WI: Dukakis didn't run in 1988

Who would the Democratic nominee be, and how would they do against HW Bush?

Perhaps it would be Gephardt, who won Iowa and came second in New Hampshire. In the general election Gephardt might do better than Dukakis based off his heartland roots and working class appeal. But he'd still have the weaknesses that sunk his primary candidacy. To quote a Washington Post article from March 1988, "Gephardt's fall, seven weeks after his rise, is a cautionary tale about the limits of political advertising. His made-for-TV image was finally overwhelmed by another, broadcast with greater wattage: that of a consummate Washington insider who tailored his convictions to the demands of political expediency."
 
Possibly Gore; he seems like a strong contender without Dukakis, although he'd have to improve his campaign in the north. It'd be funny to see Bush vs. Gore, under much different circumstances.
 
It's an intriguing concept, because Gephardt - to defeat Dukakis - poured everything into Iowa and ended up running out of money come New Hampshire. Per Joe Trippi, the master plan Gephardt had was to do a Jimmy Carter and use the Iowa momentum to jump start everything. It did not work. But I'm not sure if Gephardt does that without Dukakis or not. Because Gephardt was an unknown quantity outside the union workers and labor wonks, so he needed something to capture eyeballs and that's why he felt compelled to spend money on that Hyundai TV spot.

Other candidates to consider: Biden. Biden's campaign was sunk by alleged "plagiarism" of Neil Kinnock's speech (side note: can you remember a time when politicians' public integrity mattered so much that "plagiarism" could be enough to derail you?). But the plagiarism claim came from the one speech when Biden did not cite Kinnock, which happened to be filmed, and the video of the speech was found by Dukakis aides and they leaked it to the media. With Duke out, does another team find the tape and leak it? Maybe, maybe not. But just like that you have to put Biden on the table.

Would a fellow Northeastern Duke no longer running make the case for Bill Bradley to throw his hat in the ring? That is, how early does Duke decide not to run? If it's early enough, we would need to add other candidates who decided not to step up. Including, possibly, the white whale of Democratic presidential primaries: Ted Kennedy himself. And that'd upset the apple cart something fierce.

But no matter who the Dems place, Bush still has one ace up his sleeve: Lee Atwater, the Dark Lord of Negative Political Ads, at the height of his creative powers, back by money and minions to do his bidding. If Biden could be derailed by a single plagiarism whispering campaign, picture what Atwater would have done to him? Picture Southern Democrat Gore with his political family baggage and his white gloves wife and how easily Atwater could have made them lose their marbles. Or, for a true horror show, think what Atwater would have done to Ted Kennedy?

For Dems to win in '87, they'd need to neutralize Atwater, bring gobs of money to the fight, make Bush the target and hammer him to pieces, and rally around a single candidate. It's skating uphill.
 
Possibly Gore; he seems like a strong contender without Dukakis, although he'd have to improve his campaign in the north. It'd be funny to see Bush vs. Gore, under much different circumstances.

Gore was just too much a regional candidate in 1988--and even in the South he couldn't sweep the region, Jesse Jackson winning the Deep South states. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_.../File:1988DemocraticPresidentialPrimaries.svg If Dukakis didn't emerge as the leading white candidate in the big northern states, Gephardt or Simon would be far more likely to do so than Gore.
 
Gore was just too much a regional candidate in 1988--and even in the South he couldn't sweep the region, Jesse Jackson winning the Deep South states. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_.../File:1988DemocraticPresidentialPrimaries.svg If Dukakis didn't emerge as the leading white candidate in the big northern states, Gephardt or Simon would be far more likely to do so than Gore.

I don't think it'd be a cakewalk for Gore, and in fact he'd most likely have to sway some delegates from the other campaigns in order to win the nomination, but he seems to have a better chance than either Gephardt or Simon. As has been noted, Gephardt poured everything into winning Iowa in the hopes that it'd jump start his campaign, and that just never happened. Now of course, without Dukakis in the race this opens up lots of possibilities for everyone who does run, but I just don't know if I see him making it all the way to the nomination. Simon hardly even got 5%, and when compared to a much younger (but still experienced), more dynamic candidate like Gore (or hell, even Gephardt or Biden for that matter), I'm doubtful that he could win. He was an interesting candidate, and perhaps this is just me being shallow but...the thick, rimmed glasses and bowtie don't exactly strike me as being "presidential", and I'll bet many primary voters would agree.
 
