WI: Dan Quayle in 1996

Outside of Conservative circles, Dan Quayle was the running joke of the late 1980s/early 1990s. An entire culture grew up around making fun of Dan Quayle, and it was very strong. Like an 80s comedian with a premature HBO special, Dan Quayle totally dropped off the map after Bush lost to Clinton in 1992. However, Quayle was very much liked by the Conservatives, and it was projected that he would be a strong contender for the nomination in 1996. He declined to run, citing health problems. He also considered but did not run for governor of Indiana, and subsequently did not run for office in his new home state of Arizona (albeit he considered it). He attempted to run in 2000 but was quickly undercut by George W. Bush, whom he dropped out to support. Quayle's time had passed.

However, what if Quayle did make a run for the nomination in 1996? Could he overcome Bob Dole? The Republicans have a habit of nominating based on party seniority. Could he have undercut Buchanan as the Conservative favorite to counter Dole? Or would he have crashed and burned in the primaries, as Quayle may have been naturally apt to do? And how would he look against Bill Clinton in the general election?
 
On paper, Quayle looks like a plausible candidate for the GOP nomination in 1996. However Democrats and Independents might joke about him, he was still popular among Republicans. He could fill a niche--without being too offensive to the GOP Establishment (after all, he had been GHW Bush's vice-president) he could get the support of conservatives who thought that Dole and Alexander and (on social issues) Forbes were too moderate, and that Buchanan was too isolationist and anti-Israel and populist/protectionist on economic policy. OTOH, Pawlenty in 2011 and Scott Walker in 2015 also looked like ideal candidates who could be supported by both the GOP Establishment and ideological conservatives. And we know what happened to them.

If he did get the nomination, Clinton IMO would beat him without too much trouble. Quayle's support with the GOP base could get him a respectable minority, but that is it.
 
It was also a different political era, though. Certain candidates who could have been strong ten or twenty years ago are undercut by all sorts of things. Recently, Trump's domination has upset the normality of the Republican primaries. Trump takes up popularity, the media attention, and if you aren't addressing Trump, you aren't getting coverage. And if you are, he gets more coverage. It's like a playoffs where only one team is winning against everyone. No one else has the ability to get traction or develop, and die in the cradle. Had Trump not run, it'd be a completely different thing (deserving of it's own thread in the near future).

In 1996, Quayle has problems but he also has name recognition and position other candidates do not. The media would assume him to be the designated successor, and report on him in such a way.
 
Quayle would probably be an even better candidate in a world where Bush Sr. won a second term; I imagine he'd lose there through.
 
I think of Dan Quayle as an ideological conservative, more so than Dole.

In addition, although Bob Dole may have made an alright president in '96, he was not a particularly good campaigner.

And so, if Quayle runs a good campaign and still loses to Clinton, ideological conservatism will be somewhat less popular, at least for a season. More pragmatic conservatives within the Republican party will have more of a chance to get a hearing.
 
Quayle would probably be an even better candidate in a world where Bush Sr. won a second term; I imagine he'd lose there through.
This is the most interesting version of this WI to me. After two terms of Bush, and four terms of Republican presidents, any Republican is going to have a hard time in 1996, but how badly does Quayle lose, and to which Democrat? Certainly not Clinton; the Democrats at the top of the totem poll will be in the running, unlike OTL 1992. President Gore, 1997-?
 
This is the most interesting version of this WI to me. After two terms of Bush, and four terms of Republican presidents, any Republican is going to have a hard time in 1996, but how badly does Quayle lose, and to which Democrat? Certainly not Clinton; the Democrats at the top of the totem poll will be in the running, unlike OTL 1992. President Gore, 1997-?

The likes of Gov. Zell Miller (D-GA) (still considered quite a moderate even liberal at this stage), Sen. Chuck Robb (D-VA) and Gov. Mario Cuomo (D-NY) (assuming he doesn't get defeated in 1994 with no Republican Revolution) were all considered potential front runners for the nomination in 1996.
 
If Quayle had been nominated in 1996, he would have lost badly unless the Democrats dropped Clinton in favor of a truly awful nominee of their own, maybe Ted Kennedy.

Quayle was friendly and personally likeable, but did not give the impression of real strength of character, which, combined with his frequent bonehead remarks, had the country convinced that he was not up to handling a crisis. The Republicans knew that of course, which is why his nomination was off the table.
 
Top