Accidental President Series: Gerald Ford - Twice Accidental

We meet Gerald R Ford, the only man to be president who never won election as either Vice President or President.  

Transcript

Accidental Presidency Series:  Gerald Ford, Twice Accidental

February 2026

“A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.”
 
 

“The harder you work, the luckier you are, and I worked like hell.”
 
 

“I know I am getting better at golf because I am hitting fewer spectators.”
 
 

Why did Gerald R Ford join the likes of John Tyler, Millard Fillmore, and Chester Arthur as one-term presidents after the death or resignation of the person who won election to that office?  You can blame the Nixon pardon, inflation, OPEC’s oil embargo, or confusion over geopolitics when, during a 1976 nationally televised debate with Democratic candidate Jimmy Carter, Ford said, “There is no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe.” 

I blame Chevy Chase.  You can check out the videos on YouTube, but in his first and only season on Saturday Night Live in 1975, Chase, without makeup or any attempt to sound like the President, portrayed Ford as a bumbling incompetent who thought Milwaukee was in Poland.  The sketches would end with Chase’s Ford taking some sort of pratfall after the real-life Ford slipped on the stairs up to Air Force One.  

Upon Ford’s death in 2006, columnist Mark Leibovich reflected on the Chase impersonation. 

“While the events leading to Gerald Ford’s ascent to the White House tarred him as an accidental president, he will also be remembered as an accident-prone president.

And for this, he could thank the comedian Chevy Chase, or blame him, or (as he would eventually choose) laugh along.

No one did more to solidify Mr. Ford’s unfortunate, and perhaps unfair, standing as the nation’s First Klutz than Mr. Chase, the “Saturday Night Live” cast member who routinely portrayed the President committing all manner of trips, flails, and lurches.

Mr. Ford’s cheerful reaction to the send-up included doing a cameo for “Saturday Night Live” from the Oval Office; sending his press secretary, Ron Nessen, on the show; and appearing with Mr. Chase at a political dinner. That type of reaction became a benchmark of what would come to be an essential presidential image-making skill: an ability to laugh at oneself.”  

Think of how other GOPers have been lampooned.  Reagan was a reckless cowboy, GW Bush was a war monger, and Donald Trump was a fascist.  None of these figures would outwardly embrace these labels, but all imply some power or take-charge attitude.  All of these presidents survived these labels to win a second term.  But portrayed as a bumbling nincompoop?  That is harder. 

Ford was very gracious about the teasing, but the damage was real.  I highlight this because, in many ways, the sketch was indicative of his presidency.  Never fully acknowledged for the selflessness, diligence, and decency for which we now, well after his death, only now appreciate.  

Note the comparison of Ford to previous accidental presidents who failed to win a term in their own right.  All are from the 19th century.  20th-century accidental presidents such as Theodore Roosevelt, Calvin Coolidge, and Harry Truman all won elections with their names at the top of the ticket.  Not only is Ford historic in that context, but there is another context as well.  

In 1972, Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew won a stunning landslide that was eye-popping at that time and feels like science fiction in 2026.  Nixon won 60% of the popular vote to just 37% for his Democratic opponent, George McGovern.  The Electoral College vote was even more lopsided, with 520 electoral votes for Nixon and 17 for McGovern.  He won the Democratic-dominated DC and one state, Massachusetts.  McGovern even lost his native South Dakota – by nine points.  

It appeared in that year that Nixon could do as he pleased with a true mandate from the American people.  Alas, events have a way of scuttling the best of circumstances.  Agnew was forced to resign on October 10, 1973, following a federal investigation into bribery, extortion, and tax evasion charges stemming from his time as Baltimore County Executive and Governor of Maryland. He pleaded nolo contendere (no contest) to a single charge of federal income tax evasion, avoiding prison but receiving three years of probation and a $10,000 fine.  Looking to shore up his non-corruption credentials, Nixon chose Michigan Representative Ford, the House Minority Leader.  He needed a well-liked figure whom Congress could easily and quickly confirm. With the Watergate scandal unfolding, Nixon needed a non-threatening, trustworthy successor to avoid a contentious confirmation battle. 

And there is that word, Watergate.  On August 8, 1974, President Richard Nixon announced his resignation, becoming the first U.S. president to do so, effective noon on August 9, 1974. Faced with near-certain impeachment due to the Watergate scandal cover-up, Nixon cited a need for national healing. 

So, Gerald R. Ford occupies a singular position in American constitutional history as the only individual to serve as both vice president and President of the United States without having been elected to either office—the twice-accidental President.  

Ford’s administration (1974–1977) was defined less by sweeping legislative innovation than by the stabilization of political institutions, public confidence, and executive branch integrity. 

