AHC: John McCain in 2008
- Thread starter DSS
- Start date
The only way for McCain to win would be for Lehman Bros and the markets to remain stable until after the election. He was rapidly gaining ground on Obama with his focus on his celebrity and radical "friends". It would be a close election, but if Paulson bails out Lehman it's possible the markets hold until November and McCain can win in a squeaker.
Paul V McNutt
Banned
MCsin had to deal not only with the bad economy but with the unpoularity of his fellow Republican George W Bush. I don't know how you fix that by 2007.
Edwards doesn't flame out early, such that a few states that would have gone Obama go Clinton. But not enough! Clinton beats Obama in a brokered convention - not that I think that Clinton would lose just because she's Clinton or something, but an even longer drawn out primary which ends with the narrative 'inspiring up-and-comer crushed by backroom deal' isn't going to look good. And black voters are not going to be very happy at all. As part of the deal, Clinton picks Edwards as her VP.
Since a woman on the ticket doesn't look as maverick now, McCain's fickle VP search ends with a better candidate. Lieberman might be good for the "oh look i'm so bipartisan" pick. Or if there's someone with really good economic credentials, but no one springs to mind. Lieberman tells McCain not to 'suspend' his campaign like OTL, the right blows the dust off all those old anti-Clinton smears they were raring to use (Vince Foster! Whitewater! The Lincoln Bedroom or some shit!), and then the Edwards scandal breaks, with much more attention and an unfortunate resonance. There might even be a Nixon/Eisenhower esque fight over taking him off the ticket.
I don't know if that would do it, but it would get it a lot closer, within plausible distance I think.
EDIT: Actually, if not Lieberman, how about Marsha Blackburn? She was on some of the lists I remember seeing thrown around. I think she might have less of the problems that beset Sarah Palin, while still shoring up McCain's weakness with the farther right. And having a woman on the ticket while Clinton is suffering from more embarassing infidelity flashbacks might split the women vote more than it would be otherwise.
Since a woman on the ticket doesn't look as maverick now, McCain's fickle VP search ends with a better candidate. Lieberman might be good for the "oh look i'm so bipartisan" pick. Or if there's someone with really good economic credentials, but no one springs to mind. Lieberman tells McCain not to 'suspend' his campaign like OTL, the right blows the dust off all those old anti-Clinton smears they were raring to use (Vince Foster! Whitewater! The Lincoln Bedroom or some shit!), and then the Edwards scandal breaks, with much more attention and an unfortunate resonance. There might even be a Nixon/Eisenhower esque fight over taking him off the ticket.
I don't know if that would do it, but it would get it a lot closer, within plausible distance I think.
EDIT: Actually, if not Lieberman, how about Marsha Blackburn? She was on some of the lists I remember seeing thrown around. I think she might have less of the problems that beset Sarah Palin, while still shoring up McCain's weakness with the farther right. And having a woman on the ticket while Clinton is suffering from more embarassing infidelity flashbacks might split the women vote more than it would be otherwise.
There were two finalists IOTL: Palin and Pawlenty. McCain might pick Pawlenty ITTL.
John Edwards get's the democratic nomination and his scandal is uncovered three weeks before the election.
Yeah, but his process of picking was all over the place, and with a POD set far enough back he could pick a ton of different people. Tim Pawlenty is boring as shit, doesn't really bring in a state, and doesn't have a great economic record. Plus, 2008 not a great year for Two White Guys. Especially if McCain can steal some Democratic thunder with a minority pick.
I wonder if Condaleeza Rice would be a net benefit to the McCain campaign. Assuming he could convince her, of course.
EDIT: Entirely independent of my proposed scenario - or in conjunction with it - there's also a Bloomberg run. That could hurt the Dems.
Paul V McNutt
Banned
[
I doubt you could get a majority of delagates at a Republican conventio to vote for a pro choice liberal like Lieberman. Even if you could get him nominated, McCain would have alienated much of the Republican base.
QUOTE=Sicarius;4783427]Edwards doesn't flame out early, such that a few states that would have gone Obama go Clinton. But not enough! Clinton beats Obama in a brokered convention - not that I think that Clinton would lose just because she's Clinton or something, but an even longer drawn out primary which ends with the narrative 'inspiring up-and-comer crushed by backroom deal' isn't going to look good. And black voters are not going to be very happy at all. As part of the deal, Clinton picks Edwards as her VP.
