 1980 as alleged, but many conspiracy theorists disagree. Given the margin of Reagan's victory, it is unlikely that even if Carter had arranged for the release of the hostages in time for election day, this would have been sufficient to overcome a crippled economy, an energy crisis and Carter's perceived weakness for failing to bring the hostages home sooner.