Democratic Victory in 2004

I am actually intending on working this into a TL. Of course this might or might not mean that Kerry will win. That said, I was thinking on whether a Wesley Clark campaign would be likelier to win in 2004 than Kerry's, first of all
 
Clark would not have made an effective candidate. No political experience, lackluster campaigner, and while he opposed Iraq he was an interventionist and rather complimentary to the bush administration's policies. In addition, he often wound up unintentionally shooting himself in the foot when questioned on the spot. And Rove and company probably would have been able to swiftboat him in a similar manner to how they handled Kerry.

That is not to say that Clark could not have taken the nomination, or won in the general election. But there are some issues, most of which boil down to his manner of campaigning in some form (or his background and experience) that would have to be dealt with. have him be a better, more concise speaker, not rambling to the point where media and opponents have a field day, and a sounder campaign, and he can go far. He did have some formidable backing, after all, and could run a moderate campaign fairly well.
 
Clark's political inexperience makes him less likely to win the 2004 presidential election; unless you wish to butterfly in some random series of events that derail the Bush-Cheney campaign.

You might consider a POD where Howard Dean comes in 1st or 2nd in the Iowa Caucuses and does not scream at the conclusion of his post-caucus rally speech and then wins either the Wisconsin or new Hampshire primary. Dean was, I believe, the strongest candidate in the Democratic Party field that year.
 
Clark's political inexperience makes him less likely to win the 2004 presidential election; unless you wish to butterfly in some random series of events that derail the Bush-Cheney campaign.

You might consider a POD where Howard Dean comes in 1st or 2nd in the Iowa Caucuses and does not scream at the conclusion of his post-caucus rally speech and then wins either the Wisconsin or new Hampshire primary. Dean was, I believe, the strongest candidate in the Democratic Party field that year.

Was it the scream that killed Dean?
 
Was it the scream that killed Dean?

Kind of. He (and Gephardt) really slipped to Kerry and Edwards going into Iowa, and he never really regained his momentum. He fell by 20 percentage points in the polling in New Hampshire from december to january, for instance. The dean scream was a major effect, but not necessarily the killer. A win in Iowa, NH, or Wisconsin was needed to keep things running. but if dean gets the primary wins early on, he probably takes the nomination and quite possibly the white house.
 
Kind of. He (and Gephardt) really slipped to Kerry and Edwards going into Iowa, and he never really regained his momentum. He fell by 20 percentage points in the polling in New Hampshire from december to january, for instance. The dean scream was a major effect, but not necessarily the killer. A win in Iowa, NH, or Wisconsin was needed to keep things running. but if dean gets the primary wins early on, he probably takes the nomination and quite possibly the white house.

So he wins in Iowa and NH, Kerry would be second, who would be a better VP candidate then?
 
Dean Stays Cool As A Cucumber

My favorite route to victory is Dean not going extreme. He governed moderately and well in Vermont, and then went extreme during the early primary season, doing things like The Scream, bwaha. If he hadn't, I think he would've won.

I can't help wondering if one Rove had anything to do with it. There's no proof, but, after all, one McCain went downhill after quite publically losing his cool after a nasty Bush attack on his anger, a well-documented weakness. And Rove had opportunity to see this kind of MO, of sending the best opposition around the bend and effectively throwing the primaries to somebody bad, in use in the Nixon Administration campaign he was in. See one Ed Muskie, whose campaign also ended in an emotional outbreak, though tears instead of screams.

So, my ATL is to have Rove's try fail; a letter with some upsetting thing gets lost in a Fedex bin. Dean keeps his cool and beats Bush by seven in 04. After all, the WMD was a problem by then, and Mr. Bush hardly had kept HIS cool.
 
So he wins in Iowa and NH, Kerry would be second, who would be a better VP candidate then?

Evan Bayh balances a Dean led ticket nicely in terms of geography, age, temperment and political philosophy.


My favorite route to victory is Dean not going extreme. He governed moderately and well in Vermont, and then went extreme during the early primary season, doing things like The Scream, bwaha. If he hadn't, I think he would've won.

I can't help wondering if one Rove had anything to do with it. There's no proof, but, after all, one McCain went downhill after quite publically losing his cool after a nasty Bush attack on his anger, a well-documented weakness. And Rove had opportunity to see this kind of MO, of sending the best opposition around the bend and effectively throwing the primaries to somebody bad, in use in the Nixon Administration campaign he was in. See one Ed Muskie, whose campaign also ended in an emotional outbreak, though tears instead of screams.

So, my ATL is to have Rove's try fail; a letter with some upsetting thing gets lost in a Fedex bin. Dean keeps his cool and beats Bush by seven in 04. After all, the WMD was a problem by then, and Mr. Bush hardly had kept HIS cool.