An argument can be made that the difference between Nixon and earlier scandalized presidencies, like Grant’s, lies in the media scrutiny.  It also did not help that, between the Pentagon Papers and Watergate, there was a journalism-as-champion narrative that was swallowed by those who controlled the media and later by historians.  Nixon himself was implicated in cover-ups, but not in any personal involvement.  And unlike the Biden and Trump families, the Nixon family was not adding troves of wealth due to obvious influence peddling.  But with not one but two resignations, the first by a sitting president, a man of unimpeachable integrity was needed, and one was at hand.  

In an era marked by economic malaise and geopolitical tension, Ford’s leadership style—pragmatic, conciliatory, and grounded in congressional experience—reflected his long tenure as a legislative insider rather than an executive visionary.

Born Leslie Lynch King Jr. on July 14, 1913, in Omaha, Nebraska, Ford was raised in Grand Rapids, Michigan, after his mother remarried Gerald R. Ford Sr., whose name he later adopted. His mother fled an abusive relationship with his biological father, Leslie King Sr., shortly after his birth, and the stepfather provided a stable, loving home, leading to the name change. 

His Midwestern upbringing, marked by modest means and civic engagement, shaped his political temperament. Ford attended the University of Michigan, where he excelled in athletics, earning distinction as a center on the university’s football team.  I already noted Chase’s portrayal of Ford as a klutz.  The real Ford was arguably the most athletic figure to serve in the presidency, as Ford was named to the Sports Illustrated Silver Anniversary All-America roster in 1959. 

After graduating in 1935, he turned down professional football offers to attend Yale Law School, where he later also coached football and boxing while completing his legal studies.

Ford served in the U.S. Navy during World War II, participating in operations in the Pacific Theater. His wartime service reinforced his commitment to public service and introduced him to administrative and command responsibilities that would later inform his legislative and executive roles.  Whereas his predecessor, JFK, was lauded and well known for his wartime activities, Ford, who was awarded the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal with nine engagement stars, the Philippine Liberation Ribbon with two bronze stars, the American Campaign Medal, and the World War II Victory Medal, was not celebrated as the war hero he was.  

In 1948, Ford was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives from Michigan’s 5th congressional district, beginning a 25-year congressional career. He became known as a diligent legislator with strong ties to party leadership. In 1965, he was appointed House Minority Leader, succeeding Charles Halleck. In this role, Ford cultivated a reputation for bipartisanship and institutional loyalty, often negotiating across party lines during the turbulent 1960s and early 1970s.

The constitutional pathway that elevated Ford to the national executive office was unprecedented. In 1973, Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned following charges of tax evasion and corruption. Under the 25th Amendment, ratified in 1967, President Nixon nominated Ford to fill the vacancy. Congress confirmed Ford, marking the first invocation of the Amendment’s vice-presidential succession mechanism.  There were times in the Republic’s past when VPs died, and the office went unfilled. 

Less than a year later, as the Watergate investigation intensified and impeachment proceedings loomed, Nixon resigned on August 8, 1974. Ford was sworn in as President the following day, declaring in his inaugural address that “our long national nightmare is over.” This phrase encapsulated his immediate objective: restore confidence in the presidency and reaffirm the rule of law.

Was I kidding a bit about Chase and his torpedoing of Ford’s reelection?  A bit, but inarguably, his Nixon pardon did not help.  Perhaps the most consequential decision of Ford’s presidency came just one month after taking office. On September 8, 1974, Ford issued a full and unconditional pardon to Richard Nixon for any crimes he may have committed while in office. Ford argued that a prolonged criminal trial of a former president would further divide the nation and impede political recovery.

The decision was constitutionally sound but politically costly. Public opinion turned sharply against Ford, and accusations of a “corrupt bargain” emerged, despite the absence of evidence suggesting prior agreement. Many historians, myself included, have reassessed the pardon more favorably, viewing it as a calculated act of institutional preservation rather than partisan loyalty. Ford had been the GOP leader of the House, was well respected, and had three years to cement his party’s loyalty for a run in his own right in 1976. 

What is more, Ford, an accomplished politician, had to know it would cost him.  We always want our public servants to operate with class, conscience, and integrity – until we do not like their decisions.  Ford genuinely did what was best for the nation, knowing it would harm him, and went ahead anyway.  

Ford assumed office during a period of economic stagflation—simultaneous inflation and stagnating growth—compounded by the aftershocks of the 1973 oil embargo. Unemployment rose while inflation remained persistently high, confounding traditional Keynesian policy frameworks.

In response, Ford introduced the “Whip Inflation Now” (WIN) campaign, a voluntary program encouraging Americans to conserve energy and reduce spending. Critics dismissed it as symbolic rather than substantive. The rollout was wrong.  Ford even used little WIN pins that, in hindsight, not only looked silly but did nothing to rally public opinion and instead made the President seem ineffectual.  As Carter was to learn after Ford, you can impose challenges on the American people, such as going to war or higher taxes, but do not expect them to volunteer unless there is a clear reason and a clear outcome to the policy. As proved by Ronald Reagan and Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker, a matter of hiking interest rates into the double digits.  This move sucked the free cash out of the system and finally changed inflation.  These rates made the cost of ownership far higher, but Reagan was clear on the medicine.  