Since a woman on the ticket doesn't look as maverick now, McCain's fickle VP search ends with a better candidate. Lieberman might be good for the "oh look i'm so bipartisan" pick. Or if there's someone with really good economic credentials, but no one springs to mind. Lieberman tells McCain not to 'suspend' his campaign like OTL, the right blows the dust off all those old anti-Clinton smears they were raring to use (Vince Foster! Whitewater! The Lincoln Bedroom or some shit!), and then the Edwards scandal breaks, with much more attention and an unfortunate resonance. There might even be a Nixon/Eisenhower esque fight over taking him off the ticket.
I don't know if that would do it, but it would get it a lot closer, within plausible distance I think.
EDIT: Actually, if not Lieberman, how about Marsha Blackburn? She was on some of the lists I remember seeing thrown around. I think she might have less of the problems that beset Sarah Palin, while still shoring up McCain's weakness with the farther right. And having a woman on the ticket while Clinton is suffering from more embarassing infidelity flashbacks might split the women vote more than it would be otherwise.[/QUOTE]
I doubt you could get a majority of delagates at a Republican conventio to vote for a pro choice liberal like Lieberman. Even if you could get him nominated, McCain would have alienated much of the Republican base.
QUOTE=Sicarius;4783427]Edwards doesn't flame out early, such that a few states that would have gone Obama go Clinton. But not enough! Clinton beats Obama in a brokered convention - not that I think that Clinton would lose just because she's Clinton or something, but an even longer drawn out primary which ends with the narrative 'inspiring up-and-comer crushed by backroom deal' isn't going to look good. And black voters are not going to be very happy at all. As part of the deal, Clinton picks Edwards as her VP.
Since a woman on the ticket doesn't look as maverick now, McCain's fickle VP search ends with a better candidate. Lieberman might be good for the "oh look i'm so bipartisan" pick. Or if there's someone with really good economic credentials, but no one springs to mind. Lieberman tells McCain not to 'suspend' his campaign like OTL, the right blows the dust off all those old anti-Clinton smears they were raring to use (Vince Foster! Whitewater! The Lincoln Bedroom or some shit!), and then the Edwards scandal breaks, with much more attention and an unfortunate resonance. There might even be a Nixon/Eisenhower esque fight over taking him off the ticket.
I don't know if that would do it, but it would get it a lot closer, within plausible distance I think.
EDIT: Actually, if not Lieberman, how about Marsha Blackburn? She was on some of the lists I remember seeing thrown around. I think she might have less of the problems that beset Sarah Palin, while still shoring up McCain's weakness with the farther right. And having a woman on the ticket while Clinton is suffering from more embarassing infidelity flashbacks might split the women vote more than it would be otherwise.[/QUOTE]
No, I'm serious - she'd have lost. Partly for the same reason she lost the nomination (her terrifying sense of entitlement, her campaign team trying to get people to support her through arm-twisting and threats) and partly because she'd make some very bad choices (picking Richardson as VP and then having to dump him, replacing Howard Dean with Harold Ford as DNC Chair and screwing the campaign there).
She wouldn't energise the youth vote the Dems need, and like her husband she will take the base for granted and so lose important bits of it - and while she is busy losing votes on the left, she is too familiar and too (undeservingly) polarising to pick up enough votes to the right and plug the gap. There would be a lower turn-out, a slightly increased vote for third parties, Clinton might win a thin majority in the popular vote but will lose the electoral college.
The Lieberman pick is always interesting because there is no good way of telling how much support McCain would have lost versus what he would have gained among Moderates with the Connecticut Senator running along his side; I have no doubts that he could push the nomination through, though it would be far from a comfortable majority, but there likely would have been some kind of revolt among the Conservatives. They would likely be pushed by people such as Tancredo to vote for the Constitution or Libertarian parties who were both headed by more Conservative candidates, at least by first perception. With this, despite losing some Conservative voters, McCain gains some Moderate voters and thus can placate more towards the Independents.