Quite the conspiracy theorist aren't you? Rove probably manipulated the mic so that it amplified the screem and the TV cameras as well to make Dean look tired and under the weather. Those evil Republican political operatives, shame on them.
 
2004 was one of those years, like 1836, 1856, 1892, 1928, 1948, 1976, and 1988 that it was not a good idea to win. The winning President will only get blamed for the bad times to come. So, while my country had to suffer through four more years of George W Bush, at least a Democrat did not get blamed for the mess in Iraq and the bad economy.
 

Deleted member 1487

I disagree. The economic situation, specifically the subprime crisis, if addressed in 2005 when Dean would take office could be softened considerably. However, if he had not dealt with it, then the Republican party would not currently be self destructing and possibly in power right now. Howard Dean woke me up to politics and that he lost in the primaries was one of the worst things to happen to this country. I think he would have been an even better candidate than Obama and could have gotten us a hell of a lot farther earlier. But if he was elected, the Obama doesn't ever get elected, or at least not for several decades. A black president may not occur for years then. The Republicans would still be somewhat coherent without the remaining Bush term truly exposing the ugly side of the conservative movement (the neocons).

I don't really know how things would play out, because I doubt he would have a democratic congress to work with, so much of his agenda might not even get implimented.
 
Didn't you know evil's all Rove's fault :)? Though, his wiki page has its interesting bits.

I agree with wiking. After 9/11, Bush, by failing to care enough about reality to see how well he was doing, and failing to give any serious lookover to any plan, no matter how important, managed to make several crises far, far worse than even a mediocre President would've done. The financial crisis, for example, was turned from a bad finance problem in to a global, multimensional crisis by his Secretary of Treasury promising $1T without taking the time to consult a certain Congress thing you may've heard of (something about deciding what money goes under our Constitution? no, must be the British)

IMHO, a President Dean would be getting some unhappiness for the economy, but even more props for his handling of it, as PM Brown's been, but more so since Dean's corruption timer's farther back. A Senator Obama might even be planning for his run in '12 - the best of all worlds.
 
I disagree. The economic situation, specifically the subprime crisis, if addressed in 2005 when Dean would take office could be softened considerably. However, if he had not dealt with it, then the Republican party would not currently be self destructing and possibly in power right now. Howard Dean woke me up to politics and that he lost in the primaries was one of the worst things to happen to this country. I think he would have been an even better candidate than Obama and could have gotten us a hell of a lot farther earlier.

I agree. Obama's not exactly a great president, but Dean had a lot more potential.

But if he was elected, the Obama doesn't ever get elected, or at least not for several decades. A black president may not occur for years then.

Honestly, this shouldn't be an issue. The ability of a president should matter infinitely more than their race or gender.

The Republicans would still be somewhat coherent without the remaining Bush term truly exposing the ugly side of the conservative movement (the neocons).

I don't know about this. I mean, it might not be as bad as OTL, but we could still see a lot of dysfunction and general party disorder. A lack of a second Bush term doesn't mean that the neocons don't suddenly disappear, they just don't get quite the same spotlight. We'd still see a lot of Senators calling for large interference in Iraq, and pulling the same sort of neocon shit.
 
I disagree. The economic situation, specifically the subprime crisis, if addressed in 2005 when Dean would take office could be softened considerably. However, if he had not dealt with it, then the Republican party would not currently be self destructing and possibly in power right now. Howard Dean woke me up to politics and that he lost in the primaries was one of the worst things to happen to this country. I think he would have been an even better candidate than Obama and could have gotten us a hell of a lot farther earlier. But if he was elected, the Obama doesn't ever get elected, or at least not for several decades. A black president may not occur for years then. The Republicans would still be somewhat coherent without the remaining Bush term truly exposing the ugly side of the conservative movement (the neocons).

I don't really know how things would play out, because I doubt he would have a democratic congress to work with, so much of his agenda might not even get implimented.


You know I have a fantasy where Reagan dealt with the Social Security mess. Of course I know it's a fantasy...

Catch my drift?;)

Encouraging home ownership has been a bi-partisan goal of goverment since WWII!

If you want a TL with Dean dealing with it, we need some historical evidence that he was even aware of it as an issue, even if later when he was out of the campaign, but before it hit.

THen explain how he got Congress to stop helping poor people buy houses.:eek:

Also if you want a Dean TL, the big question is what does he do with Iraq?


And actually a Dean president gets Rice out of there before it gets ugly. Hell, she could have had her down time and been ready to get back in the Game, if a Black President is so important to you.:confused:
 
I disagree. The economic situation, specifically the subprime crisis, if addressed in 2005 when Dean would take office could be softened considerably. However, if he had not dealt with it, then the Republican party would not currently be self destructing and possibly in power right now. Howard Dean woke me up to politics and that he lost in the primaries was one of the worst things to happen to this country. I think he would have been an even better candidate than Obama and could have gotten us a hell of a lot farther earlier. But if he was elected, the Obama doesn't ever get elected, or at least not for several decades. A black president may not occur for years then. The Republicans would still be somewhat coherent without the remaining Bush term truly exposing the ugly side of the conservative movement (the neocons).

