Culture of the 1990's without Bill Clinton

What would happen to the pop culture of the 1990's if Bill Clinton never got elected??? Let's go the easy route and have him, like Gary Hart, get caught cheating on his wife. I am assuming, this is one where HW easily wins and a prominent 90's Dem gets elected in 1996.
Could go two different ways: Either GOP 90s followed by dem takeover in 96/00 or a dem one/two termer who runs things differently than Clinton.

The first scenario is this: The GOP revolution of the 80s and 90s continues until ending in 96/00 with a 'natural' death rather than OTL's situation which was tbh rather odd in several ways. The first bit of oddness was being a two-term democrat in a GOP/conservative era. The second off thing was how much he agreed with them, and was able to get alot of the reagan era's policies frozen in amber for 10-20 years, or even incorporated into being a 'normal' democat. The third thing was that Clinton somehow didn't manage to get even something like Obamacare through. No mass expansion of free trade agreements and lesser "progress" on globalization -- DMCA is dead in the water(they kept trying to get it in bills before getting smart and trying it in a treaty to get it through otl. ttl? probably a nonstarter)

The second scenario? Similar in some ways to Clinton in broad strokes -- having to try being seen as 1) a democrat 2) liberal in a conservative GOP era. The fact that they're willing to let Ted Kennedy and the other relevant guys write the healthcare plans means it's more likely to pass, and to be more comprehensive than say Obamacare*, even if UHC wasn't going to be on the table yet. More socially liberal and not trying to seem conservative/"moderate" on social issues, which imo means less culture wars -- no Conservatives mad at Clinton's hypocrisies. As above less free trade/"globalizaiton".

Anyways, these are the various alternatives.

My take on Clinton direct cultural effects on OTL? Well, his whole persona and scandals gave the religious right a few more years of boosted influence, plus kept them more vocal/united for another 10-15 years. There's of course the political side of cultural issues, where democrats continued the carter/post-carter trend of secular moralizing -- the prudish wings of feminism, Tipper Gore/Hillary Clinton on the media and video games or the internet, Lieberman and well his favoring censorship. There is of course the fact that the Clinton administration enabled media consolidation to ridiculous levels which was BIG. Why? Well, it led to you can call it the "overton" window being drastically narrowed, execs/advertisers all chasing the same(increasingly upper-middle class) demographics in entertainment. Certain prudish types began to become more influential in the democratic party/various institutions friendly to them -- hollywood, the future social media types. The "Angry white male" thing of the 1990s was largely due to 1) feelings of betrayal from a POTUS they thought was double-talking/hypocritical 2) outsourcing/deindustrializing hitting them 3) the fact the credentialled top 20% was doing well and rubbing it in the faces of well everyone else(They still are to a much worse extent)

What this means, is that even if your hypothetical non-clinton democrat is still a sunbelt moderate like our boy Billy things will look different. Sure, you'd see broadly the same social trends regardless of it's a sunbelt dem, bush's second term, cuomo, brown or who else. The differences would come from simple personality reasons -- no giving the religious right 10-15 more years of unity, getting even a halfassed healthcare bill through, etc. The GOP wave of 94 happens roughly as OTL, Deregulaiton still happens but not to OTL's extent -- remaining new deal banking regs hurt, antitrust made lower priority*, welfare cut down a bit as otl, etc.