Last edited:
I don't think it'd be a cakewalk for Gore, and in fact he'd most likely have to sway some delegates from the other campaigns in order to win the nomination, but he seems to have a better chance than either Gephardt or Simon. As has been noted, Gephardt poured everything into winning Iowa in the hopes that it'd jump start his campaign, and that just never happened. Now of course, without Dukakis in the race this opens up lots of possibilities for everyone who does run, but I just don't know if I see him making it all the way to the nomination. Simon hardly even got 5%, and when compared to a much younger (but still experienced), more dynamic candidate like Gore (or hell, even Gephardt or Biden for that matter), I'm doubtful that he could win. He was an interesting candidate, and perhaps this is just me being shallow but...the thick, rimmed glasses and bowtie don't exactly strike me as being "presidential", and I'll bet many primary voters would agree,

Why I think Simon had a chance: In OTL he not only came a close second to Gephardt in the Iowa caucus, but he may actually have won it! https://www.stltoday.com/news/local...cle_006245b4-4391-11e1-89aa-0019bb30f31a.html And I think that OTL Dukakis voters would be at least as likely to vote for Simon as for Gephardt.

If Simon wins in Iowa and then in NH--where in OTL he was behind only Dukakis and Gephardt (and only very narrowly behind Gephardt, despite the latter's Iowa "bump")-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1988_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries his OTL problem of getting enough money and publicity to remain a credible candidate would certainly be much alleviated.

I think the glasses and bow-tie would actually help him with college-educated Democratic voters--"he's a homely-looking, intelligent, authentic Illinoisan like Lincoln and Adlai." And for less intellectual Democrats, he had a good labor record. And he was a senator from a major swing state (yes, that's what Illinois still was in 1980)...
 
Last edited:
A question I have, maybe for @David T in particular since he seems so knowledgeable; how is it that Jesse Jackson did as well as he did? I realize that it was mainly in the deep south, and that lots of that probably came from the black vote (on which, at least as far as personal demographics go, he had a monopoly), but he also did win Michigan and Alaska. How did he manage to come in second, and do as well as he did?

And, without Dukakis in the race, is there any chance he comes out on top? Maybe more candidates jump in, the race is inconclusive for long enough that he ekes out a win. He'd lose the GE, almost for sure, but that's another conversation.
 
A question I have, maybe for @David T in particular since he seems so knowledgeable; how is it that Jesse Jackson did as well as he did? I realize that it was mainly in the deep south, and that lots of that probably came from the black vote (on which, at least as far as personal demographics go, he had a monopoly), but he also did win Michigan and Alaska. How did he manage to come in second, and do as well as he did?

By 1988, he had the support of some white left-liberals as well as African Americans. In caucus states, the Left vote can be important. Still, whoever would be the last white candidate standing would almost certainly defeat Jackson one-on-one.
 
Last edited:
What do you mean by Tipper Gore being "white gloves"?
In 1985, Tipper Gore and several other white women of a certain age and political clout formed a movement to regulate content of music albums, giving birth to the "Parental Advisory" labels and etc. In the course of the melodrama, the group was able to actually have Congressional hearings on the whole thing, with the spectacle of career politicians, some of whom were husbands of these women, grilling musicians about how obscene and dirty their music is to the youth of America. In the center of maelstrom stood lily white Tipper Gore, looking prim and proper and being everything we imagine Helen Lovejoy from the Simpsons would be in real life.

Now picture Lee Atwater, son of the South, the dirty South at that, facing off against someone whose wife cringed at hearing naughty words in album songs. He'd break her into a dozen pieces via rumors and leaked false stories inside two weeks and then drink Al Gore's tears of impotence and rage from a cup made of the skull of his enemies.
 
I think all this business about the genius Lee Atwater is nonsense. The Massachusetts prison furlough program was an obvious target (and was used by Gore during the primary) but at any rate Atwater's use of it was not what defeated Dukakis. Dukakis' lead in the polls over Bush had already disappeared by the time of the GOP convention, well before the Willie Horton ads--or for that matter many of the other supposed game-changers of the campaign like the ride in the tank or Dukakis' wooden answer to Bernard Shaw's question about the rape and murder of Kitty Dukakis. In fact, after the GOP convention, Bush was always ahead: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/01/06/its-time-to-stop-the-endless-hype-of-the-willie-horton-ad
 
In 1985, Tipper Gore and several other white women of a certain age and political clout formed a movement to regulate content of music albums, giving birth to the "Parental Advisory" labels and etc. In the course of the melodrama, the group was able to actually have Congressional hearings on the whole thing, with the spectacle of career politicians, some of whom were husbands of these women, grilling musicians about how obscene and dirty their music is to the youth of America. In the center of maelstrom stood lily white Tipper Gore, looking prim and proper and being everything we imagine Helen Lovejoy from the Simpsons would be in real life.

Now picture Lee Atwater, son of the South, the dirty South at that, facing off against someone whose wife cringed at hearing naughty words in album songs. He'd break her into a dozen pieces via rumors and leaked false stories inside two weeks and then drink Al Gore's tears of impotence and rage from a cup made of the skull of his enemies.
You're saying that Tipper wouldn't be able to handle someone being mean to her? I've never heard the phrase "white gloved" used to mean that.
 
Top