Giuliani v Gore

  • Thread starter Deleted member 109224
  • Start date

Deleted member 109224

Let's say Gore wins in 2000 by taking Florida and New Hampshire. Come 2004, America's Mayor Rudy Giuliani is able to win the GOP nomination for President.

How would a Giuliani vs Gore race go? How would the GOP base react to a pro-choice nominee? Who would the running mate be?
 
Anarcho-Occultist

Anarcho-Occultist

The base would not like a pro-choice nominee. It might be manageable if he picks a pro-life running mate. Even so given I’d expect a third party social conservative campaign-maybe Pat Buchanan especially if the War on Terror is on.

I’d give Gore an edge due to the above factors
 
Jonathan

Jonathan

If he is able to win the 2004 nomination, he will need a strong bottom half.

Senator John McCain of Arizona
Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina
Governor Jeb Bush of Florida

Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania (could work even if they are neighbouring states)
 

Amadeus

President Earl Warren said:
He could always just change his position, it worked out fine for Romney.
Click to expand...

In this primary yes, but in the general Romney was easily painted as a flip flopper by the Democrats. Giuliani could easily meet a similar fate, which would undermine his image as a strong leader. Ironically, had Giuliani remained a Democrat he would've had a much greater chance of national success than in the GOP.
 
Bomster

Bomster

Jackson Lennock said:
Let's say Gore wins in 2000 by taking Florida and New Hampshire. Come 2004, America's Mayor Rudy Giuliani is able to win the GOP nomination for President.

How would a Giuliani vs Gore race go? How would the GOP base react to a pro-choice nominee? Who would the running mate be?
Click to expand...
2004

genusmap.php


Pres. Albert Gore Jr. (D-TN)/Vice Pres. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) - 325 EV
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani (R-NY)/Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) - 213 EV
 

SiddFinch1

i doubt Rudy could have won the nomination as a pro-choice Republican. He would have to change position

Not to get into current politics, but the religious right will overlook a candidates personal failings and past beliefs if he is willing to pledge picking the Judges they approve of for SCOTUS and support the pro-life movement. Not sure if Rudy could have pulled it off
 

Deleted member 109224

Giuliani in 2000 Senate polling was neck and neck with Clinton in New York. He had strong crossover appeal.

Giuliani-McCain could perhaps do the job since they'd both be very good with independents.
 

Danthefan28

Personally, I think Gore would win. Giuliani would talk non stop about September Eleven, and how he was "Americas Mayor". That might get him far with the predominantly red states, maybe even parts of New York and the neighbouring states, but you can only go so far when you only say, to quote Joe Biden:
"A noun, and a verb, and 9/11"
 

Amadeus

Danthefan28 said:
Personally, I think Gore would win. Giuliani would talk non stop about September Eleven, and how he was "Americas Mayor". That might get him far with the predominantly red states, maybe even parts of New York and the neighbouring states, but you can only go so far when you only say, to quote Joe Biden:
"A noun, and a verb, and 9/11"
Click to expand...

If nominated he could end up like a second Tom Dewey - a popular New York Republican who at first is the favorite to win but is upset by the incumbent Democrat. The fact is that while Giuliani is very talented and he was an excellent Mayor, he is also a Machiavellian opportunist with serious political shortcomings. (He arguably switched parties in the 1970's just to further his legal career, and in 2008 he couldn't even make it to Super Tuesday).
 

David T

President Earl Warren said:
He could always just change his position, it worked out fine for Romney.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but the noteworthy thing is that Giuliani never did that in OTL in his campaign for the 2008 presidential nomination. (True, he did say he would appoint "strict constructionists" to the Supreme Court, and many people thought that this meant justices who would overrule Roe--but Giuliani denied that this would necessarily be the case: "Should it be overturned? I don't answer that because I wouldn't want a judge to have to answer that. I don't consider it a litmus test. I think a conservative strict constructionist judge could come to either conclusion." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Rudy_Giuliani#Abortion)

It's not clear to me why he would have taken a different approach to the issue in this alt-2004 than he did in OTL's 2008.
 

