2008 with Earlier first black and a first woman president

Suppose that somehow there had been an earlier black president a woman woman had taken office.

(maybe Chase Smith and Edward Brook had republicans reacted differently to Goldwater's disaster, maybe (had her health been better Barbara Jordan)

How much less attractive would that have made otl's Democrat front runners?
 
The SJWs would ignore Obama and Hillary because those boxes were checked off.

Hillary would still be a strong candidate because of her last name. Democrats over 45 would be saying "Member peace and prosperity? Ooh, I 'member!" just like they did last year in OTL.

Obama would be viewed as too inexperienced and too extreme.
 
Last edited:
There would be so many butterflies from the ATL female and black presidents that the state of the 2008 and 2016 elections would be extremely different.

We might never have heard of either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama.
 
As people have said, realistically things would be a lot different, but assuming things are mostly the same:

Obama is still charismatic but ultimately probably will be weaker than in OTL and less likely to woo Clinton allies like Lewis. 2008 would probably be too early but I could see him still winning at some point.

Assuming Bill was still President I think Clinton would be in a good position to win the 2008 Democratic nomination. While there might have been some people who backed her just because she was the first strong female candidate in a while, I don't really know where else they'd go. John Edwards has his issues and no one else had any support base at all.
 
And inexperienced, yes, Obama had only been a Senator for four years in 2008.

But I think this feeds into the (?) Jungian archetype of the young warrior savior, which people find appealing, in my personal view, more appealing than they probably should.

And in point of fact, I think there has been a fair number of youngish, relatively inexperienced persons who have actually been elected president or who were serious candidates. And I think we could look at other countries, as well as U.S. governors and mayors, that is, chief executive officers.
 
Mmmm? Not so sure. Obamacare is a lot like Romneycare.

I think Obama mainly is a Clinton-esque triangulator, which is one of the ironies of the whole thing! :)

It is, but O campaigned against the individual mandate.

I'm suggesting that Candidate Obama would be viewed as too extreme. President Obama was Bush on steroids (with the exception of social issues).
 
It is, but O campaigned against the individual mandate.

I'm suggesting that Candidate Obama would be viewed as too extreme. President Obama was Bush on steroids (with the exception of social issues).
I know it's asking a lot, and there's plenty of stuff I remember but probably couldn't find references for, but if you could find a reference of Candidate Obama saying this, I'd be interested.

Love the second part, except I'd say Obama was more just a straight continuation of Bush, protestations of conservatives notwithstanding!
 
If Reagan's Alzheimers incident happens during the debate or his double dealing cooperation with Senator McCarty come out McGovern wins in 1984. If anything happens to him Geraldine Ferraro becomes president, or she would be set up to win the presidency in 1992.
 
I know it's asking a lot, and there's plenty of stuff I remember but probably couldn't find references for, but if you could find a reference of Candidate Obama saying this, I'd be interested.

Love the second part, except I'd say Obama was more just a straight continuation of Bush, protestations of conservatives notwithstanding!

First result I found on Google was from CNS and refers to a 2/28/08 appearance on Ellen.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...idual-mandate-forcing-uninsured-buy-insurance
 
The biggest problem with this is that a large portion of the 2008 primary was shaped by Iraq. One of the many reasons Clinton had/has trouble with the Left is her vote in favor of Iraq, while in 2008 Obama was able to point out that at the time he had spoken publicly against the Iraq War. So on the major issue of the Democratic Primary, simply put Obama was right and Clinton was wrong, and Clinton has never really been ever able to figure out how to get out from under that.

Additionally, let's not forget that frankly Clinton's '08 campaign was laughably incompetent, such that merely being mediocre last year constituted massive improvement. Her staff were constantly at war with each other (i.e. Patti Solis Doyle and Mark Penn, as campaign manager and chief strategist respectively had veto power over hiring choices, and they hated each others guts, also Clinton constantly avoided stepping into her staff's disputes to make decisions), their strategic sense and ability to control spending was near nonexistent (they burned through $100 million by Super Tuesday thinking that it would be a knockout blow, supposedly in no small part because Penn thought that delegates would be awarded on a winner take all basis), and on so many things were utterly tone deaf (Clinton tried to get Caroline Kennedy, who was leaning towards supporting Obama, to campaign for her by having a staff member ask her, and of course Bill told Ted Kennedy that "Obama would be carrying our bags a few years ago, and Bill's general conduct throughout the campaign as a whole). Obama by contrast ran a far smoother and far more competent operation than Clinton did in 2008, and was able to win the nomination and the Presidency twice not just on his personality but also on having finely tuned campaign apparatuses behind him.

Even with the just the latter factor at play, my sense is that any permutation of Obama v. Hillary will end up with Obama winning 9 times out of 10 based simply on Clinton's demonstrable ineptitude and incompetence. But a Presidential race of course has so many elements that are contingent that by changing so much of recent American history you'd end up with a campaign that would be wholly unrecognizable.
 
There was a GREAT tl here, where Reagan ran and won in 68, served two terms and Edward Brooke, has his VP wins a term in 1976. Meanwhile, Maureen Reagan runs and wins in 92.

Meanwhile, my more realistic pitch:

General Colin Powell runs as the GOP nominee and wins in 1996. He serves two terms, and leaves office wildly popular - enough so, that the eventual GOP nominee in 2004, Senator Elizabeth Dole, wins in a landslide.
 
First result I found on Google was from CNS and refers to a 2/28/08 appearance on Ellen.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...idual-mandate-forcing-uninsured-buy-insurance
Thanks for looking this up.

I do see the site's on the political right, which is fine. I sometimes quote stuff from the political left.

In fact, one of my hopes is that we as just regular citizens will explore some of the overlap between some branches of left advocacy and what I've heard called 'crunchy conservatism.'
 
Top