US Presidents (CNS)

Hi. Here is a list of US Presidents for a timeline in which i was working since a couple of years ago

Ronald Reagan 1977-1985
Ted Kennedy 1985-1993
Bill Clinton 1993-2001
John McCain 2001-2009
Mike Huckabee 2009-2016

For the VPs

Bob Dole 1977-1985
Michael Dukakis 1985-1993
Al Gore 1993-2001
Dick Cheney 2001-2009
Tim Pawlenty 2009-2017

But I have doubts about Dole and Dukakis.

I wondering if anyone can help me with the VP and the presidential cabinets (at least the key positions).
 
Last edited:
Butterflies would effect this. Clinton's rise was unlikely, he only won because all the important Democrats didn't run. McCain also was an unlikely rise, in 2000 and 2008 he was not expected to win New Hampshire.I think more obscure figures would rise due to butterflies. With a bit of improvement though, this scenario would be quite cool.
 
Last edited:
Ronald Reagan 1977-1985
Ted Kennedy 1985-1993
The economy was good in 1984. That would help the candidate of the president's party.
Bill Clinton 1993-2001
The economy was bad in 1992. That would hurt the candidate of the president's party.
John McCain 2001-2009
The economy collapsed in 2008. That would be very hard for the candidate of the president's party./
Mike Huckabee 2009-2016

For the VPs

Bob Dole 1985-1985
Michael Dukakis 1985-1993
Ted Kennedy and Michael Dukakis are from the same state. They would have to do with electoral votes from Massachusetts.
Al Gore 1993-2001
Dick Cheney 2001-2009
Tim Pawlenty 2009-2016

But I have doubts about Dole and Dukakis.

I wondering if anyone can help me with the VP and the presidential cabinets (at least the key positions).[/QUOTE]
 
Economic developments are not set in stone.

The lists seem rather convergent, especially the VP list - thus, I suppose, the help. If you want to stick with the POTUS list, might I suggest Walter Mondale, Lloyd Bentsen, John Glenn, or Gary Hart as Kennedy's VP; Bob Kerrey, Tom Harkin, Paul Tsongas, or Doug Wilder as Clinton's (Gore is possible, but would be rather convergent); and Lamar Alexander, Liz Dole, John Kasich, or Dan Quayle as McCain's? Bob Dole and Tim Pawlenty look like reasonable choices, though.
 
Kennedy was essentially marginalized by 1980 in OTL, given that he couldn't even mount a successful challenge to Jimmy Carter. By the mid-1980s, his drinking would have caught up with him, and his stature as an intellectual lightweight would have long since come to the forefront. You'll need someone other than Kennedy as a Dem successor to Reagan.

As such, you might consider John Glenn. Rather difficult to argue with the commitment to one's country of a former USMC colonel and an astronaut, eh?
 
Given that 76 was a poisoned chalice and would be even more so with Reagan's economic polices, I doubt he would have won reelection.
 
Economic developments are not set in stone.

The lists seem rather convergent, especially the VP list - thus, I suppose, the help. If you want to stick with the POTUS list, might I suggest Walter Mondale, Lloyd Bentsen, John Glenn, or Gary Hart as Kennedy's VP; Bob Kerrey, Tom Harkin, Paul Tsongas, or Doug Wilder as Clinton's (Gore is possible, but would be rather convergent); and Lamar Alexander, Liz Dole, John Kasich, or Dan Quayle as McCain's? Bob Dole and Tim Pawlenty look like reasonable choices, though.
Yep, I want to work with this list of presidents.
Thanks for the VP options :)

What about the presidential cabinets? specially in the cases of Reagan and Kennedy.

Regards!
 
One long period of sixteen years. That's not incredible.
It hasn't happened since Truman left office, but that doesn't mean it can't happen. There have only been 15 presidential elections since then, which isn't enough to say anything about a how people vote in four-election sequences.
 
One long period of sixteen years. That's not incredible.
It hasn't happened since Truman left office, but that doesn't mean it can't happen. There have only been 15 presidential elections since then, which isn't enough to say anything about a how people vote in four-election sequences.
It's possible we're looking at it right now. Hillary is the favorite to win in November and that'll gobble up 12 years. Sure, party fatigue could be in real play in 2020, but then we find ourselves one election from that sixteen year stretch.

