Romney wins 2008 election?

I've read quite a few of the ATLs where John Kerry, or another democrat wins the 2004 election. And I hear a lot of people say that after the economic collapse, Mitt Romney would become president in 2008. I suppose because he's a businessman, but why else?

nathan2 said:

I've read quite a few of the ATLs where John Kerry, or another democrat wins the 2004 election. And I hear a lot of people say that after the economic collapse, Mitt Romney would become president in 2008. I suppose because he's a businessman, but why else?

Click to expand...

I think even in this scenario McCain would be the nominee. It was just his turn to win, and with Bush's failure to get re elected, a moderate is going to be the GOP's best bet for 2008 ITTL. Keep in mind also that foreign policy was the main issue of the 2008 election OTL until September of 2008 with the economic colapse, so that to would give McCain the edge.

dw93 said:

I think even in this scenario McCain would be the nominee. It was just his turn to win, and with Bush's failure to get re elected, a moderate is going to be the GOP's best bet for 2008 ITTL. Keep in mind also that foreign policy was the main issue of the 2008 election OTL until September of 2008 with the economic colapse, so that to would give McCain the edge.

Click to expand...

Yea. Well whoever wrote this doesn't agree.
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=335609

Given that the financial crisis and the 2007-2009 recession are still likely to occur, the general consensus is that Kerry would lose to whoever the Republicans nominate.

That could certainly still be McCain. It could also be Jeb Bush. Or even George W. Bush seeking a second, non-consecutive term. The case for Romney is that it may be that neither Bush runs, and McCain's ideological and partisan heresies could prove disqualifying in a scenario where the Republicans are favored to win the WH regardless and where they aren't as concerned about electability. OTL, Romney *was* the establishment frontrunner for much of that cycle. However, his dreadful poll numbers, his inability to put away Mike Huckabee, and the fact that McCain was the only Republican who looked remotely competitive vis-a-vis Obama or Hillary brought about a late shift to McCain on the part of both primary voters and the GOP establishment.

So the thinking, at least for some, is that Romney might be better able to put away McCain if his opponent is an unpopular President Kerry rather than Obama or Hillary. Of course, OTOH, Romney had his own ideological heresies, and since the GOP would likely go after Kerry's foreign policy and national security record, McCain would be well-placed to capitalize.

I can see the case for either. Since there's no way to prove it ... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

nathan2 said:

Yea. Well whoever wrote this doesn't agree.
https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=335609

Click to expand...

That was me. I have some doubts about the plausability, but the idea was that with victory imminent, the establishment would feel comfortable rejecting McCain, an outsider to tgem, and Romney's economic record and even governorship would play better in 2008.

Would be interesting if W. tried again. I assume in such a scenario where Kerry wins, Ohio goes blue and Bush wins the popular vote. He would certainly have support for another go just like Gore before him and could clear both McCain and Romney from the primary. He could run on a platform of "Had I been in the White House I wouldn't have screwed up handling this crisis".

One thing to remember is that while the economy wasn't in great form during the primary season in 2008 in OTL it hadn't collapsed yet either. (As late as September, people seriously debated whether a there was a recession!) So assuming it doesn't collapse any earlier under Kerry, the GOP primary might not be as totally dominated by the economy as some people think.

Non-consecutive terms are tough to do, since generally if people voted you out then they have a strong reason to dislike you (since the opposition has to overcome the incumbent advantage). It's worth noting that besides Grover Cleveland the only two people have ever tried this: Grant and TR. Both were not voted out of office, but left voluntarily.

Napoleon IV said:

Non-consecutive terms are tough to do, since generally if people voted you out then they have a strong reason to dislike you (since the opposition has to overcome the incumbent advantage). It's worth noting that besides Grover Cleveland the only two people have ever tried this: Grant and TR. Both were not voted out of office, but left voluntarily.

Click to expand...

Had Kerry beat Bush by winning Ohio(he only lost it by 2) Bush would have won the popular vote so the argument that the America populace voted W. out doesn't hold as much water IMO.