The America We Deserve

[Bookmark1995]

I like this TL, but I do contest the idea of Ross Perot endorsing anybody.

Maybe he might find Donald Trump a worthy successor, but I also believe he never really wanted to create a sustainable political party. He said he wouldn't run in '96, but jumped back in after Richard Lamm declared his own candidacy.

In other words, I think Perot would be too controlling to let another famous person overshadow him and succeed where he failed.

 

[Abraham Washington]

Nationwide Poll - 8/17/2000:


Trump/Schwarzkopf (I) - 42%

Gore/Lieberman (D) - 30%

Bush/Cheney (R) - 27%

Trump/Schwarzkopf (I) - 459 EV (projected)

Gore/Lieberman (D) - 50 EV (projected)

Bush/Cheney (R) - 29 EV (projected)​

 

[Abraham Washington]

I like this TL, but I do contest the idea of Ross Perot endorsing anybody.

Maybe he might find Donald Trump a worthy successor, but I also believe he never really wanted to create a sustainable political party. He said he wouldn't run in '96, but jumped back in after Richard Lamm declared his own candidacy.

In other words, I think Perot would be too controlling to let another famous person overshadow him and succeed where he failed.

Well, at the end of the day Perot supported fair trade, reform etc. and Trump was the best man to do it. It did take some convincing, but Perot did finally agree when he saw that Trump had a strong chance of winning the Presidency regardless.

Basically, he was being overshadowed anyways, so he came to the convention to keep himself relevent.

 

[Deblano]

I like this TL, but I do contest the idea of Ross Perot endorsing anybody.

Maybe he might find Donald Trump a worthy successor, but I also believe he never really wanted to create a sustainable political party. He said he wouldn't run in '96, but jumped back in after Richard Lamm declared his own candidacy.

In other words, I think Perot would be too controlling to let another famous person overshadow him and succeed where he failed.

I agree with this.

From what I have heard, one of the problems with the Reform Party (regarding why it collapsed) is that it was more of a cult-of-personality for Ross Perot rather than a viable political party.

 

[Abraham Washington]

I agree with this.

From what I have heard, one of the problems with the Reform Party (regarding why it collapsed) is that it was more of a cult-of-personality for Ross Perot rather than a viable political party.

Yeah, that was the problem. It had no coherent ideology and instead was a big tent for third party types.

This is why IOTL Trump left the Reform party, he thought that it had been hijacked by kooks and radicals and had no future.

ITTL, Trump has managed to keep the party together through his own personal popularity and personality. However, even if Trump reaches the White House, it won't have much of a future. Reform is a means to an end, and you'll find that this timeline will take an even more interesting turn as it goes on.

 

[MERRICA]

Yeah, that was the problem. It had no coherent ideology and instead was a big tent for third party types.

This is why IOTL Trump left the Reform party, he thought that it had been hijacked by kooks and radicals and had no future.

ITTL, Trump has managed to keep the party together through his own personal popularity and personality. However, even if Trump reaches the White House, it won't have much of a future. Reform is a means to an end, and you'll find that this timeline will take an even more interesting turn as it goes on.

I could see Trump, being as he is centrist in this TL and if he wins, the elder statesman of the party, having to rely on centrist Democrats and Republicans to run things. He also might face a lot of hostilities in Washington due to him being third party. Meaning that the Reform Party in question only has one chance to make an impression upon the American people to elect more than the President.

 

[thezerech]

I could see Trump, being as he is centrist in this TL and if he wins, the elder statesman of the party, having to rely on centrist Democrats and Republicans to run things. He also might face a lot of hostilities in Washington due to him being third party. Meaning that the Reform Party in question only has one chance to make an impression upon the American people to elect more than the President.

The American people have a traditional distrust of Congress, if he is blocked by Congress he'll just use it to his advantage and drum up a few reform candidates in the midterms. If there is one thing that is true of all Congressmen it is that they are afraid of being the center of public anger or humiliation. If there is anyone who can instill that fear into his fellow man, it is Donald J. Trump.

 

[Aaaaasima]

tbh I cant see Bush getting less than 30% in a poll

still good TL

 

[thezerech]

tbh I cant see Bush getting less than 30% in a poll

still good TL

I do agree, I think Bush is polling a little low, and Trump a little high. Gore and Bush are national figures and we have in 2000 nowhere near the anti-establishment feeling we do today.

