Summer TL: President Henry Wallace

[hcallega]

The real excitement however was in the Vice-Presidential debate. Gore, who was rarely used outside of the south, was in an awkward position. Gephardt had made trade and jobs the key to his protectionist campaign, but Gore was by any definition a Free-Trader. Ironically, Perot was a stronger isolationist than Gephardt, but was much more comfortable touting the party line. The billionaire would confront the issue head on “Everyone knows I think free trade is a joke, and not a very funny one. But I’m not the one running for President. My job is going to be to give the President the best advice I can, which will be to not negotiate this deal. But if he does I will still stand right next to him, because he is my President and it is my duty to support him.” Gore was not as eloquent: “I support free trade, but that really doesn’t matter, you know, because President, excuse me, Mr. Gephardt doesn’t. If he doesn’t, I don’t either because we are united and we are going to win because the working people in this country get that.” In both debates the GOP ticket would prevail, but Gephardt was still hanging around in the polls. Entering Election Night many still believed that Gephardt had at the very least a fighter’s chance. In the end they would be wrong, as Kemp would win as solid victory, claiming that “Tonight we have a mandate for change in this nation, a mandate to go into Washington and accomplish something great. With your help we have done this, and with your help we will continue.”

Kemp/Perot (R) 54% of the PV, 362 EVs
Gephardt/Gore (D) 40% of the PV, 176 EVs
Anderson/Stockdale (NR) 6% of the PV, 0 EVs

1988 Congressional Elections
Along with Kemp’s solid victory in the Presidential Election, the Republicans would also make solid gains in the US Senate, particularly in traditionally Republican areas that had trended Democratic in recent elections. However the Democrats would still hold a lead, 63-37, though with conservatives like freshmen Trent Lott and veteran Strom Thurmond on the Democratic side Kemp felt confident that he could get much of his package done. In the House the Republicans would actually take a majority, as Bob Michel of Illinois was named Speaker.
Democratic Gains
-Nebraska: Bob Kerrey
-Virginia: Chuck Robb
Republican Gains
-California: Pete Wilson
-Florida: Connie Mack III
-Montana: Conrad Burns
-New Jersey: Pete Dawkins
-Wisconsin: Susan Egleiter

[hcallega]

The First Term of President Jack Kemp

Jack Kemp began his Presidency with one focus: “To restore the image of this great nation at both home and abroad. If we as a nation can achieve this then we will have taken a huge step towards once again becoming a beacon of hope for the world.” Kemp’s strong words were backed up by strong actions. The conservative New Yorker would focus his efforts early on on domestic policy.

Kemp’s first budget was an example of his commitment to reform. Following his belief in “Supply-Side Economics”, Kemp proposed large tax-cuts combined with lowered domestic and increased military spending. The idea was that this plan would stimulate growth while also lowering the government’s burden on many of the programs viewed as wasteful by Kemp and fellow conservatives. However congressional opposition by Democrats and moderate Republicans were able to overcome the small GOP majority in the Senate, and therefore negotiations were forced to occur. Kemp was willing to compromise on the size of his plans, but not the plans themselves. However this was not good enough for Minority Leader Jim Wright, who took to the air waves to defend his party’s position. “What President Kemp is proposing will essentially increase spending, decrease revenue, and making it harder for the most vulnerable in our nation to receive the help they need. It’s not to hard to figure out why we, as a party oppose it.” Eventually Speaker Michel and Wright forged a compromise deal eliminating most of the domestic spending cuts while shrinking the size of the tax cuts. The plan passed both the Senate and House, and was reluctantly signed into law by the President, who reportedly murmured “I feel like every other President since Hoover. Simply raising the deficit and passing it on.”

On foreign policy, Kemp believed that the best way to improve America’s image was to take a more active role in Eastern Europe. While Kennedy had crafted the Kirkpatrick Plan, Kemp believed that a key was to travel to the ex-communist nations, such as Eastern Germany (now unified), Poland, and Yugoslavia. Appearing with Solidarity Leader Lech Walesa in Warsaw, Kemp would call on “all free peoples to continue to fight back against any form of oppression, whether it is Communism, Fascism, or simply evil.” Kemp recognized that his words meant little in practicality, but a lot in terms of world support. In Latin America, Kemp would continue the interventionist policy of Kennedy, focusing on Marxist regimes.

