WI: No 9/11 or anything similar

The POD is that Bin Laden gets eaten by a bear before he got radicalized OTL, and as a result, Al-Qaeda never exists. What would happen in terms of Bush 43’s Presidency, Iraq, etc.?
 
The USS Cole disaster does not happen in October, 2000. Does it influence a close upcoming presidential election?
 
It happened shortly before one of the debates, yet never came up during the debate, so I don’t think so.
Gore was an environmentalist and former military journalist. Bush trained pilots stateside. No attack could have swayed just enough voters in Vermont to not vote for Nader or Bush and that would have turned the election.
 
Oklahoma City happened in 1995 and the Unabomber was incarcerated the same year, so I don’t see how either could have any effect on the 21st century.

They prove that there were domestic groups able and willing to do terrorist acts. If Bin Laden never carries out the WTC bombing or 9/11, then we will not not have implemented the security measures we added in their wake; and somebody else will attack those sorts of targets, probably sooner than later.
 
No embassy bombings either.
Since the embassy in Somalia was bombed in 1998, that is more significant than the Cole. The Cole happened so close to the election that there was little time for discussion. Somalia wasn't exactly a household subject, but it wasn't forgotten.
Oklahoma City happened in 1995 and the Unabomber was incarcerated the same year, so I don’t see how either could have any effect on the 21st century.
There was no politically correct way a candidate could have supported a program against lone wolves, one never on the radar and one cleverly hidden.
 
This affects rather more. Al-Qaeda's first attacks were in 1992, the World Trade Center was bombed in '93 and 6-7 people killed (depending on how you count the unborn child), a car bomb in '95 and the embassy bombings in '98. So butterflies start flapping then

Anyways the big one is that in fall 2001 rather than gory 24/7 coverage of the 9/11 attacks and the war in Afghanistan, we have 24/7 coverage of the Enron scandal breaking. So most probably you see a tougher Sarbanes-Oxley than OTL. Also given how the Bush administration was linked to Enron, Bush is going to take a huge hit as no patriotic surge to save him

Anyways Dems probably take the midterms, and most probably Bush loses reelection, Terrorism was one of his big pros and that's gone

Great Recession might or might not happen. Without 9/11 the Federal Funds rate probably does not drop all the way to 1% and with the greater concern over financial misgivings relaxation of the net Capital rule is less liekly. May be enough to prevent it, may just make it milder or delay it
 
Great Recession might or might not happen. Without 9/11 the Federal Funds rate probably does not drop all the way to 1% and with the greater concern over financial misgivings relaxation of the net Capital rule is less likely. May be enough to prevent it, may just make it milder or delay it
The Great Recession was the product of greedy banking practice incubated by the curtailment of Glass-Steagall. If Bush wins in 2000 and implements his tax cuts, something will happen. If he loses mid-terms and is defeated in 2004, the recession is lessened, but how much? If Gore wins 2000, it would be lessened very much. If legislators were alerted, there is some small chance it could have been stopped.
 
...

Great Recession might or might not happen. Without 9/11 the Federal Funds rate probably does not drop all the way to 1% and with the greater concern over financial misgivings relaxation of the net Capital rule is less liekly. May be enough to prevent it, may just make it milder or delay it

One better case scenario is a briefer & shallower recession circa 2003-2005 shakes out the housing/mortage sector & prevents the festering that made the eventual crash so bad.
 
The Great Recession was the product of greedy banking practice incubated by the curtailment of Glass-Steagall. If Bush wins in 2000 and implements his tax cuts, something will happen. If he loses mid-terms and is defeated in 2004, the recession is lessened, but how much? If Gore wins 2000, it would be lessened very much. If legislators were alerted, there is some small chance it could have been stopped.
Bush's tax cuts had nothing to do with the matter. The issue was Fed rates hitting rock bottom and a massive inflow of foreign capital due to US trade imbalance leaving a surplus of dollars that had to go somewhere. As such borrowing money became ridiculously cheap so everybody did it. When things inevitably had to change, many people who borrowed could not afford the rates and defaulted. This led to the chain reaction of failure led to by repeal of Glass-Steagall, relaxing the Net Capital Rule and so much extra money in the system

If fed rates don't fall as much there is going to be less risky borrowing, so fewer defaults thus less of a shock. Without the 2004 Net Capital rule relaxation the big financial companies are not as leveraged and thus able to ride out shocks better. Whether that is enough to avert the Great Recession or simply make it merely a Recession is the question
One better case scenario is a briefer & shallower recession circa 2003-2005 shakes out the housing/mortage sector & prevents the festering that made the eventual crash so bad.
That's unlikely, the Dot Com bubble bursting already triggered one in 2001 that 9/11 made worse, the economy has not time to climb back up
 
The DotCom bubble pop did not much rationalize the housing sector. For all the idiots charging for the housing finance cliff the DotCom thing may as well not happened. We needed a readjustment in the housing sector, earlier the better.
 
The DotCom bubble pop did not much rationalize the housing sector. For all the idiots charging for the housing finance cliff the DotCom thing may as well not happened. We needed a readjustment in the housing sector, earlier the better.
It's the DotCom crash that in part made the housing bubble, as to fight it interest rates went from 6.5% to 1% and made the crazy mortgages possible. In any case since a recession just happened you won't get anther one to shake up the market until a certain time-span afterwards, by which point its probably too late, the housing bubble popped in early '06 but things didn't really go nuts until September '08. A recession in 2006 does nothing because the dominoes are already falling

What you need is no 9/11 to convince the Fed that more recovery is needed, if rates stay at the ~3% they were in September '01 the bubble doesn't get near as bad, even if they only fall to 2% its stil lbetter than OTL
 
It's the DotCom crash that in part made the housing bubble, as to fight it interest rates went from 6.5% to 1% and made the crazy mortgages possible.

I suspect a portion of the DotCom Lemmings moved to the housing market. One of the victims I met in 2009 had invested heavily in apartment complexes nationwide the previous 9-10 years. Moving the bulk of his money into a increasingly weak hosing market. There's a couple of other examples I crossed paths with in 2007 & 2008. Guys & gal frantically chasing a bubble after the previous thing went bust.
 
With a better economy+no new wars, bush wins 04 by a bigger margin than otl.

we'd get the housing bubble/great recession/collapse of political normality as OTL but would at least have better civil liberties and less inflation since 2001
 
George W. Bush cruises to reelection on a "no nation-building" promise kept, likely against Gephardt. The administration is more critical of Russian conduct in the northern Caucasus. The lack of resources poured into Afghanistan and Iraq buys the economy another year or two, and hits during John McCain's first and only term after eight years of George W. Bush.
 
Top