DBWI: Liberal 60's-70's, Conservative 80's

We all know that the 1980's were considered the Left's 'Silver Age' in the United States. They were after all the decade where Geraldine Ferraro (the "Iron Lady") was elected President and when major reforms to Healthcare, Public Education, Social Security, etc. were made. Aside from continuing to have Conservative policies on Drugs and Crime (e.g. the Death Penalty), the US saw a real shift leftward from the more Conservative years of the 1960's and 1970's. What might the world be like today had the reverse held true?
 
Last edited:
I guess the USSR would have collapsed into revolution by the 90s instead of reforming their economy to be like Sweden's in the mid 80s. Suppose the nuclear reactors keep operating in their inferior levels, instead of updated after the reform, would the whole of northern ares of Ukraine Russian Republic become unsafe to live in?
 
I would imagine that a liberal president would be more inclined to reopen the diplomatic/economic dialog between America and communist china. Access to american markets could have probably saved the country from collapse following the failure of the post cultural revolution reforms. Everything about the country now is so terribly depressing with its decaying industries, miniscule life expectancy, disasterous pollution and nonexistant birthrate.
 
I would imagine that a liberal president would be more inclined to reopen the diplomatic/economic dialog between America and communist china. Access to american markets could have probably saved the country from collapse following the failure of the post cultural revolution reforms. Everything about the country now is so terribly depressing with its decaying industries, miniscule life expectancy, disasterous pollution and nonexistant birthrate.

On the other hand, we've been making noise about granting Most Favored Nation status to India, which is copying our '80s era economic reforms at a rapid pace. Makes sense for the World's Largest Democracy to become allies to one of the world's Most Powerful Democracies.......:cool:
 
I guess the USSR would have collapsed into revolution by the 90s instead of reforming their economy to be like Sweden's in the mid 80s. Suppose the nuclear reactors keep operating in their inferior levels, instead of updated after the reform, would the whole of northern ares of Ukraine Russian Republic become unsafe to live in?

<gragh the second post, someone always does it eventually but the second post!>

Things could have been a lot nicer from a British perspective. Perhaps the Americans would back us up in going and giving the Rhodesians the slapping they deserve.
 
I guess the USSR would have collapsed into revolution by the 90s instead of reforming their economy to be like Sweden's in the mid 80s.

People always seem to emphasize the mid-80's reform, but Perestroika was much earlier than that. The Russians really started restructuring their economy around '73. Russia transitioning to a Scandanavian-style 'Social-Market' from '84 to '86 was just the final product of all that.
 
Last edited:
People always seem to emphasize the mid-80's reform, but Perestroika was much earlier than that. The Russians really started restructuring their economy around '73. Russia transitioning to a Scandanavian-style 'Social-Market' from '84 to '86 was just the final product of all that.

Not to mention they liberalized politically, and they're now our biggest trading partner.

People are all talking up the idea of there being a "Co-dominion" ruling the world now. I think that's fairly accurate.....
 
On the other hand, we've been making noise about granting Most Favored Nation status to India, which is copying our '80s era economic reforms at a rapid pace. Makes sense for the World's Largest Democracy to become allies to one of the world's Most Powerful Democracies.......:cool:

Yes, that was one of the better decisions that President Cranston made. What a crook that guy was though, I'm glad he lost to Wilson in '92.
 
People are all talking up the idea of there being a "Co-dominion" ruling the world now. I think that's fairly accurate.....

Well, I don't. You have to poke a little deeper than the sunshine and light on the surface - the US and the USSR are nowhere near as friendly as they'd have you believe.
 
Well, I don't. You have to poke a little deeper than the sunshine and light on the surface - the US and the USSR are nowhere near as friendly as they'd have you believe.

Right. We have to remember that the USSR is still a one-party state too, even if it pretends to be otherwise. And if the Russian Spy Plane incident of '02 was any indication, they're still playing the same old tricks they did during the Cold War. Good thing President Bradley was able to keep everything from going out of control.
 
I would imagine that a liberal president would be more inclined to reopen the diplomatic/economic dialog between America and communist china.

I don't know, President Church was fairly liberal but he didn't really make any overtures towards China. Then again he only served one term, and he was under pressure to not seem softer on Communism than Ashbrooke in '72 (not that it did him any good)...

I suppose a Moderate Republican could have pulled it off. But the most Moderate Republican Presidential candidate of the Cold War era was Nixon (moderate by 60's standards anyway), and look how his administration handled Cuba!
 