I don't really know how things would play out, because I doubt he would have a democratic congress to work with, so much of his agenda might not even get implimented.
Sounds about Right, at Least to me ...

Actually, I have a Couple of Friends who were REALLY Close to Senator John Kerry, Almost from The Start of his Campaign ...

According to them, Only One Thing would Need to Change to Bring about a Democratic Win in 2004; If Kerry had Selected Senator Joe Biden as his Running-Mate, he Would've Gotten him Ohio, And with it The Presidency!
 

Deleted member 1487

You know I have a fantasy where Reagan dealt with the Social Security mess. Of course I know it's a fantasy...

Catch my drift?;)

Encouraging home ownership has been a bi-partisan goal of goverment since WWII!

If you want a TL with Dean dealing with it, we need some historical evidence that he was even aware of it as an issue, even if later when he was out of the campaign, but before it hit.

THen explain how he got Congress to stop helping poor people buy houses.:eek:

Also if you want a Dean TL, the big question is what does he do with Iraq?


And actually a Dean president gets Rice out of there before it gets ugly. Hell, she could have had her down time and been ready to get back in the Game, if a Black President is so important to you.:confused:

I did note in my post that if Dean got elected he would still be dealing with a Republican Congress as per OTL and that would hamstring him considerably. But without Paulson and Bernanke, anyone else would not have made it policy to inflate the economy with the real estate bubble. There was a concerted effort to make the economy appear healthy by the fed by directing money into housing because things never picked up after the tech bubble burst. The structural problems of the economy were then becoming obvious and the Bush administration wanted to give a rosy picture by boosting the only thriving business, the financial industry.

Dean would have to choose whether or not to let the economy start to go down and deal with the fact that the nation no longer has enough industry. He is likely to be a one term president because Iraq is going to still be a mess. As much as Bush gets ragged on for Iraq, once he bungled the initial occupation, no matter who gets in in 2004 is to have to deal with situation going south.

Oh and Corbell Mark IV race has nothing to do with it. I am just saying the a president of a different race would propably not happen for a while ITTL. Obama was a fluke. He got lucky that he was running in a very anti-Republican time. And read about the actual finanacial collapse. It had nothing to do with poor people buying homes, rather it was middle class and wealthier people that were buying 2nd and 3rd homes for renting purposes or people flipping houses based on the over inflated prices who walked away from their debt when the mortage became more than the market worth of the house.
 
I did note in my post that if Dean got elected he would still be dealing with a Republican Congress as per OTL and that would hamstring him considerably. But without Paulson and Bernanke, anyone else would not have made it policy to inflate the economy with the real estate bubble. There was a concerted effort to make the economy appear healthy by the fed by directing money into housing because things never picked up after the tech bubble burst. The structural problems of the economy were then becoming obvious and the Bush administration wanted to give a rosy picture by boosting the only thriving business, the financial industry.

Dean would have to choose whether or not to let the economy start to go down and deal with the fact that the nation no longer has enough industry.

So poor people getting houses, and the middle class and rich rolling in dough and Dean's the one going to stand up and say "stop!"?:confused:


Sounds like preaching temprance at a Frat party, around 1:30am!!!:eek:


I don't recall any resistance to "Bush's policies" from dems during that time.

The whole country bought it to this.



He is likely to be a one term president because Iraq is going to still be a mess. As much as Bush gets ragged on for Iraq, once he bungled the initial occupation, no matter who gets in in 2004 is to have to deal with situation going south.


Well, the fact that you're not trying to tell me Dean would magically do better does lend you credibility.;)

BUt what were his campaign promises on the issue? I don't recall.

SOme ideas I remember could be even worse than OTL.
 
In Whistling Past Dixie, the author said if Kerry had spent the money in Ohio that he spent in South Carolina (which he was very unlikely to win anyway), he would have won the election.

You don't need to dump Kerry--just have him make better decisions.

Clark had Waco and an attempt to start WWIII to drag him down.
 
I think if Kerry want after Bush the way he did in the first debate and spent less time talking about Vietnam, or how about Katrina coming two or maybe one year earlier.
 
I think if Kerry want after Bush the way he did in the first debate and spent less time talking about Vietnam, or how about Katrina coming two or maybe one year earlier.

His constant referances to his service did become quite the joke.

And since he placed so much emphasis on it, it made him vunerable to the complaints raised by his fellow officers, about his service.

BUt he must have choosen to emphasize it because he felt it was the best thing to do.

What should he have focused on instead? THat he was incorrect in not realizing was a greater streagth?
 
Top