Pawlenty could lead to a Hope, Change and Nutmeg scenario as it would be a pretty moderate ticket. I doubt it'll get that bad, but it'll be fun, with the Democrats winning Montana and some other Northern states.
Al Gore 2008
- Thread starter Pericles
- Start date
Pawlenty could lead to a Hope, Change and Nutmeg scenario as it would be a pretty moderate ticket. I doubt it'll get that bad, but it'll be fun, with the Democrats winning Montana and some other Northern states.
Palin turned off moderates though, so no Palin might lead to the same, if not a better, result. In Game Change, they had a woman who thought Obama was inexperienced, incompetent, too liberal, unpatriotic a Muslim etc but was still undecided "because Sarah Palin's Vice-President."
Back on point, what environmental initiatives would Gore propose? Cap and trade probably, or would he do more? How would his presidency go?
Gore was very concerned about Global Warming, so I could see him making an initiative to reduce carbon emissions in vehicles. He might also be a strong opponent of hydraulic fracturing because of its negative effects on the air, the ground, and water. Ice/Glaciers melting and rising ocean levels are also caused by Global Warming. Other unrelated environmental issues he'd likely address are: The British Petroleum Oil Spill, the Keystone Pipeline, and the Flint, Michigan Water Crisis.
Last edited:
Do you think he'd try to get Congress to pass cap and trade or a carbon tax and make that a focus of his agenda, or would he do it more subtly. How do you think Gore would be different from Obama?
I think for his VP he might pick Russ Feingold. Feingold is from a swing state while reinforcing Gore's message.
Because cap and trade was in the making since the 1990s, it's plausible to say he'd try to get Congress to pass it. Over the eight years he spent out of office, he came to see global warming as an urgent matter and would plausibly make cap and trade a focus of his agenda, but a carbon tax is still not off of his table for containing Global Warming. I think Gore would have done a lot more than Obama. Gore was prepared to be president in 2000 and despite waiting eight years to run again, he'd still have his training as vice president fresh in memory. Gore would be at the edge of his seat on all of the issues, especially Global Warming and would have better rejection alternatives than just resorting to executive orders. Gore would not have Obama's messianic reception when he arrived in office.
Feingold would be an excellent and plausible choice for Vice President. He was a seasoned, experienced liberal senator who voted against the Patriot Act, Iraqi Invasion, and other Bush Administration proposals, balancing Gore's centrism well. I feel Obama as Vice President is too 'dreamy' of a ticket, but would definitely be more popular than Feingold because of his popularity among youths and African Americans. Feingold could defend his opposition of the Patriot Act and Iraqi Invasion with his past actions, whereas Obama would simply say "I was against it from the start".
Last edited:
So Feingold is his VP and Gore wins a comfortable victory in November over McCain.
Then Gore passes a stimulus, maybe he manages to get a bigger one. I think cap and trade would likely be an epic debacle for Gore, Republicans would portray it as a giant new tax, the public would be confused about why Gore is creating a whole new tax and regulatory system in the middle of a big recession and coal-state Democrats would run away from it. However, there may not be the same burning hatred for Gore as the Tea Party had for Obama, maybe partly because of race but also because of butterflies(no Palin, death panels) and because cap and trade is a less emotive issue than Obamacare. The gridlock might be reduced(Gore and Congress are able to hammer out bargain on budget in 2011 or second term?) and some of the worst aspects of the gridlock(shutdown, debt ceiling roulette) could be avoided. What do you think?
Then Gore passes a stimulus, maybe he manages to get a bigger one. I think cap and trade would likely be an epic debacle for Gore, Republicans would portray it as a giant new tax, the public would be confused about why Gore is creating a whole new tax and regulatory system in the middle of a big recession and coal-state Democrats would run away from it. However, there may not be the same burning hatred for Gore as the Tea Party had for Obama, maybe partly because of race but also because of butterflies(no Palin, death panels) and because cap and trade is a less emotive issue than Obamacare. The gridlock might be reduced(Gore and Congress are able to hammer out bargain on budget in 2011 or second term?) and some of the worst aspects of the gridlock(shutdown, debt ceiling roulette) could be avoided. What do you think?
Republicans might not oppose Cap and Trade as much as OTL, if at all, as if I remember correctly, many of them at one point in the last 20-30 years supported it. It wasn't until Obama pushed for it that there was a lot of opposition.
I also think Gore would focus more on the economy in 2009 and 2010 than Obama did OTL, as Gore was VP during the Hillarycare debacle of 1993 and 94, so the 2010 midterms may not be as bad as they were OTL, and if Gore does pursue healthcare, it's after 2010, or he's much more gradual about it than Obama was (I think we'd get a better plan than Obamacare if this type of approach was taken). I also agree about the gridlock, at worst it would be equivalent to what it was in the 1990s under Clinton-Gingrich, only with the country being more liberal in the 2010s than in the '90s, Gore would have the upper hand politically.
I think that when cap and trade is proposed the Republicans will oppose it. They didn't obstruct Obama because he was black, or because he didn't work with them or for any of those reasons. They obstructed him for one reason only. He was a Democrat Even before his inauguration, just as with Clinton, they developed a strategy to systematically obstruct his agenda and they continued with it because it worked. Mitt Romney passed Obamacare, and Republicans supported many of its tenants. They opposed Obamacare because it was proposed by a Democrat President. So they will do exactly the same with cap and trade.
