WI No VP Cheney

Suppose Cheney either doesn't offer himself up as a running mate for George Bush, or Bush rejects the offer -- who does the RNC nominate for VP instead? Assuming Bush still takes the oath come January, how would his administration be changed?

I did a DBWI on this a ways back, but figured it deserved to be straight up asked.
 
Suppose Cheney either doesn't offer himself up as a running mate for George Bush, or Bush rejects the offer -- who does the RNC nominate for VP instead? Assuming Bush still takes the oath come January, how would his administration be changed?

I did a DBWI on this a ways back, but figured it deserved to be straight up asked.

In his autobiography, George W Bush said that he would have chosen former Senator John Danforth of Missouri as his running-mate. I'm not certain what Danforth's positions were on the War and Terror and such; he was anti-death penalty (which probably wouldn't matter) and has criticized social conservatism (though Cheney isn't that socially conservative either). Like Cheney, Danforth would be a Vice-President unlikely to attempt a Presidential run in 2008, since Danforth would be too old.

Also supposedly on George W Bush's short list were Michigan Governor John Engler, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, New York Governor George Pataki, and Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel (a Maverick).
 
Last edited:
In his autobiography, George W Bush said that he would have chosen former Senator John Danforth of Missouri as his running-mate.

Well he's certainly a different sort of Republican -- though the question is, what kind of influence, if any, would he has as veep?

There's also the pure absence of Cheney to consider -- for example, wasn't he a big political ally of Donald Rumsfeld? How likely is it that somebody else would head DoD TTL? And without Dick and Rummy at the table, how likely is a decision like the Iraq War? Or is Bush pretty much going to do that anyway?
 
No Cheney is huge on the whole authoritarian, torture, fuck the UN thing. Read the Washington Post series on him for a start.
 
No Cheney probably means no Rumsfeld also - I believe Cheney recommended Rumsfeld.

The whole internal dynamic of the Bush admin in foreign policy would pretty decisively shift away from the neo-con hawks and towards a much more sensible, pragmatic, OTL post-2006 spirit.

I'm not sure about Iraq tbh; I suspect it would probably still happen, but difficult to be sure. It's certainly less likely to happen ITTL though.
 
I believe Bush had Iraq in his sights from day one, but then whose to say the hawk contingent hadn't already been making their case per-inauguration? I can only assume a far less bullish approach at least.
 
Top