Now with the Democrats, simply have John Edwards not deny interest in the Vice Presidency, and have him be Barack Obama's pick for Vice President. It is not out of the realm of possibility, but also not that likely given that Obama really wanted a candidate who would give him more of an 'experienced' image; Edward's one term in the Senate doesn't really give it.
Now, as others have suggested, we simply allow for the Markets to hold steady until after the election through whatever means considered probable. McCain and Obama would likely be head to head at this time, maybe the latter with a slight lead, with a significant third party presence representing disaffected Conservative voters. Eventually Edwards scandal comes out and starts pulling Obama down in the polls, eventually allowing McCain to really come neck and neck or even ahead. Debates go about the same though the Edwards scandal becoming the major topic at the Town Hall debates results in McCain appearing better than in OTL.
Eventually, come election day, John McCain is elected the next President of the United States by a close margin. While the Republicans manage to make some gains in the Midwest and the Northeast, there is a weakening in the Deep and Middle South as Third Party strength increases, at least for the time being.
Now with the Democrats, simply have John Edwards not deny interest in the Vice Presidency, and have him be Barack Obama's pick for Vice President. It is not out of the realm of possibility, but also not that likely given that Obama really wanted a candidate who would give him more of an 'experienced' image; Edward's one term in the Senate doesn't really give it.
Now, as others have suggested, we simply allow for the Markets to hold steady until after the election through whatever means considered probable. McCain and Obama would likely be head to head at this time, maybe the latter with a slight lead, with a significant third party presence representing disaffected Conservative voters. Eventually Edwards scandal comes out and starts pulling Obama down in the polls, eventually allowing McCain to really come neck and neck or even ahead. Debates go about the same though the Edwards scandal becoming the major topic at the Town Hall debates results in McCain appearing better than in OTL.
Eventually, come election day, John McCain is elected the next President of the United States by a close margin. While the Republicans manage to make some gains in the Midwest and the Northeast, there is a weakening in the Deep and Middle South as Third Party strength increases, at least for the time being.
She wouldn't take much convincing. OTL, he ignored his instincts and gave in to the argument that she wasn't conservative enough and a media whispering campaign about her sexuality would put off conservative voters. She is connected to Bush, but she's connected to Bush's foreign policy, and that's not a problem if he's running against Clinton.
But if he were up against Clinton, he isn't going to pick Palin - he's going to want a black, conservative Republican. If not Rice, who? Blackwell and Steele aren't successful enough. Clarence Thomas is certainly conservative enough and seems like a running-mate who would elevate the debate, but it would mean he'd face a Supreme Court nomination as soon as he gets into the White House. What was Herman Cain doing in 2008?
The only other even remotely realistic pick I can think of in this regard is Representative Sanford Bishop, who is a conservative African-American from Virginia, and would have been serving his 15th year in office. The only problem though is that he is a member of the Democratic Party, not the Republican Party, though he has managed to hold on in what amounts to a Republican district.
Tovarich
Banned
Obama still gets the Dem' nomination, but does his acceptance speech like this:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYlDbv7MqE8&feature=related
I definitely think she's the least politically toxic member of the Bush administration (barring Colin Powell). I'm more worried about her being a black woman alienating some conservative voters. It can be argued how many there actually were like that vs. how much attention the media gave, but there was more than one instance of pretty unsavory statements about Obama from rally-goers. Would they choke it down or stay home on election day? I couldn't say with the knowledge I have now.
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. No Steele, because that would hurt more than help. Herman Cain is a little too out-of-nowhere. Clarence Thomas would whip the left into a frenzy, and I think he likes his job too much to leave, plus the danger of them losing and that seat going to the other side. Blackwell is actually probably the best choice of those listed, but he's just not prominent or that experienced. I for sure think Rice would be the best choice.
Just don't have him say that. Have him say "Oh yeah I'm great with the economy, I worked closely with the Reagan administration to help bring America back from the brink of the ruinous socialistic programs of the Carter administration." Also gonna wanna avoid "The fundamentals of the economy are strong." Probably in favor of "This country never truly recovered from the recession of 2001, when the internet investment bubble that had been masking the effects of the fundamentally unsupportable and irresponsible Clinton administration. Further, the Clinton loosening of regulation on Fannie and Freddie and simulatenous job-killing tightening of regulation clearly laid the groundwork for the problems of today."