WI: Bush v. Gore 1988?

[Chapman]

Assume that somehow Al Gore manages to win the 1988 Democratic primary instead of Michael Dukakis. Who would he select as a running mate? Would his nomination alter George H.W. Bush’s campaign, and in particular his own selection of Dan Quayle as a running mate? Who else might be chosen if not Quayle? How would the general election play out? As I understand it, Bush campaigned heavily on the idea that Dukakis was too liberal, a line of attack that would be hard to pursue against Gore I think. However I also understand that the Bush campaign was particularly aggressive and frankly underhanded (to put it mildly) in their approach; would it be the same here? I assume so, but in what ways would they try to smear Gore?

As far as Gore’s running mate goes, I personally think it would be funny if he chose his Senate colleague Bill Bradley. Bradley would offer a more liberal bend to Gore’s “raging moderate” identity and maybe lighten up his generally stiff and wooden presence. Of course this would be somewhat ironic given the fact that Bradley was the sole (major) challenger to Gore’s OTL 2000 Democratic primary. He is however not the only possible choice for Gore’s running mate so I’m open to other candidates.

Finally, let’s assume that Gore manages to defeat Bush that year. What does an Al Gore presidency starting in 1989 look like? What does he do regarding the economy, foreign policy, etc? What would be the likely impact on Congressional elections? What do you think President Gore’s biggest priorities would be, and how much do you think he would be able to accomplish? And when it comes to the 1992 election, who would likely run against him? Would he have a good chance at winning?

 

[dw93]

I don't think Gore would pick a northeastern liberal as his running mate (and Bradley wasn't considered that liberal at the time). I think he'd pick someone like Bob Graham, then Senator and Former Governor of Florida or Lee Hamilton, Representative from Indiana, both of whom were, IIRC, on Bill Clinton's shortlist in 1992. Dick Gephardt is also a possibility for regional balance and bringing a bit of populism to the ticket. As for Gore effecting Bush's VP pick, if anything Gore only being 44 in 1988 makes it even more likely that he picks Quayle in the name of bringing youth to the ticket.

Bush will still run dirty, but Gore will also be more competent and responsive to said attacks than Dukakis was OTL. He'd also likely debate better than Dukakis too. As for Gore's odds of winning, it'll be difficult with the economy and relative stability abroad favoring Bush, but none the less it'll be winnable. I'd say the end result will either be a narrow Gore win or a narrow to slightly above narrow Bush victory. A Gore Presidency would likely be a hybrid of Bush 41's OTL term and Clinton's first term. Gore would likely be more responsive to the recession than Bush, so that'll help him in 1992, but enough to get him a second term, who knows. If Dole is the nominee, I think Gore gets re elected. If it's someone else, it's 50/50.

 

[brunohusker]

If Gore wins the nomination, I see him still going with Bentsen being chosen. While it’s be a boring ticket, you avoid some of the Dukakis gaffes and he runs a good campaign but still loses, though he does well in the Midwest, taking Iowa, Missouri and Illinois due to farmer discontent. He also flips Maryland back to the Democrats and wins in Vermont.

Things still are similar to otl until 2000. No senate seats flip in 88. Bernie Sanders might get in the house earlier as he lost a close race. That might be a tad notable but that’s it.

In 92 Clinton still wins but picks Bob Kerrey of Nebraska as his vp, with both notably being democratic governors of relatively conservative states. The election goes to Clinton but the only notable change is that Nebraska splits its electoral votes with the Clinton Kerrey ticket winning the 1st and 2nd districts of Nebraska, which consisted of Omaha and Lincoln.

In 96 Clinton wins again and once again the big change is two electoral votes from Nebraska. In 2000, Kerrey runs for president and while well liked, many argue that he isn’t liberal enough to unite the democrats and isn’t conservative enough to win in deep red states. As such Kerrey and vice president nominee John Edwards loses Florida and New Mexico However he does better in the Midwest, winning Ohio and Missouri.

Bush is gracious in defeat in spite of close losses in the Midwest with some arguing there is fraud but Bush stays out of it. 9/11 still happens and while Kerrey, like Bush gets high approval ratings, and commits to Afghanistan, he’s seen as being too cautious, saying he doesn’t want to get into wars we don’t have business in though Republicans argue he was ignoring terrorist hotbeds in Iraq and Libya, though Kerrey says he’d rather focus on stopping it at home.

In 2002 the Democrats lose the senate as Mary Landrieu loses in Louisiana, Tim Johnson loses in South Dakota and Al Gore loses in Tennessee to Lamar Alexander.
Kerrey then loses to John McCain who has Ohio Governor Mike DeWine as vp. Like in otl Ohio is a battleground but he loses many blue collar voters. The senate is also more in favor of the Republicans as they hold 56 seats in 2004

McCain stays the course in Afghanistan, and struggles with the economy but still remains decently popular though some social conservatives are disappointed in his record but most keep supporting him. However the gop lose the house and barely hold the Senate 50/49. In 08 he loses to Barack Obama but closer than in otl as McCain keeps Indiana North Carolina and Florida and wins every electoral vote in Nebraska. Obama beats Romney in 2012 and by 2016, things are a bit different as there is no Iraq war (Saddam is toppled in the Arab Spring) and while the economy has yet to get beyond a soft recovery Republicans seem lost but focus more on the culture war. Trump beats Clinton and then Biden wins and here we are.

 

[Deleted member 145219]

Gore probably loses, but it's a lot closer than OTL 1988. If it comes down to a single state like OTL 2000, the Democratic dominance of the Congressional and State level might give Gore an advantage in any legal disputes. That would make a neat inverse of OTL. Gore controversially elected over Bush Sr, and coming into office with an air of illegitimacy, only to have something big on the Foreign Policy front change the political situation overnight and define much of the next decade.