Nothing would change. Cheney was infuential, but the idea that he called all the shots is silly. Bush would have picked another VP, probably someone from his cabinet (Rumsfeld maybe?), and would have kept the same basic advisers. He wins reelection the same, he acts the sames.
The only thing, if the VP is younger, and runs for president in 2008, we have a slightly different race. Obama will still win, but it will be different.
I agree. The notion that Cheney was calling all the shots and Bush was merely a puppet is asinine, IMO.Nothing would change. Cheney was infuential, but the idea that he called all the shots is silly. Bush would have picked another VP, probably someone from his cabinet (Rumsfeld maybe?), and would have kept the same basic advisers. He wins reelection the same, he acts the sames.
The only thing, if the VP is younger, and runs for president in 2008, we have a slightly different race. Obama will still win, but it will be different.
I agree. The notion that Cheney was calling all the shots and Bush was merely a puppet is asinine, IMO.
Absolutely. Same regarding Rumsfeld. Everybody knows it was Karl Rove who was giving all the orders. If you don't believe me, ask Colin Powell.![]()
I'm thinking McCain or Powell for VP.
Again according to Decision Points, this was George W. Bush's VP shortlist:
Lamar Alexander
Tom Ridge
Frank Keating
John Engler
Jack Danforth
Jon Kyl
Chuck Hagel
Bill Frist
Fred Thompson
Of these nine candidates, Bush himself said he was VERY impressed with Jack Danforth in particular, and came very close to offering the job to him, but went with Cheney instead.
So, if we're talking about no Cheney back in 2000, then Bush would most likely have gone with Jack Danforth instead.