DBWI: Al Gore runs in 2000

CaliGuy

Banned
What if Al Gore would have decided to run for the U.S. Presidency in 2000? Indeed, in our TL*, he surprisingly decided not to run in 2000 and instead returned to private life--eventually becoming a prominent environmental activist.

Would Al Gore have won the U.S. Presidency in 2000 in this TL? Also, would Gore have gotten reelected in 2004? In addition to this, who would he have picked as his VP and who would have been the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008? Finally, who would have been Gore's successor as U.S. President?

Also, one last thing--exactly what kind of President would Al Gore have been had he won in 2000?
 
With Gore in the picture, we probably would've seen a much less dramatic Democratic Primary in 2000. As the incumbent VP, he would've probably had the nomination, if he wanted it. As we all know though, this wasn't the case. With no clear front-runner in 2000, it was a vicious contest between John Kerry, Howard Dean, and Bill Bradley for the nomination. Of course, Bradley came out of the primary season as the ultimate champion, and went on to just barely eek out a victory over George W. Bush.

But, had Gore run in 2000, the only real change I see is a much less divisive primary season. As for the General Election, I see him easily and soundly defeating Bush as well. Bill Clinton's relative popularity and a stable economy were enough for Bradley to ride to victory on, after all. Maybe Bradley could've been his VP choice? But, regardless of his choice in VP, I imagine Gore still would've been more on the conservative side of the Democratic Party. Continuing the policies of Bill Clinton, he might've had more luck in the fight for healthcare than President Bradley did IOTL. While his heart was in the right place, Bradley was simply too liberal for the times.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
With Gore in the picture, we probably would've seen a much less dramatic Democratic Primary in 2000. As the incumbent VP, he would've probably had the nomination, if he wanted it. As we all know though, this wasn't the case. With no clear front-runner in 2000, it was a vicious contest between John Kerry, Howard Dean, and Bill Bradley for the nomination. Of course, Bradley came out of the primary season as the ultimate champion, and went on to just barely eek out a victory over George W. Bush.

But, had Gore run in 2000, the only real change I see is a much less divisive primary season. As for the General Election, I see him easily and soundly defeating Bush as well. Bill Clinton's relative popularity and a stable economy were enough for Bradley to ride to victory on, after all. Maybe Bradley could've been his VP choice? But, regardless of his choice in VP, I imagine Gore still would've been more on the conservative side of the Democratic Party. Continuing the policies of Bill Clinton, he might've had more luck in the fight for healthcare than President Bradley did IOTL. While his heart was in the right place, Bradley was simply too liberal for the times.
In spite of his flaws in regards to domestic policy, though, President Bradley was an excellent leader in the War on Terror. Indeed, after the failed 9/11 plot, once Al-Qaeda succeeded with the Sears Tower bombing in 2003, President Bradley immediately attacked Afghanistan, overthrew the Taliban regime there, and captured and killed Osama Bin Laden. :)
 
In spite of his flaws in regards to domestic policy, though, President Bradley was an excellent leader in the War on Terror. Indeed, after the failed 9/11 plot, once Al-Qaeda succeeded with the Sears Tower bombing in 2003, President Bradley immediately attacked Afghanistan, overthrew the Taliban regime there, and captured and killed Osama Bin Laden. :)

Due in no small part to his choosing Wesley Clark as his VP, i'm sure. As few wins as Bradley may have had on domestic issues, he was surprisingly bold and efficient in regards to the Middle East in general. Without his Presidency, we might've been bogged down in Afghanistan for much longer. Gore, I suspect, wouldn't have chosen Clark as his own VP, which leads me to question where we'd be today.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Due in no small part to his choosing Wesley Clark as his VP, i'm sure. As few wins as Bradley may have had on domestic issues, he was surprisingly bold and efficient in regards to the Middle East in general. Without his Presidency, we might've been bogged down in Afghanistan for much longer. Gore, I suspect, wouldn't have chosen Clark as his own VP, which leads me to question where we'd be today.
Completely agreed. Indeed, given Gore's intense personal disgust at Clinton's affair, I wonder if he would have picked a hyper-moralist such as Joe Lieberman as his VP pick; indeed, in such a scenario, Lieberman might have pressured President Gore to invade Iraq and to quickly abandon Afghanistan--possibly with disastrous consequences! :(
 