The big difference would come from the cultural scene. The early to mid 90s "multicultural"/diverse focus with results like how McDonalds had that one guy in the wheelchair quiets down earlier, less likely than OTL to revive in it's late 2000s and on form*. Late 1990s, well more specifically late 1990s to mid 2001, then 2003-6 "edgy" stuff happens earlier and faster than OTL*. Videogames get normalized faster with a president who has a more "normal" administration and doesn't need to create distractions from scandals with things like hearings about videogame violence -- The ESRB is likely founded around now, less strict on ratings and mroe willing to slowly evolve over time since it's more the companies' own choice and not de facto state pressure. More over the top content in games, even if it's not till ttl's late 2000s that you see things getting to OTL's level of content. Porn? Accepted faster, attitudes shift faster but not as fast you'd think given technical/connection limitations. Music? More edgy and over the top with a more relaxed FCC than OTL, the same goes for non-cable TV pobably -- still no nudity or anything on that but more willingness to push things. Healthcare reform is surprisingly something with sizeable cultural implications -- note how various "vice"/"persona lifestyle" issues get less moralistic complaining about in countries with UHC as an example. Even though the plan will be basically obamacare plus, this will still happen -- notice the shift in opinions on marijuana since say 2010 going faster than it was before, or less talk complaining about smoking OTL since then. The late 1990s saw a trend of being visibly more liberal liberal or at least uncaring re: sexual mores, a POTUS whose routine doesn't actively enrage the RR for existing, plus less appeals to certain types of feminists means this comes faster. A somewhat less repressed US sees an earlier and even stronger anime boom, instead of let's say 1997-2007ish make it 1995-2009ish(great recession) with more impact than OTL's anime boom.

tl;dr 1990s as OTL but less restrained/moreso with the 2000s (Even with a 9/11) being more similar to the 90s and a 2010s that's less repressed thanks to the power of ttl's 90s nostalgia. Also more weebs.

The GOP getting it's last hurrah with a second term for bush and/or one for Quayle(the booming economy suggests this id doable), Brown, Cuomo? Other ATLs I'll mention in the next post.

* I used it above in the Clinton thing bc more or less GOP health plan
* as opposed to OTL's insane media consolidation
* Or if it does, less of one. Remember, less media consolidation and antitrust sitll being a thing(This will be important once FB/twitter/the like get big on top of butterflies.
* Thande's pointed out the 30s blend into the 50s, I'd like to note a similar thing applying to the late 1990s and the early-mid 2000s outside of 2001-2 which were a BIG shock. Remove 9/11 and it'd be easy to see a single cultural trend of increasing 'edge' to the great recession.
 

samcster94

Banned
Could go two different ways: Either GOP 90s followed by dem takeover in 96/00 or a dem one/two termer who runs things differently than Clinton.

The first scenario is this: The GOP revolution of the 80s and 90s continues until ending in 96/00 with a 'natural' death rather than OTL's situation which was tbh rather odd in several ways. The first bit of oddness was being a two-term democrat in a GOP/conservative era. The second off thing was how much he agreed with them, and was able to get alot of the reagan era's policies frozen in amber for 10-20 years, or even incorporated into being a 'normal' democat. The third thing was that Clinton somehow didn't manage to get even something like Obamacare through. No mass expansion of free trade agreements and lesser "progress" on globalization -- DMCA is dead in the water(they kept trying to get it in bills before getting smart and trying it in a treaty to get it through otl. ttl? probably a nonstarter)

The second scenario? Similar in some ways to Clinton in broad strokes -- having to try being seen as 1) a democrat 2) liberal in a conservative GOP era. The fact that they're willing to let Ted Kennedy and the other relevant guys write the healthcare plans means it's more likely to pass, and to be more comprehensive than say Obamacare*, even if UHC wasn't going to be on the table yet. More socially liberal and not trying to seem conservative/"moderate" on social issues, which imo means less culture wars -- no Conservatives mad at Clinton's hypocrisies. As above less free trade/"globalizaiton".

Anyways, these are the various alternatives.

