MrHola
Banned
For a few months now, I’m busy with a what-if scenario with Reagan’s assasination as the POD. This makes George H.W. Bush the 40th President of the United States. I’m kinda stuck on what Bush would do in his two terms. Here are a few assumptions;
1) The top priority in 1981/1982 was to kill off inflation. That was done by the Federal Reserve, so the recession would be the same and the subsequent skyrocketing economy still happen. Bush gets the credit regardless of the "voodoo economics."
2) I don't see much changing with the USSR, given the age of Brezhnev, Chernenko, and Andropov. Gorbachev was nearly inevitable. However, the level of animosity between the US and USSR (deploying the cruise missiles, joking about starting the bombing) would not have been as bad. But the USSR economy was doomed anyways.
3) Though George Bush was very able in international relations, more able than any president since Truman (though Nixon's opening of Red China was quite masterful), he would never have allowed Iran-Contra, or blatenly support Afghan rebels. We would see, in a two-term Bush a move closer to Bush's ideal of a world government. The relationship between the US and the UN would be much stronger. Bush would very easily win the 1984 elections. Not as easy as Reagan, but Mondale would not have won.
So what DOES change? For starters, no support for the Contras, and I assume no Iran-Contra affair. Also, the assassination would lead to passage in 1982 of the Brady Bill, only now called the Reagan-Brady Bill in memory of the slain president. Since Bush did not get along well with Reagan’s California buddies, I could see a major cabinet reshuffle early on. Also, with Reagan out of the picture, the Religious Right would have gone four years without access to the White House.
Now for the questions;
- What does Bush do about Lebanon? In OTL, Reagan pulled back all US troops stationed in Lebanon after the 1983 attacks. I can see Bush managed to pull a gradual pull-out through Congress instead of the rapid pull-out that Reagan ordered. And what about Grenada?
- While Bush would not have been so open about supporting the Afghan rebels, he would still use some covert operations to provide a lot of support. What do you think?
- Reagan managed to break the back of the unions in 1981 when he crushed the PATCO strike. Would Bush go that far?
1) The top priority in 1981/1982 was to kill off inflation. That was done by the Federal Reserve, so the recession would be the same and the subsequent skyrocketing economy still happen. Bush gets the credit regardless of the "voodoo economics."
2) I don't see much changing with the USSR, given the age of Brezhnev, Chernenko, and Andropov. Gorbachev was nearly inevitable. However, the level of animosity between the US and USSR (deploying the cruise missiles, joking about starting the bombing) would not have been as bad. But the USSR economy was doomed anyways.
3) Though George Bush was very able in international relations, more able than any president since Truman (though Nixon's opening of Red China was quite masterful), he would never have allowed Iran-Contra, or blatenly support Afghan rebels. We would see, in a two-term Bush a move closer to Bush's ideal of a world government. The relationship between the US and the UN would be much stronger. Bush would very easily win the 1984 elections. Not as easy as Reagan, but Mondale would not have won.
So what DOES change? For starters, no support for the Contras, and I assume no Iran-Contra affair. Also, the assassination would lead to passage in 1982 of the Brady Bill, only now called the Reagan-Brady Bill in memory of the slain president. Since Bush did not get along well with Reagan’s California buddies, I could see a major cabinet reshuffle early on. Also, with Reagan out of the picture, the Religious Right would have gone four years without access to the White House.
Now for the questions;
- What does Bush do about Lebanon? In OTL, Reagan pulled back all US troops stationed in Lebanon after the 1983 attacks. I can see Bush managed to pull a gradual pull-out through Congress instead of the rapid pull-out that Reagan ordered. And what about Grenada?
- While Bush would not have been so open about supporting the Afghan rebels, he would still use some covert operations to provide a lot of support. What do you think?
- Reagan managed to break the back of the unions in 1981 when he crushed the PATCO strike. Would Bush go that far?