No Bush or McCain in 2000

If George W. Bush and John McCain were not involved in the 2000 Republican nomination processes, who would win? I just looked up the candidates on Wiki and I find it to be an interesting field ... Dan Quayle, Pat Buchanan, Alan Keyes, etc. Whether or not any of these people had a snowball's chance in hell at winning the nomination, however, is up for grabs.

Who would win the 2000 Republican nomination, sans McCain and Bush? What would this mean for US politics?
 
my bet is on Elizabeth Dole. she's a sweet little old lady, and she's got that whole "compassionate conservative" thing.
other then Dan Quayle she's the only one left with a hope in hell of getting the nomination.
 
I've always thought it was an interesting field, if only because of its, um, idiosyncracies.

It was unduly affected by George W. Bush running. He was the frontrunner from about November 10, 1996, and never really lost that. A lot of other candidates (Tommy Thompson, John Engler, Pete Wilson, George Pataki, Tom Ridge, Olympia Snowe) didn't run because Bush dominated the field so much. The only real open spot was who would be the 'anti-Bush'; after a brief spark by Elizabeth Dole, McCain triumphed over Forbes to take the spot.

So if Bush doesn't run, and doesn't look like he's running, expect any of the above (I name five Republican governors above, all of whom were, functionally, identical, and Olympia Snowe is the perennial 'centrist' pick, as beloved of Democrats as Republicans) to run in his place, and to effectively 'be' Bush.

In the absence of the above, Liddy Dole lacked the political skills, Steve Forbes lacked the experience and Orrin Hatch lacked the humanity to win. Jack Kemp might actually jump in, as he was manouevering to do before Bush ran, and would probably win.
 
One long-shot senario: Colin Powell

The Republican party desperate for a strong well experienced candidate beg Gen Powell to run. His wife Alma finally relents and he easily wins the nomination. Not sure about his VP pick as he wasn't cozy about Cheney. McCain or Jack Kemp are possibilities.

He wins big over Al Gore, prevents 9/11 but still goes after Bin Laden and Taliban. No Iraq war but he continues bombing Saddam's military communication bases and suspected weapon areas. Most of all he lays a critical blueprint for an Israeli-Palistinian peace accord.

President Powell becomes of the greatest presidents in history.
 
Last edited:
One long-shot senario: Colin Powell

The Republican party desperate for a strong well experienced candidate beg Gen Powell to run. His wife Alma finally relents and he easily wins the nomination. Not sure about his VP pick as he wasn't cozy about Cheney. McCain or Jack Kemp are possibilities.

He wins big over Al Gore, prevents 9/11 but still goes after Bin Laden and Taliban. No Iraq war but he continues bombing Saddam's military communication bases and suspected weapon areas. Most of all he lays a critical blueprint for an Israeli-Palistinian peace accord.

President Powell becomes of the greatest presidents in history.

I think that's a wee bit optimistic, don't you? I don't think any president elected that closely to September 11 could have done anything to prevent that day. Plus, I don't see the American public giving a President Powell the carte blanche to go after bin Laden if they didn't see him as a threat. Which, before September 11, the majority of the US public didn't.
 
Jeb Bush!

Yeah I don't know. George Bush so dominated the actual field that all kinds of prominent Republicans simply didn't bother.

Jack Kemp didn't impress in '96 as VP nominee; Elizabeth Dole isn't good enough to be top fiddle; Quayle, interesting and underrated though I believe he was, is still under his negative image cloud; Powell still won't run; Forbes still can't win; etc….


An interesting comment from Luntz (a Republican framing guy) is that he waited his whole life for a Republican Obama, and the guy turns out to be a Democrat.

Perhaps we find in the field a Republican who died (um, figuratively) early on, but who could have been that character. 2000 is probably the first chance the Republicans have to get beyond their positioning of the last couple decades (as Bush ran on, but didn't govern as) so it could be fun.
 
One long-shot senario: Colin Powell
(snipped) No Iraq war but he continues bombing Saddam's military communication bases and suspected weapon areas.

Also no way he can maintain this status quo (Northern & Southern Watch, Sanctions, Oil for Food programs). While the media, and anti-war movement has forgotten, our "undeclared" war on Iraq was as big an issue pre-2003 as the invasion is today. Actually alot of the rectoric is the same... Any US President with or with out Iraq 11 SEPT 2001, was going to have to deal with the "Iraq Situation." (For those interested take a hard at the Clinton Adminstration's actions and words re Iraq late 98-JAN 2001, hard to tell them from pre invasion Bush adminstration)

Most of all he lays a critical blueprint for an Israeli-Palistinian peace accord. (snipped).

This I could see, in 2000 no American or world leader had as much respect among the 4 sides (Israel, PLO, Saudis and rest of the Arab world) as Powell. Course he (or his State) couldn't have worst than Albright...
 
Top