Trump-Weicker 2000

What if Donald Trump had run as the Reform Party nominee in 2000 with Lowell Weicker as his running mate?

The Reform Party was entitled to $12.5 million in Federal Matching Fund that year. I'm not sure how much of his own money he'd put in, but if he just matched that the campaign would have spent three times as much as Nader did in 2000 (Nader spent about $8,000,000).

I'm thinking Trump goes through with the candidacy thinking that if he performs similarly to Ross Perot in 1996, it'll be beneficial to his brand somehow.

Nader polled at a peak of 6% before dropping to 2.7% by the end of the campaign. Nader in the last month or so mostly campaigned in swing states too, where it'd be harder to farm for votes.

Trump polled at around 7% before the election, and I think he'd be far better at garnering media and attention for himself than Nader was.
 
Well that is the sane trump....still he would hurt bush...enough to give gore the win or make more chaos?
 
I'm not really sure who Trump pulls from more.

At the time he was pro-choice, pro-gays in the military, and pro-single payer healthcare. He also was a protectionist with a pro-business mindset. For all we know he hurts Gore not Bush.

As for it putting him off politics, he probably just talks about how he's a big shot who did so well with no experience. He then uses the boost in name-id and image as a marketing tool.

Nader got 2.74% with 8 million. With triple the budget or more, 7-8% for Trump isn't that crazy.

The biggest knock-on would be that the Reform Party now has federal matching funds for 2004 too.

Maybe we see Trump TV here?
 
I'm not really sure who Trump pulls from more.

At the time he was pro-choice, pro-gays in the military, and pro-single payer healthcare. He also was a protectionist with a pro-business mindset. For all we know he hurts Gore not Bush.

As for it putting him off politics, he probably just talks about how he's a big shot who did so well with no experience. He then uses the boost in name-id and image as a marketing tool.

Nader got 2.74% with 8 million. With triple the budget or more, 7-8% for Trump isn't that crazy.

The biggest knock-on would be that the Reform Party now has federal matching funds for 2004 too.

Maybe we see Trump TV here?
Trump in 2000 I think would have hurt Gore more than Bush, Given that Trump held the positions that you mentioned, although he might pick up some disgruntled McCain supporters. In fact, I think that Trump could have ran as a Democrat in 2000 and might have won!
 
Trump in 2000 I think would have hurt Gore more than Bush, Given that Trump held the positions that you mentioned, although he might pick up some disgruntled McCain supporters. In fact, I think that Trump could have ran as a Democrat in 2000 and might have won!

That reminds me of this fun (if iffy) article.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/07/08/what-if-trump-had-won-as-a-democrat-215351


Trump might box out Nader here as the leftmost candidate here while also clutching for main-street republicans. Quite the combo.

In 2016, Trump used Sanders as a big stick to suppress Democratic turnout - he talked a lot about how the Democrats cheated him. I could imagine him doing the same to how George W Bush beat John McCain and how nasty that primary was (especially South Carolina).
 
Top