 

[KiwiEater]

Well it is a post-convention bounce. I'd imagine Trump gaining a lot from Republicans due to that. It'll probably be the peak.

 

[Abraham Washington]

The Campaign Trail

Coming off a successful convention with a sizeable bump, the Trump/Schwarzkopf campaign was energized and thrilled. They led their nearest opponents by double digits and were the favourites to win the Presidency, indeed 2000 was far closer then even 1992 or 1912. It was almost a given that Trump would win several states, and very likely that he could deadlock the electoral college or even ride the wave of populist discontent to the White House.

The pick of Schwarzkopf was a strong pick, and took the other campaigns by surprise. Republican George Bush collapsed from his formerly strong position in the polls to only 27%. Trump had successfully peeled off many Republicans with his pick of the brave Gulf War General as well as other moderate Democrats. In private, Bush was furious and regretted having not picked Colin Powell, another VP finalist.

Nevertheless, by Labor Day the three candidates were neck and neck once again. Gore, Bush and Trump all had equal shots of winning, and even more likely, the election would have to be decided in the House of Representatives. It was thrilling stuff, and even as Gore and Bush attacked Trump on his policy positions, inexperience and temperament, Trump mesmerized the nation with his colourful and electrifying rallies. Trump harked back to a time of a different breed of politician and it showed.

Voters had earlier thought that they had a choice between two "boring" candidates, Gore and Bush. However, Trump had injected life into this otherwise typical election, and record turnouts were anticipated.

The 2000 campaign also brought in a new style of campaigning, that would go on to define most elections of the 21st century. The old concept of "swing states" was gone, especially in such a chaotic three way race. Trump campaign manager, Roger Stone decided to pioneer a different style of campaigning, a 50 state strategy. Considering that Donald Trump, the nominee of a relatively new party, had no natural base, there were no true swing states to swing to his camp. Instead, Trump campaigning in all 50 states, for himself and for Reform congressional and Senate candidates. From the Dakotas, to Louisiana to New York and Boston, Trump campaigned and spoke. Utilising his broad appeal was a strong strategy, and would turn out a lot more people who usually stayed home for fear of a "wasted vote".

The race was indeed chaotic, and the candidates exchanged leads multiple times through September. Pundits were despondent, they really had no clue how the election would unfold. Neither did the campaigns.

Gore's camp feared that Trump would steal Democrats, especially Southern Democrats won by Clinton and deadlock the electoral college, throwing the election to a Republican congress. Gore was very concerned about Trump playing spoiler and deadlocking the election.

Bush on the other hand was concerned about Trump being a new Perot. Bush always remembered what happened to his father and he was determined not to allow history to repeat itself. However, many Republicans were on the fence and the prospect of another Bush was not very appealing to those yearning for a fresh face.

The one thing both candidates feared however was Trump coming through the middle and winning it all. Whether he comed through the middle in the electoral college due to vote splitting, or through the house as a compromise candidate, Trump had a great chance of winning. That was what both sides feared, a Trump victory would end the two-party duopoly forever and place a true maverick in the White House. Neither could predict what Trump would do as President, and if Trump was a popular President, he could stand to make the old parties irrelevant. The GOP would rather see the Democrats win, and vice versa than a man backed by neither party.

The first debates were fast approaching, and these would offer the first chance for each candidate to try and shape the race. Everything - Congress, the Presidency and country - was at stake.

​

 

[Cuāuhtemōc]

The idea of Trump breaking the duopoly (and introducing universal healthcare) makes his candidacy very appealing to me. I was just a kid at the time but I'm sure my father would've voted for him in TTL 2000 as he did in OTL's 2016.

 

[Abraham Washington]

1st Presidential Debate
University of Massachussetts, Boston
October 3rd, 2000

Hello, I'm Jim Lehrer, and welcome to the first Presidential debate of the year 2000!

The first Presidential debate was on, tens of millions tuned in as the candidates slowly shuffled in. Mr. Trump first shook the hand of Vice-President Al Gore, as Gore then shook the hand of Governor Bush and finally Bush shook the hand of Mr. Trump. It was polite and cordial, but the debate would prove to be far different...