I think you have a good point that Gore might focus on the economy more. That would have interesting consequences.
So you're proposing a scenario where the Vice President under a popular centrist loses the election to succeed his boss, but returns to politics after the opposition party has been in power for eight years and become associated in the public mind with disastrous and fruitless foreign intervention, handily winning the presidency? And you think he might pass major environmental protections? Something about that scenario seems off to me.
Gore making a comeback is not too implausible, he won the popular vote and lost by 500 votes in Florida and the 2000 election was one of the most controversial ever, Gore could argue he really did win in 200. And while Gore made mistakes in 2000 and the period afterwards, Nixon made mistakes in the 1960s and still won in 1968.
Gore's 2008 campaign would be far more liberal than his 2000 one, at least in the primaries. Gore would appeal to regret at electing Bush and peddle himself as the opposite of Bush. His documentary would be a part of this. Gore winning the nomination is the most challenging part if the scenario, but it can be done. I could see Gore rallying white liberals to win in early states, this gives him momentum and he wins on Super Tuesday. It would be close though, and Clinton would win the black vote because the Clintons have a closer connection with blacks than their VP. Gore won't win with the Obama coalition, he'll win with a stronger and broader version of Sanders' support. Gore would need to do better than Obama with whites and in big states like Massachsetts, Califirnia etc which is hard but if he gets a lucky break(avoids Clinton's comeback in NH wins narrowly there) it is certainly doable.
If he becomes President, Gore could easily champion climate change action because he has become more liberal since 2000, he got a Nobel peace prize for doing just that and there would be broad public support for some action(though maybe not for his specific program).
Foreign Policy
Could Hillary still be Secretary of State or does he find someone better? In OTL, Obama offered Hillary the role as a sign of goodwill and so that she'd receive training on how to deal with foreign leaders as president. I think Gore would avoid Libya, but like Clinton with Kosovo, address Syria while the United States is still in Iraq. But how much longer the United States stays in Iraq all depends on whether Gore honors the deal Bush and Maliki struck in 2008.
Could Hillary still be Secretary of State or does he find someone better? In OTL, Obama offered Hillary the role as a sign of goodwill and so that she'd receive training on how to deal with foreign leaders as president. I think Gore would avoid Libya, but like Clinton with Kosovo, address Syria while the United States is still in Iraq. But how much longer the United States stays in Iraq all depends on whether Gore honors the deal Bush and Maliki struck in 2008.
Last edited:
That's what I was alluding to. I don't find this scenario too implausible; I just found the parallels kind of amusing.
Oh right
. Do you think Gore would be able to win the nomination by exceeding his score among white voters and winning states Obama lost(New Hampshire, California, Massachusetts, Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania)? Especially since he would not have Obama's overwhelming advantage with black voters, he'd need that to win the nomination.
I was thinking so far that he would push a cap and trade program as his major initiative, but it would be a disaster. Republicans would attack it as ineffectual on 'climate change' and a huge new tax, coal Democrats and red-state Democrats would run away from it and the public would be confused about why this whole new tax and bureaucracy is being added during a huge recession. Gore probably would make some PR blunders too so the whole thing would fail spectacularly.
But while I think that is pretty plausbile, I'm not satisfied it. I don't want to write a Gore presidency TL just for him to fail and it end up becoming Republican-wank. So does anybody else have ideas on how the Gore presidency would go?
I think he could push for clean energy (solar, wind, etc...) instead of health care. Coming off of the high energy prices of the Bush years, he could sell it as a good way to create jobs. Gore would probably push hard to end the Iraq war quicker than OTL, Afghanistan goes more or less as OTL. The Bush tax cuts depend on the 2010 midterms, which will more than likely be bad for Gore, as to whether it would go better or worse is debatable. I doubt Gore would intervene in Syria or Libya either, seeing how Iraq turned out. Gore's Presidency overall would be somewhat similar to Obama's OTL.
Do you think Gore would appoint Hillary as his Secretary of State or would he appoint John Kerry? If he appoints Kerry and his presidency is a failure Clinton might challenge him in 2012, continuing their relationship which has now devolved into a bitter feud.
And there could be Clinton vs Vice-President Feingold in 2016. That would be an interesting contest, Feingold would be like a stronger Bernie.
Gore would be more experienced than Onama, but not as charismatic and has been known to make PR blunders. What would his relationship with Congress be like? How would his increased experience effect his presidency?
And there could be Clinton vs Vice-President Feingold in 2016. That would be an interesting contest, Feingold would be like a stronger Bernie.
Gore would be more experienced than Onama, but not as charismatic and has been known to make PR blunders. What would his relationship with Congress be like? How would his increased experience effect his presidency?
I don't know if Gore liked Hillary all that much when he was VP (correct me if I'm wrong) so Kerry seems more plausible. As for a primary challenge, after Kennedy's challenge against Carter in 1980, I doubt she'd do it and I know the party wouldn't support it. She'd wait till 2016.
I personally think he'd have a better relationship with Congress than Obama OTL, at worst it'd be the same as Bill Clinton's in the 90s. Lack of Charisma is a set back but won't alone cause a Presidency to fail. Same with PR blunders, if GW Bush could do 8 years with many, many gaffes, Gore could survive some PR blunders. I think his experience would give him a better idea of how to get things done and what can and cant be done.
OK, seems you have an optimistic view of how the Gore presidency would go, so it's not too implausible if Gore does do well.
Any ideas on how else Gore would be different from Obama?