Even with Reagan-Bush, until the economy collapsed in 1991, it looked like H.W. Bush would sail to reelection. Had the election been held in November, 1991, instead of November, 1992, it's very possible Bush wins.

For a sixteen-year stretch, it does require stabilization. Bush wasn't tossed from office solely because Republicans had been in control for twelve years. I mean, in 1988, Bush won despite the fact Republicans held the White House for sixteen of twenty years. Bush lost, though, because the economy went south at the worst possible time. Even then, the election was still competitive compared to other landslides we've experienced.

It can happen. It's possible we're experiencing it happening right now. We'll see, though.
 
Given that 76 was a poisoned chalice and would be even more so with Reagan's economic polices, I doubt he would have won reelection.
I agree. Plus Reagan didn't come off as the well intentioned optimist that he was in 1980 when he ran in '76. He was seen as Goldwater 2.0 or worse.
 
Ronald Reagan 1977-1985
Ted Kennedy 1985-1993
Bill Clinton 1993-2001
John McCain 2001-2009
Mike Huckabee 2009-2016

For the VPs
Bob Dole 1985-1985
Michael Dukakis 1985-1993
Al Gore 1993-2001
Dick Cheney 2001-2009
Tim Pawlenty 2009-2016

But I have doubts about Dole and Dukakis.

I wondering if anyone can help me with the VP and the presidential cabinets (at least the key positions).
Just a suggestion, in stead of Dukakis, why not have California Governor, Jerry Brown, this would stretch the Democratic Ticket from New England to the West Coast and could potentially take votes away from Reagan in his home state.

Why does Ronald Reagan, ditch George H.W. Bush for Bob Dole?
 
Given that 76 was a poisoned chalice and would be even more so with Reagan's economic polices, I doubt he would have won reelection.
Reagan was a Keynesian. He had as good a chance of turning around an underperforming economy as anyone and maybe even slightly better.
 
Just a suggestion, in stead of Dukakis, why not have California Governor, Jerry Brown, this would stretch the Democratic Ticket from New England to the West Coast and could potentially take votes away from Reagan in his home state.

Why does Ronald Reagan, ditch George H.W. Bush for Bob Dole?
Thanks :)

About Reagan's VP, I don't know if Bush had good chances for the nomination in 1977.
 
Reagan was a Keynesian. He had as good a chance of turning around an underperforming economy as anyone and maybe even slightly better.
Whether he was a Keynesian or not, Reagan owes the economic recovery of OTL to Paul Volker, who was originally appointed by Carter in 1979 and reappointed by Reagan in '83. A Reagan elected in '76 probably won't appoint a Democrat like Volker without someone else doing it first. Without Volker, you still have inflation, plus Iran still blows up and while we may prevent a hostage crisis with the Gipper, I doubt we'd prevent the economic problems that came with the Iranian revolutions, so I think after 12 miserable years of Nixon, Ford, and in TTL Reagan, the Dems would win BIG in 1980. Also keep in mind that the Reagan of 1976 was much further to the right and much less polished than the Reagan that was elected President in 1980 OTL.
 
We might have to just agree to disagree.

The U.S. economy finally came out of a double-dip recession in 1983 and began a long period of economic growth. And I freely acknowledge that at least a dozen things were going in at the same time and that a modern economy is almost biologically complex. But to me, I think the recovery was more likely caused by Reagan's deficit spending having time enough to work, rather than Volker's austerity. Although I should point out that I'm not an economist, just a regular person who's interested.

I do think the single most important number for a modern economy is growth rate.

And here's a graph of U.S. economic growth from 1948 to present.
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/A191RO1Q156NBEA
 
Last edited:
I'm surprised there's no Obama.:p
Well, in my TL Obama didn't participate in the 2008 primaries. So, Hillary Clinton won the nomination that year, but was defeated by Huckabee.

However, in the current 2016 primaries, Obama and Hillary face each other (but Clinton has the edge).
 
Top