The first question was directed to Mr. Trump, asking if he was a serious candidate and could break through and win as a third party candidate. Trump was somewhat irritated, this was the hundredth time he had been posed this question, but responded that no vote was ever wasted and contrasted his very different vision for the country with Bush and Gore's almost identical platforms.

The next question was to Bush, on the issue of healthcare. Bush talked about his plans to go across state lines, but then threw some red meat to his base when he went on the offensive against Trump. Attacking him as an out of touch liberal, comparing him to Al Gore and ridiculing his universal healthcare proposal, Bush nevertheless stayed away from a "New York values" type gaffe.

Trump attacked back Bush tenfold and savaged him and his record as Governor. He also had this to say...

Look, I'm a businessman okay? But I also have a heart and we can't have people dying in the streets. Little George here doesn't care about the people who can't afford healthcare, he just wants to help his special interest buddies!

Trump also used the oppurtunity to take a swipe at Gore, saying that "if we are going to have healthcare reform, it's gotta be universal."

The next subject was the budget. Gore used this to highlight his record and how Democrats had balanced the budget. However, he also used this to attack Trump, criticizing his policies to increase spending and cut taxes as reckless. Trump, rather than remain on the defensive, went on the offensive against "Bore" and said that the Democrats' policies were unsustainable. Trump defended his record as a businessman, and said his policies would create jobs and encourage growth while eventually paying down the debt.

While Gore was the "safe" option, Trump has definitely proven he was the "change" candidate and appealed to a lot of independents. Meanwhile, Bush did not do as well, mired in several gaffes and vague responses.

However, Bush had appealed to and energized the base, while Gore had deflated the excitement of the liberal base with his "safe" answers. Gore had won over some moderates, but by alienating his base he had set himself up for trouble in the long run.

Overall, voters rated the debate as too close to call, but gave Trump the edge.

The debate recieved over 85 million viewers, setting an all new record.


Who won the Presidential debate?

Trump - 39%
Gore - 37%
Bush - 22%
​

 

[Asami]

I'll be honest with you, Trump ain't gonna be anywhere near that many points in the polls. Third parties never win for a reason.

 

[Cuāuhtemōc]

Trump could've also hurt Bush's pro-business record by making a soundbite that businesses would save on costs if the government was responsible for healthcare of their employers but the dying on the streets line is also good.

 

[Abraham Washington]

I'll be honest with you, Trump ain't gonna be anywhere near that many points in the polls. Third parties never win for a reason.

The poll in the last post was a poll on debate performance not a vote preference poll.

Additionally, in 1992 Ross Perot actually did reach very high levels in the polls and was winning for a time prior to dropping out of the race. That was also in an election with better and more exiciting candidates than 2000. There was also still some anti-establishment fervor in even 2000, with the protests against the DNC and especially the WTO. That is why Nader recieved many votes, and why Gore lost the election in OTL.

 

[Abraham Washington]

Trump could've also hurt Bush's pro-business record by making a soundbite that businesses would save on costs if the government was responsible for healthcare of their employers but the dying on the streets line is also good.

Good idea for the next debate! Thanks!

 

[Heliogabalus]

I think Trump would do pretty well among liberal Democrats who don't like Gore, especially the ones who voted for Nader IOTL, with his support of universal healthcare and general reformist policies. In 2016, there were a lot of Bernie-to-Johnson voters even though their platforms were very different, so I can see a lot of Bradley-to-Trump voters here.

 

[thezerech]

I'll be honest with you, Trump ain't gonna be anywhere near that many points in the polls. Third parties never win for a reason.

Perot probably could have won the popular vote if he had not dropped out because of an alleged attempt to blackmail his daughter by the Bush family. By the time he reentered the race it was unknown by many Americans whether he was even still running for President. Polls had him real close to winning the popular vote. Though in all honesty it probably would have gone to the HoR.

 

[Rosa Luxemburg]

I'm enjoying this timeline, but I do have a couple of nitpicks.

1) I don't think that Trump should be that high in the PV polling. While, he may be able to win the popular vote, I don't't see him cracking 40%
2) The EV polling numbers are WAY too high. The electoral college, whether it's intentional or unintentional, has sucessfully prevented a third party victory for centuries. Therefore, there is absolutely no way Trump wins a landslide in polling or in the general election.