Yet note that Ford lost his election bid in 1976 and Reagan was in the 1980s, so the whipping of inflation was a long time coming.  

More concretely, Ford pursued a combination of spending restraint and tax adjustments, vetoing numerous congressional spending bills to curb deficits. His approach reflected a fiscally conservative philosophy emphasizing balanced budgets and restrained federal expansion.

Relations with Congress were complex. The Democratic Party held majorities in both chambers, especially after the 1974 midterm elections, which delivered significant gains to Democrats in the wake of Watergate. Ford frequently relied on veto power—overriding congressional initiatives he deemed fiscally irresponsible—yet he also signed important legislation, including reforms to campaign finance and education policy.

In foreign affairs, Ford largely continued the strategic framework established under Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. The doctrine of détente with the Soviet Union persisted, culminating in Ford’s participation in the 1975 Helsinki Accords. The accords sought to improve relations between Eastern and Western blocs and included commitments to human rights and territorial integrity.

Although critics argued that recognition of post–World War II European borders legitimized Soviet dominance in Eastern Europe, the human rights provisions later empowered dissident movements within the Eastern Bloc, contributing indirectly to the eventual unraveling of Soviet authority.

Ford also confronted the denouement of the Vietnam War. In April 1975, North Vietnamese forces captured Saigon, effectively ending the conflict and marking a decisive defeat for U.S. objectives in Southeast Asia. Ford oversaw the evacuation of American personnel and vulnerable Vietnamese allies in Operation Frequent Wind. The fall of Saigon symbolized the limits of American interventionism and reshaped domestic debates about foreign policy.

Another notable episode was the 1975 Mayaguez incident, in which Cambodian forces seized an American merchant vessel. Ford ordered a military response to secure the crew’s release, projecting decisiveness but also exposing coordination challenges within the defense establishment.

In 1976, Ford sought election in his own right. He faced a strong primary challenge from former California governor Reagan, reflecting ideological divisions within the Republican Party between moderates and conservatives. The most consequential GOP President between Reagan and Coolidge was Dwight Eisenhower.  Before his first run in 1952, many did not know which party he belonged to.  Ford and his own VP pick, Nelson Rockefeller, were more in this vein than in the Barry Goldwater, new conservatism vein embodied by Reagan.  Ford won the nomination, but not until after many conservatives abandoned the ship.  

His Democratic opponent, Jimmy Carter, campaigned as a Washington outsider promising ethical renewal. During the debates, Ford committed the aforementioned notable gaffe by asserting that Eastern Europe was not under Soviet domination—an assertion widely interpreted as detached from geopolitical realities. The misstatement reinforced perceptions of strategic ambiguity and may have influenced undecided voters.

Despite all of these challenges, 1976 was a near thing.  Carter won, but with less than 2% of the popular vote and 297 electoral votes vs. Ford’s 240. If Ohio, which Carter won by 1/3 of 1%, and one other small state had flipped, Ford would have achieved election. However, in keeping with Ford's typical character, his concession underscored his commitment to democratic norms and the peaceful transfer of power.

After leaving office, Ford maintained a comparatively low-profile public life, though he remained engaged in policy discourse and bipartisan initiatives. Over time, historians have reevaluated his presidency with greater appreciation for its stabilizing function. In the immediate aftermath of the executive scandal, Ford prioritized constitutional continuity and institutional legitimacy over personal political gain.

His tenure demonstrated the resilience of the 25th Amendment and the durability of constitutional mechanisms of succession. Moreover, his presidency represented a transitional phase between the expansive executive assertiveness of the early Cold War and the ideological realignment that would crystallize in the Reagan era.

Gerald Ford’s presidency lacks the dramatic legislative triumphs or transformative rhetoric associated with other administrations. Yet its significance lies precisely in its restraint. In a moment of systemic strain, Ford’s leadership was defined by procedural fidelity, pragmatic compromise, and an effort to restore civic equilibrium. Though he was electorally unsuccessful in 1976, his historical standing has strengthened as scholars increasingly value the quiet yet essential work of constitutional stewardship. In this respect, Ford’s legacy is less about policy innovation than about institutional repair—a form of governance indispensable in times of national crisis.

I often talk about how we should not elevate athletes, rock stars, or politicians as our role models.  Rather, I think that job is the person in the mirror.  But in a profession of necessary grubbiness, ugly statements, and compromised positions, I think Gerald Ford stood out for the better.  I think he had many virtues worth modeling.