What if Bill Clinton chose someone other than Al Gore to be his running mate in 1992? Who would it be? How different would the Clinton administration be, if at all? Would this alternate Vice President run for President in 2000 and win or suffer Gore's fate of OTL. Plus, speaking of Gore, how does his career play out without the Vice Presidency?
AH: A differnet running mate for Bill Clinton in 1992?
- Thread starter dw93
- Start date
Bob Graham is an obvious alternative, whom Clinton seriously considered. He would probably enable Clinton to carry Florida in 1992 (GHW Bush narrowly carried the state that year in OTL http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/pres/1992.txt). But if Graham runs for president in 2000, I doubt that he is as widely accepted by Democrats as Gore was in OTL. I have the feeling that others besides Bradley would challenge Graham in the 2000 primaries, and try to portray him as too conservative. (And his habit of keeping detailed notebooks drew some ridicule--unjustly IMO.) The challengers might include Gore himself, assuming he wins re-election to the Senate in 1996...
Why would he?
Given the factors involved, Al Gore in '92 is really one of the least easily nudgeable VP picks of the last four decades. Clinton was not picking Gore on a whim, we're not talking John McCain-level VP selection here.
Paul V McNutt
Banned
Yes, but he didn't know Powell was a Republican. More importantly, Powell likes order and couldn't stand the chaos of electoral politics.
The fact that a decision was not made on a whim does not mean it was inevitable. Clinton does seem to have given serious consideration to other possible running mates, especially Graham and Wofford (both of them from states much more pivotal than Tennessee in the Electoral College).
No, but the factors Clinton was judging people against kind of does in this case. You would have to find a really significant reason for actively not picking Gore, because it wasn't a close decision. On all the main metrics Clinton was working off (ability to be president, personal chemistry etc) Gore pretty much slotted perfectly. Clinton never deliberated too long after the interview stage, in fact the interview stage was key.
But I'm pretty sure FWIW the (distant) fallback option was Bob Kerrey, though I eminently might be mis-remembering this. Been a while since I went over the '92 campaign.
"But one Democrat who is working with the campaign said advisers have talked about a final-night convention tableau that includes 'two husbands and two wives,' in an effort to deflect the character issue that plagued Clinton during the primaries. If true, that would eliminate Kerrey and Richards, who are divorced." https://www.washingtonpost.com/arch...g-mates/e97c3ac4-9d80-46b0-a700-858998245ddb/
"The length of time they had with candidate Clinton seemed to be indicative oftheir place in the pecking order-—Gore got three hours, Graham and Wofford two apiece, and Hamilton just one. By the time Kerrey got down to Little Rock, Clinton had pretty much made up his mind..." https://books.google.com/books?id=XH4Os4Cjr-cC&pg=PT127
Gore was no doubt the favorite but had he done worse in the interview (just a bad day...) I don't think Graham or Wofford are inconceivable.
I swotted up
The top thing certainly appears to be a possible minor factor, even Kerrey acknowledged it might have been, I look like I've mis-remembered on that part. (Though Clinton aides later denied this after the reports you cited, it's worth pointing out, but that was likely in the interests of ego-smoothing of course - Kerrey was a sitting Senator, after all) I doubt it made much difference in the grand scheme.
All my sources point to the other options being less oh-so-conveniently tiered like your does, btw. James Carville, he who had managed Wofford's senate campaign, was for Wofford, and I think Begala was for long-shot Mario Cuomo. Not too relevant mind, considering how Bubba kept the campaign operation at arms' length on this one, but equally I'm not sure where you're getting this heavily implied Bob Graham-as-fallback thing.
Gore's interview took place at eleven o'clock at night, (In a suite in the Capitol Hilton, of all places) and Gore wasn't a night person. So I'm not really sure how bad an interview you're expecting. In any case 'interview' is a bit of a misnomer, it's been variously described as 'a strategy meeting' and 'two college budies hanging out together'. Pretty much instant chemistry.
Anyway, you've totally ignored what I stated above about Gore fitting Clinton's stated requirements before the vetting process began, or the many structural factors working towards Gore being chosen. This simply wasn't as open a choice as you're presenting it, sorry. And even if it was, I'm not seeing Bob Graham as the second choice.
The top thing certainly appears to be a possible minor factor, even Kerrey acknowledged it might have been, I look like I've mis-remembered on that part. (Though Clinton aides later denied this after the reports you cited, it's worth pointing out, but that was likely in the interests of ego-smoothing of course - Kerrey was a sitting Senator, after all) I doubt it made much difference in the grand scheme.
All my sources point to the other options being less oh-so-conveniently tiered like your does, btw. James Carville, he who had managed Wofford's senate campaign, was for Wofford, and I think Begala was for long-shot Mario Cuomo. Not too relevant mind, considering how Bubba kept the campaign operation at arms' length on this one, but equally I'm not sure where you're getting this heavily implied Bob Graham-as-fallback thing.
Gore's interview took place at eleven o'clock at night, (In a suite in the Capitol Hilton, of all places) and Gore wasn't a night person. So I'm not really sure how bad an interview you're expecting. In any case 'interview' is a bit of a misnomer, it's been variously described as 'a strategy meeting' and 'two college budies hanging out together'. Pretty much instant chemistry.
Anyway, you've totally ignored what I stated above about Gore fitting Clinton's stated requirements before the vetting process began, or the many structural factors working towards Gore being chosen. This simply wasn't as open a choice as you're presenting it, sorry. And even if it was, I'm not seeing Bob Graham as the second choice.
Last edited:
Bradley had no interest in being running mate in either this election or '88, and asked to be taken out of consideration at an early stage in both.
Anyway, bald electoral college considerations are not what Clinton was primarily working off.
Knoxville Jim
Banned
I am from Tennessee. So I had no problem with this but how did two guys from the south (much less two really southern unimportant states) end up on the same ticket?
I do not consider Florida the south. So maybe Bob could have been in.
I think Gore fit in due to he was considered a moderate (except in TN where we thought he was a liberal). He fit the whole we're young theme. He served (kind of) in Vietnam, and he and Tipper where considered a "good married" couple (funny huh?)
In this line, anyone want to guess who Hillary! Will pick?
My guess is JUlian Castro. He is male check. He is latino check. He puts a red state in play (for those of you who think Texas could not go blue. Let me say I'm stationed in the hell that is San Antonio. Texas is not at all the south. It is north Mexico. Houston is very Democratic, Castro was mayor of San Antonio, and this city is very democratic. I think latino's would hugely vote for Hillary! No matter who the GOP nominates because Cruz and Rubio are of Cuban heritage. We all know about Trump. He has executive experince, and he served in the Obama cabinet.
In the meantime who would agree to run with trump?
Trump/Palin (jk)
I do not consider Florida the south. So maybe Bob could have been in.
I think Gore fit in due to he was considered a moderate (except in TN where we thought he was a liberal). He fit the whole we're young theme. He served (kind of) in Vietnam, and he and Tipper where considered a "good married" couple (funny huh?)
In this line, anyone want to guess who Hillary! Will pick?
My guess is JUlian Castro. He is male check. He is latino check. He puts a red state in play (for those of you who think Texas could not go blue. Let me say I'm stationed in the hell that is San Antonio. Texas is not at all the south. It is north Mexico. Houston is very Democratic, Castro was mayor of San Antonio, and this city is very democratic. I think latino's would hugely vote for Hillary! No matter who the GOP nominates because Cruz and Rubio are of Cuban heritage. We all know about Trump. He has executive experince, and he served in the Obama cabinet.
In the meantime who would agree to run with trump?
Trump/Palin (jk)