Last edited:
Does Anyone Love...

Yes, that was one of the better decisions that President Cranston made. What a crook that guy was though, I'm glad he lost to Wilson in '92.
Does anyone remember how President Pete Wilson tried to take credit for the collapse of communism in Asia in 1994? It was interesting how Chinese Democratic Party (CDP) Wang Dan, Yu Dongye, and Lu Ducheng called for the President to stop making such elaborate claims during his visit in 1995..
 
Does anyone remember how President Pete Wilson tried to take credit for the collapse of communism in Asia in 1994? It was interesting how Chinese Democratic Party (CDP) Wang Dan, Yu Dongye, and Lu Ducheng called for the President to stop making such elaborate claims during his visit in 1995..

True, but that pales in comparison to President Cranston's talk of a 'New World Order' under the hypothetical POTDA (Pan-Oceanic Trade & Defense Alliance). The Conspiracy Theorists had a field day with that one...

If anyone deserves the 'credit' for China's regime change, it's probably President Ashbrook for standing firm in support of the '78 sanctions on China.
 
Last edited:
(OCC: I can't seem to keep the Presedients straight here)

OOC: The current Presidents list is basically as follows:

Richard M. Nixon (R, 1961-1969)
Frank Church (D, 1969-1973)
John Ashbrook (R, 1973-1981)
Geraldine Ferraro (D, 1981-1989)
Alan Cranston (D, 1989-1993)
Pete Wilson (R, 1993-2001)
Bill Bradley (D, 2001-?)
 
What A Load Of @#$%%

True, but that pales in comparison to President Cranston's talk of a 'New World Order' under the hypothetical POTDA (Pan-Oceanic Trade & Defense Alliance). The Conspiracy Theorists had a field day with that one...

If anyone deserves the 'credit' for China's regime change, it's probably President Ashbrooke for standing firm in support of the '78 sanctions on China.

Come now, are you one of those "conservative media pundits" who considers the Air America Network (AAN) claim of "fair and unbiased" news reporting an insult? President Ashebrook's "Closed Door Policies" took place after Lt. William Jefferson Clinton testified before the Johnson Commission about the failed "Vietnamization" policies that began with Nixon.

Contrary to what Mel Gibson's film [/u]Nixon[/u] (2004) may have said, just remember that prior to his assassination in Miami, Florida in 1963; Henry Kissinger was already saying that the war in Indochina was "unwinnable"....
 
Come now, are you one of those "conservative media pundits" who considers the Air America Network (AAN) claim of "fair and unbiased" news reporting an insult? President Ashebrook's "Closed Door Policies" took place after Lt. William Jefferson Clinton testified before the Johnson Commission about the failed "Vietnamization" policies that began with Nixon.

AAN is horrifically biased, and TBC is biased too (albeit to a lesser extent). But let's save any debates on that for chat..

Failed 'Vietnamization'? Say what you will about the Indochinan War, but the US-UK-French Coalition did manage to secure at least a truce. Granted, the Vietnamese DMZ is still a major source of concern (and of course some claim our Navy 'provoked' Vietnam -- nonsense I think), but at least we avoided a full-blown Communist victory.
 
Last edited:
AAN is horrifically biased, and TBC is too to a less extent. But let's save that debate on that for chat..

Failed 'Vietnamization'? Say what you will about the Indochinan War, but the US-UK-French Coalition did manage to secure at least a truce. Granted, the Vietnamese DMZ is still a major source of concern (and of course some claim our Navy 'provoked' Vietnam -- nonsense I think), but at least we avoided a full-blown Communist victory.
Unfortunately, I find this completely reprehensible. Just remember that the initial outrage was based on national anger at Eisenhower's use of the atomic bomb at Dien Bien Phu in 1954 during Operation Vulture. Also, remember that after the No Gun Ri Massacre in 1950, most Americans were thoroughly outraged with American military behavior. To this day, there are many parts of Southeast Asia that haven't forgiven or forgotten.

When you had Senator Eugene McCarthy launch the 1968 HUAC Trials against the Sons of Dixie or the States' Rights Commissions, why did the Republicans like Goldwater vilify this patriotic effort? As Al Franken's book The Truth: Real & Uncensored, it's because Republicans are more comfortable with their godless and racist capitalistic ways rather than confront the facts....
 
Top