My take on Clinton direct cultural effects on OTL? Well, his whole persona and scandals gave the religious right a few more years of boosted influence, plus kept them more vocal/united for another 10-15 years. There's of course the political side of cultural issues, where democrats continued the carter/post-carter trend of secular moralizing -- the prudish wings of feminism, Tipper Gore/Hillary Clinton on the media and video games or the internet, Lieberman and well his favoring censorship. There is of course the fact that the Clinton administration enabled media consolidation to ridiculous levels which was BIG. Why? Well, it led to you can call it the "overton" window being drastically narrowed, execs/advertisers all chasing the same(increasingly upper-middle class) demographics in entertainment. Certain prudish types began to become more influential in the democratic party/various institutions friendly to them -- hollywood, the future social media types. The "Angry white male" thing of the 1990s was largely due to 1) feelings of betrayal from a POTUS they thought was double-talking/hypocritical 2) outsourcing/deindustrializing hitting them 3) the fact the credentialled top 20% was doing well and rubbing it in the faces of well everyone else(They still are to a much worse extent)

What this means, is that even if your hypothetical non-clinton democrat is still a sunbelt moderate like our boy Billy things will look different. Sure, you'd see broadly the same social trends regardless of it's a sunbelt dem, bush's second term, cuomo, brown or who else. The differences would come from simple personality reasons -- no giving the religious right 10-15 more years of unity, getting even a halfassed healthcare bill through, etc. The GOP wave of 94 happens roughly as OTL, Deregulaiton still happens but not to OTL's extent -- remaining new deal banking regs hurt, antitrust made lower priority*, welfare cut down a bit as otl, etc.

The big difference would come from the cultural scene. The early to mid 90s "multicultural"/diverse focus with results like how McDonalds had that one guy in the wheelchair quiets down earlier, less likely than OTL to revive in it's late 2000s and on form*. Late 1990s, well more specifically late 1990s to mid 2001, then 2003-6 "edgy" stuff happens earlier and faster than OTL*. Videogames get normalized faster with a president who has a more "normal" administration and doesn't need to create distractions from scandals with things like hearings about videogame violence -- The ESRB is likely founded around now, less strict on ratings and mroe willing to slowly evolve over time since it's more the companies' own choice and not de facto state pressure. More over the top content in games, even if it's not till ttl's late 2000s that you see things getting to OTL's level of content. Porn? Accepted faster, attitudes shift faster but not as fast you'd think given technical/connection limitations. Music? More edgy and over the top with a more relaxed FCC than OTL, the same goes for non-cable TV pobably -- still no nudity or anything on that but more willingness to push things. Healthcare reform is surprisingly something with sizeable cultural implications -- note how various "vice"/"persona lifestyle" issues get less moralistic complaining about in countries with UHC as an example. Even though the plan will be basically obamacare plus, this will still happen -- notice the shift in opinions on marijuana since say 2010 going faster than it was before, or less talk complaining about smoking OTL since then. The late 1990s saw a trend of being visibly more liberal liberal or at least uncaring re: sexual mores, a POTUS whose routine doesn't actively enrage the RR for existing, plus less appeals to certain types of feminists means this comes faster. A somewhat less repressed US sees an earlier and even stronger anime boom, instead of let's say 1997-2007ish make it 1995-2009ish(great recession) with more impact than OTL's anime boom.

tl;dr 1990s as OTL but less restrained/moreso with the 2000s (Even with a 9/11) being more similar to the 90s and a 2010s that's less repressed thanks to the power of ttl's 90s nostalgia. Also more weebs.

The GOP getting it's last hurrah with a second term for bush and/or one for Quayle(the booming economy suggests this id doable), Brown, Cuomo? Other ATLs I'll mention in the next post.

* I used it above in the Clinton thing bc more or less GOP health plan
* as opposed to OTL's insane media consolidation
* Or if it does, less of one. Remember, less media consolidation and antitrust sitll being a thing(This will be important once FB/twitter/the like get big on top of butterflies.
* Thande's pointed out the 30s blend into the 50s, I'd like to note a similar thing applying to the late 1990s and the early-mid 2000s outside of 2001-2 which were a BIG shock. Remove 9/11 and it'd be easy to see a single cultural trend of increasing 'edge' to the great recession.
True. Imagine Pokémon(or something similar to it, even if it stayed Capsule Monsters) emerging under a President Cuomo/Gephardt/Gore.
 
The Dems, their imagine problems aside, would win 96. Heck, you could have Bill Clinton as a sort of 'Nixon' figure as he lose 93, wait out on 96, and win big in the 2000 election.