President Benedict Arnold

David T said:
Maybe, but the noteworthy thing is that Giuliani never did that in OTL in his campaign for the 2008 presidential nomination. (True, he did say he would appoint "strict constructionists" to the Supreme Court, and many people thought that this meant justices who would overrule Roe--but Giuliani denied that this would necessarily be the case: "Should it be overturned? I don't answer that because I wouldn't want a judge to have to answer that. I don't consider it a litmus test. I think a conservative strict constructionist judge could come to either conclusion." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Rudy_Giuliani#Abortion)

It's not clear to me why he would have taken a different approach to the issue in this alt-2004 than he did in OTL's 2008.
Click to expand...

Not exactly sure what he means by constructuonist. Constituional Originalist is the term for the GOP’s favorite sort of judge since the ‘80s.
 

President Benedict Arnold

Bomster said:
2004

genusmap.php


Pres. Albert Gore Jr. (D-TN)/Vice Pres. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) - 325 EV
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani (R-NY)/Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) - 213 EV
Click to expand...

Only major criticism I have is that I think Giuliani has a lot of appeal in places like Pennsylvania and Florida. Not that that would change the results (that'd make it 277-260 with Gore winning, but that'd be scrapping the Electoral College close twice).

Not saying he'd definitely win both, but perhaps he'd take one of them. Also, Graham might be considered too centrist to through with somebody who can be painted as an out and out liberal for the GOP to handle. If there isn't a third party "true conservative" run then either of them must have shifted to the right during the campaign.

David T said:
"Strict constructionist" was used a lot before "Originalist." Nixon used it frequently. https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1972/05/04/a-special-supplement-the-jurisprudence-of-richard-/
Click to expand...
 

Amadeus

I guess another thing we need to consider here is that George W. Bush and Condi Rice generally ignored the intelligence community's warnings about Al-Qaeda because they were focused on Hussein as the greater threat. Richard Clarke has argued that if the President had followed through on these warnings and pursued Al-Qaeda, then perhaps the 9/11 scheme would've been foiled. Had Gore, or even McCain or Jeb Bush, won in 2000 it's possible that 9/11 wouldn't have happened or at least would've happened differently. In that case Gore wouldn't be going up against Giuliani in 2004, he'd be going up against McCain. (However even if the 9/11 attacks did happen under Gore, which is also possible, I think Giuliani would still lose in the GOP primaries for the same reasons as OTL).
 

Deleted member 109224

Jonathan said:
If he is able to win the 2004 nomination, he will need a strong bottom half.

Senator John McCain of Arizona
Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina
Governor Jeb Bush of Florida

Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania (could work even if they are neighbouring states)
Click to expand...

McCain could work given how Rudy would likely be quite Foreign Policy focused.

The downside is you have two social moderates. In 2004 an Alabama Supreme Court Judge by the name of Roy Moore (yes, that Roy Moore) contemplated a Presidential bid on the Constitution Party line.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Expat

Speaking of McCain, it's hard to imagine a situation in 2004 where Giuliani beats McCain. He doesn't have that much room to maneuver with McCain's media image to contend with. Could be one reason why he didn't change his abortion stance in 2008? Give himself some room?

If somehow McCain is out of the way, perhaps he changes his stance. I mean if we're saying 9/11 happened- and I don't know how Giuliani thinks he has a prayer without 9/11- he's got a perfect built-in excuse for any road-to-Damascus change-of-heart he wants to cop to.

He does probably still need spend some time over at the hard-right claw machine to find himself a veep. I see someone suggested Lindsay Graham, which seems like a possible choice. We know he and McCain were tight, if it's a matter of Giuliani going to the McCain camp for its blessing and getting told who his vice president was going to be.

Anyway, any situation where McCain is not the presidential nominee probably means he's not available as a vp nominee.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top