Completely agreed. Indeed, given Gore's intense personal disgust at Clinton's affair, I wonder if he would have picked a hyper-moralist such as Joe Lieberman as his VP pick; indeed, in such a scenario, Lieberman might have pressured President Gore to invade Iraq and to quickly abandon Afghanistan--possibly with disastrous consequences! :(

Joe Lieberman, as Gore's VP? God, that's one WI that'd actually give me nightmares. If he had run, especially with Lieberman on the ticket, I wonder if it may have pushed enough liberals and progressive activists to mount a serious third party attempt at the White House. That could've caused serious trouble for Gore.

IOTL, the coupling of Bill Bradley and Wesley Clark was just good enough to not split the party. The Democrats only even won Florida by less than 1% of the vote, and with a third party at play, Gore might've just lost the race.
 
Last edited:

CaliGuy

Banned
Joe Lieberman, as Gore's VP? God, that's one WI that'd actually give me nightmares. If he had run, especially with Lieberman on the ticket, I wonder if it may have pushed enough liberals and progressive activists to mount a serious third party attempt at the White House. That could've caused serious trouble for Gore.

IOTL, the coupling of Bill Bradley and Wesley Clark was just good enough to not split the party. The Democrats only even won Florida by less than 1% of the vote, and with a third party at play, Gore might've just lost the race.
To be fair, though, Ralph Nader did run in 2000 in our TL; indeed, he was simply largely neutralized by Bill Bradley's liberalism.
 
To be fair, though, Ralph Nader did run in 2000 in our TL; indeed, he was simply largely neutralized by Bill Bradley's liberalism.

I had no idea Ralph Nader ran in 2000, honestly. My folks are big Knicks fans, and got very swept up in the Bradley-fever. But I can see now, in retrospect, how he was able to run so effectively in 2004. With Bradley failing so spectacularly on the domestic side of things (healthcare, immigration, gun control...just about everything, really), it fell to Nader to champion the liberal cause. And it opened up the door for McCain to sweep the Electoral College in 04. I wonder if Gore would've had better luck on the domestic front, even with Lieberman.
 
I had no idea Ralph Nader ran in 2000, honestly. My folks are big Knicks fans, and got very swept up in the Bradley-fever. But I can see now, in retrospect, how he was able to run so effectively in 2004. With Bradley failing so spectacularly on the domestic side of things (healthcare, immigration, gun control...just about everything, really), it fell to Nader to champion the liberal cause. And it opened up the door for McCain to sweep the Electoral College in 04. I wonder if Gore would've had better luck on the domestic front, even with Lieberman.

OOC: I think this may be a little extreme. Its been established there was a 9/11-esque incident in 2003 that Bradley reacted well too. I find it hard to imagine him being swept in the EC, especially by someone like McCain who would be more adept at hitting him on his foreign policy agenda rather than domestic one. Bradley can probably lose still, but maybe to someone other than McCain and certainly not in a sweep.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
OOC: I think this may be a little extreme. Its been established there was a 9/11-esque incident in 2003 that Bradley reacted well too. I find it hard to imagine him being swept in the EC, especially by someone like McCain who would be more adept at hitting him on his foreign policy agenda rather than domestic one. Bradley can probably lose still, but maybe to someone other than McCain and certainly not in a sweep.
Completely agreed with this. After all, even Bush, with his pre-9/11 incompetence, received an extremely massive boost after 9/11; plus, in this TL, 9/11 occurs much closer to the 2004 election.
 
Top