Bush Cheney 92

I am reading the book Days of Fire Bush and Cheney in the White House. It goes back much further than that. It said in 1992, George W. Bush advised his father to dump Quayle and replace him with Dick Cheney. What if he had followed his son's advice instead of rewarding Quayle's loyalty. I think Bush would have done slightly better in the 1992 election. I see Clinton 42% Bush 40% Perot 17%. Bush also carries New Hampshire, New Jersey, Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Montana and Nevada. The Electoral College would have been Clinton 291 and Bush 247. The book also says that after the election, Cheney explored a presidential campaign, but decided he would rather not run. I am thinking with a national campaign already under his belt, Cheney would have run but would not have been able to defeat Bob Dole for 1996 Republican nomination. This TL does not change the close relationship between GW Bush and Cheney, nor the younger Bush's desire to put someone with foreign policy experience on his ticket. So I still think you would get the same Republican ticket and election results in 2000 and 2004. There would be one less controversy about Cheney. Because he would have been focused on his presidential campaign, he would have passed on the Haliburton job
 
Who were the other possible replacements for Dan Quayle? And did Bush ever truly seriously consider dumping Quayle?
 
I doubt Dubya would've picked Cheney if his father had tapped him. That just seems very sketchy.

Yeah, I've never heard of the same guy being picked for VP twice. If he needs foreign policy, I'm sure he could grab someone on the Senate Foreign Relations Council.
 
Yeah, I've never heard of the same guy being picked for VP twice. If he needs foreign policy, I'm sure he could grab someone on the Senate Foreign Relations Council.

Calhoun, for one. But that was quite a while ago. Hell, maybe Dubya taps Colin Powell for VP.
 
This may set up Cheney for 1996. It depends on how prominent he is in the party. The Republicans tend to nominate the senior, next-in-line candidate. OTL, that was Dole. It may still be Dole here. But Cheney would be in a position. He'd also have to run against Clinton, though.
 
This may set up Cheney for 1996. It depends on how prominent he is in the party. The Republicans tend to nominate the senior, next-in-line candidate. OTL, that was Dole. It may still be Dole here. But Cheney would be in a position. He'd also have to run against Clinton, though.

I think Dole is still next in line. He had run for President twice and Vice President once.
 
As I endlessly point out, the choice of a vice-president rarely makes any difference in the election result. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...minute/2000/06/nobody_votes_for_the_veep.html There is no reason to think 1992 would have been an exception. (Yes, Quayle was the butt of a lot of jokes from comedians in 1992. So what? The same was true in 1988.) Dumping Quayle--apart from being a tacit admission that Bush had made a mistake in 1988--would alienate some conservative Republicans, and possibly convince them to vote for Perot. As for Cheney, he would not hep the ticket much because disillusionment with Desert Storm was already setting in (after all, Saddam was still in power), foreign policy/national security issues seemed less important with the breakup of the Soviet Union, and people were paying more attention to the economy--whose condition they were blaming on Bush, not his running mate.

I seriously doubt that it would have changed a single electoral vote. Yes, it probably would mean that GW Bush would have chosen a different running mate in 2000, but I doubt that this would make much difference, either--Cheney would still be an important advisor.
 
Top