AH Ideas Involving GHWBush

Which alternate history scenario would you most like to see become a timeline?

  • Bush wins reelection in 1992

    Votes: 16 30.2%
  • Bush wins the 1980 election

    Votes: 9 17.0%
  • Bush wins the 1970 senate election in Texas

    Votes: 16 30.2%
  • Bush goes down in Iran-Contra

    Votes: 7 13.2%
  • Bush is never chosen as Reagan's veep

    Votes: 5 9.4%

  • Total voters
    53
Meacham's new biography is sure to spark many ideas for me about the alternate history involved with our 41st president. Which of the following ideas would you most like to see created into a timeline? I would also ask for some discussion if you're so inclined.

Bush is reelected in 1992: A very clear scenario: Bush trumps Clinton in 1992 to reclaim four more years in the White House. How does this change the nation's course? What happens to the Democratic Party in the wake of four straight losses? How does this affect the Bush family dynasty? What happens in 1996 after Bush leaves office?

Bush wins the 1980 Republican nomination: Bush manages to best Reagan for the 1980 Republican nomination. How does he do it? He goes on to take on Carter and (presumably) wins. How do his priorities differ from those of Reagan? What would such an Administration look like? What happens years afterwards to the Republican Party? Is it still a bright red fireball or is it a more tamed shade of pink? How does Bush handle the economy? The USSR? Does he get reelected? What happens to the Bush dynasty?

Bush wins the 1970 US Senate Election: With George HW Bush entering the Senate in 1970, how does this change history? What are the effects on Watergate? Would Bush be placed on the Committee? Would that change the Committee's findings? How does this alter Bush's career path? Does he get appointed VP by Nixon and run in '76? Does he have a better shot at the '80 nomination? Does Bush ever make it to the WH? What about Senate leadership? What are his legislative priorities? How does this affect the Bush political dynasty?

Bush goes down in Iran-Contra: What if more evidence is unearthed that incriminates Bush in Iran-Contra? How does that change the 1988 election and Americans' trust in government? Does it result in Reagan's impeachment or resignation? Does Bush end up impeached or does he resign? Will Democrats sweep in 1988? How does that change history? How does the incrimination of one of the central figures of the Bush family change its political legacy?

Bush is never chosen for Veep: What if Reagan chooses someone else as his running mate in 1980? How does this change George Bush's life? His career? Does he get a cabinet position in the Reagan Administration? What does he get and how does he do the job? What are the effects of this on history and the Bush family dynasty?
 
Bush in '92 is one timeline I'd like to see. A lot of people have asked What if questions with regards to Bush in '92, but no one ever actually did a timeline and finished it.

Bush winning the Senate race in 1970 would be a good timeline as well.

Bush in 1980 I think has been done, and there are A LOT of AH timelines and threads about Reagan getting assassinated in '81 and Bush becoming President as a result. Bush going down for Iran Contra and not being picked as the Gipper's VP has been done a lot as well.
 
If Bush wins in 1992, he will be able to have a good economy under his belt which would certainly help make 1996 competitive if the Democrats pick another flaming liberal like Cuomo for instance.
 
Bush in '92 is one timeline I'd like to see. A lot of people have asked What if questions with regards to Bush in '92, but no one ever actually did a timeline and finished it.

Bush winning the Senate race in 1970 would be a good timeline as well.

Bush in 1980 I think has been done, and there are A LOT of AH timelines and threads about Reagan getting assassinated in '81 and Bush becoming President as a result. Bush going down for Iran Contra and not being picked as the Gipper's VP has been done a lot as well.

Thanks for the feedback. Do you have a link to the contra one?
 
The Bush '92 one would be interesting.

First off, I doubt that Newt Gingrich can unfold his Republican Revolution in '94 with HW in the White House, so his influence in the decade will be muted, at least initially. I don't doubt that Gingrich could play a big role in Congress and the elections, but voters do have a tendency to divide government in the absence of a wave election, and I wonder if even Newt can topple both the House and the Senate Democrats in one year without a pushback against the Clinton health care plan.

Additionally, both parties will be going into '96 with big nomination fights: the Democrats to reclaim the White House for the first time in nearly twenty years, meaning you will get all the top flight candidates going all out for the nomination; and on the GOP side, Quayle will likely be defenestrated by the RNC and leadership, and a more appealing candidate chosen, but then you would have another internal power struggle between the moderates-led by Bush-and a rising conservative wing.
 
The Bush '92 one would be interesting.

First off, I doubt that Newt Gingrich can unfold his Republican Revolution in '94 with HW in the White House, so his influence in the decade will be muted, at least initially. I don't doubt that Gingrich could play a big role in Congress and the elections, but voters do have a tendency to divide government in the absence of a wave election, and I wonder if even Newt can topple both the House and the Senate Democrats in one year without a pushback against the Clinton health care plan.

Additionally, both parties will be going into '96 with big nomination fights: the Democrats to reclaim the White House for the first time in nearly twenty years, meaning you will get all the top flight candidates going all out for the nomination; and on the GOP side, Quayle will likely be defenestrated by the RNC and leadership, and a more appealing candidate chosen, but then you would have another internal power struggle between the moderates-led by Bush-and a rising conservative wing.
I wonder if Bush would push his best buddy, James Baker, to run for the nomination.

Democrats would be super interesting with Richards and Gore still representing the recently defeated DLC faction with Cuomo as the "one more heave" liberal figure.
 
I just realized that if Bush wins in 1992, he gets two more Supreme Court Justice picks. Wow.

I don't think so.
Byron White was appointed by JFK, and stated that he wanted a Democrat to appoint his replacement, despite being a member of the Court's conservatives at that moment. And Harry Blackmun was convinced that if he retired under a Republican, Roe v. Wade (Blackmun's legacy decision) would be overturned by the Court as well. Neither White or Blackmun were in poor health at the time either, so it's unlikely that either of them would resign.

Now, HW would be able to appoint a lot of lower court judges, and that could obviously have a major impact down the road (John Roberts on the D.C. Appeals Court a decade earlier!).
 
Thanks for the feedback. Do you have a link to the contra one?

I don't remember if it was a thread or a reply to a thread that had Bush going down for IC, but I do vaguely remember seeing a scenario somewhere on this site where it happened.
 
He probably not have the 1994 Republican Revolution, because that was largely a Conservative revolt against Clinton and his policies. Just as the Tea Party wave wouldn't have happened in 2010 Obama loses 2008 to McCain.
 
From the new Jon Meacham biography, he also apparently toyed with not running for reelection, which probably results in a Democratic victory but *not* for Bill Clinton. Bush's absence probably pushes at least one or two between Al Gore, Bill Bradley, Jay Rockefeller, and Dick Gephard to run. (My guess is Cuomo still stays out given his obvious ambivalence about running both during the '88 cycle and the '92 cycle.) On the Republican side, you probably have Bob Dole, Jack Kemp, and Dan Quayle all run. Maybe James Baker or Bill Bennett.
 
Top