Clinton wouldn't get a second chance if he blows an election the Democrats we're supposed to win. As for '96, it probably won't be Gore. Butterflies could keep Cuomo in power in NY, so maybe he finally runs. Otherwise it could be Kerry or Bill Bradley.
 
Cuomo in '96 as a realigning figure once the Reagan/Bush era of 1980-96 ends? Hm, that's an ATL idea that's new.

And the trans-Atlantic political parallels would be even weirder. Both Blair and his American counterpart would be taking office in 1997, after the Conservatives in both countries win a surprise upset in 1992.
 

samcster94

Banned
And the trans-Atlantic political parallels would be even weirder. Both Blair and his American counterpart would be taking office in 1997, after the Conservatives in both countries win a surprise upset in 1992.
Major and HW parallel better here too.
 
And the trans-Atlantic political parallels would be even weirder. Both Blair and his American counterpart would be taking office in 1997, after the Conservatives in both countries win a surprise upset in 1992.
Blair was definitely a good parallel to Bill Clinton with the third way politicking/authoritarian nanny statism/entrenching neoliberalism more. Imo without Clinton you get a more traditional labor type in '97 or '98 whenever Major loses confidence.
 
Clinton wouldn't get a second chance if he blows an election the Democrats we're supposed to win. As for '96, it probably won't be Gore. Butterflies could keep Cuomo in power in NY, so maybe he finally runs. Otherwise it could be Kerry or Bill Bradley.

He still be a popular, charismatic politician and former Governor. (Much like Nixon.) 2000, of Cuomo a one term President, would be Clinton's year to rise.
 

samcster94

Banned
I think the alternate 1990's without Bill Clinton would be perceived different if late 2010's social attitudes evolved. A Democrat who was more like Obama(marriage-wise:whose marriage was normal) would probably be left alone.
 
HW getting re-elected might prevent the rise of the militia movement and people like Alex Jones. If the Waco Siege happens under HW, the NRA won't have "liberal gun-grabbing Clinton" to blame. Same for the Assault Weapons Ban if HW signs it. This all means that guns become a less polarizing issue than they are currently. The absence of Clinton denies the Religious Right a target for their anger, so you won't hear things like, "Clinton's bad influence is causing the Spice Girls and Britney Spears to show skin." Crime rates having declined and the economy having improved by 1996 may result in whoever the GOP nominates in 1996 crediting HW for these things. If the Crime Bill and the Welfare Reform Bill still happen in the years they do, they'll be seen as Republican legislation. HW's leadership may limit the influence of people such as Pat Buchanan, meaning a less xenophobic and a more free-trading, internationalist GOP.
Healthcare reform is surprisingly something with sizeable cultural implications -- note how various "vice"/"persona lifestyle" issues get less moralistic complaining about in countries with UHC as an example. Even though the plan will be basically obamacare plus, this will still happen -- notice the shift in opinions on marijuana since say 2010 going faster than it was before, or less talk complaining about smoking OTL since then.
Couldn't changing views on marijuana be attributed to Obama's endorsement of same-sex marriage and the success of Obergefell (giving hope to social liberals), police brutality in the news (raising awareness of criminal justice issues), increased interest in social justice overall, and Trump's campaign revealing the true colors of the "law and order" crowd? Couldn't decreased interest in tobacoo be attributed to the enactment of indoor smoking bans and declining smoking rates?
 
Last edited:
I'd argue that increased interest in "social justice", plus related things like concerns over "representation"/#MEETOO led to delays on both gay marriage and marijuana. Why? People getting worked up over different issues, plus putting energy into doing witch hunts. Avoid the rise of the "social justice" types in the late 2000s, and odds are you have 20-30 states with legal marijuana and gay marriage nationally in 2012-13.
 
I wonder what would become of McVeigh. The OK City bombing was a reaction to the conspiracy theories that came from Waco happening under Clinton and Reno.
 
Top