Kemp would also take an active role in promoting Free Trade among the North American Nations, something that he had talked a great deal about on the campaign. Kennedy had already signed the US-Canada Free Trade agreement, receiving little resistance from congress. However trade with Mexico was a whole other story. Kemp’s negotiations were initially successful as he emphasized relatively few restrictions and provisions, believing that the less intervention the better. However Canada was reluctant to sign on to any plan that did not protect their lumber interests, leading to prolonged negotiations and more provisions. Eventually, in 1992, the plan would come before congress, where it would narrowly pass. Kemp would sign the legislation in December of that year. Kemp would also pass environmental reform laws as well, though at the same time appointing conservative justices to the Supreme Court.

Overall, Kemp’s first term was viewed quite positively. While the economic growth of the Kennedy years began to falter and slow down, the country was perceived as stronger at home and abroad and better able to face the challenges ahead.

1990 Congressional Elections
The 1990 Congressional Elections were an example of little tangible change. In the Senate, the only change was a GOP victory in New Jersey over Bill Bradley. This would leave the Senate at 62-38. An interesting race was the North Carolina Democratic Primary between Jesse Helms and Harvey Gant. Gant, the liberal Mayor faced down the conservative incumbent Helms. The strong Dixiecrat would win a narrow reelection of 2% before cruising in the general. In the house the Republicans would barely hold on to their majority.
Republican Gains
-New Jersey: Christine Todd Whitman

[hcallega]

Solid update on The Presidency of Jack Kemp...I assume there was no response to the Gulf War Crisis(Which I think it highly unlikely due to Kemp's conservative roots, and Saddam's threats to annihlate Israel). Is NASA still along OTL straights, I.E. the dropped the Apollo Program infavor of the Shuttle, I would think that with Ronnie and Bobby... Manned Space Exploration would probably continue. Did the Soviet Union still fall right on Schedule or did the Soviet Hardliners take over in '91 August coup attempt? Let's here it for '92!

Sorry about leaving those out. For the most part I'm going off of online presidential timeliness for real life events that I may have forgot, so occassionally I miss things like that.

OK, as far as Gulf War: Same response as OTL, however US forces do not cross into Iraq at all.
Space: Reagan and Kennedy both increased space exploration. I changed the name from Apollo to something else (need to look back at the name). Moon landings continued through the 1980s, experimenting with new technology. The internet and better computer technology have been helped by this, and so the internet is in civilian use earlier. Manned missions to mars are projected for later in the '90s, though space shuttles have become the main focus.

Fall of the USSR: Going into 1992 the USSR still exists, though it is basically just the Russian speaking nations, and is on the imminent brink of collapse. In case I don't get to it, the USSR falls in January of 1993 in a bloody coup where reformists (supported by the CIA and US) overthrow the Communists. In negotiations with the UN and NATO, Russia restructure its borders to where they are today.

As far as 1992, that's anyones guess but mine!

[hcallega]

1992 Democratic Primaries

1992 symbolized a new beginning for the Democratic Party. After the embarrassing defeat that was 1988, the Democrats were simply looking for a way to change the debate, and find a way to beat President Kemp. That would be easier said than done, as Kemp had a solid approval rating that had only gone up after the Persian Gulf War. However the Democrats, as the majority party in America, saw an opportunity to win, if only they could find the right candidate.

The Sucess of the Military Operation in the Persian Gulf further bolstered Kemp's popularity

Much like 1988 however, the earlier frontrunners for the nomination balked at the opportunity to lose to Kemp. Whether it was Governor Bill Clinton of Arkansas (a rising star within the moderate branch of the party), Governor Cuomo of the Empire State, 1988 Nominee Gephardt, or Governor Doug Wilder of Virginia (the most prominent black politician in the nation). However there were a few big names that did run for President that year. The first to declare was Tennessee Senator and 1988 Vice-Presidential Nominee Al Gore. Gore, a favorite of moderates and Dixiecrats alike, was viewed as the early frontrunner. But he was not the only contender. West Virginia’s Junior Senator Jay Rockefeller declared his candidacy shortly after Gore did, focusing drawing support from labor. Senators Bob Kerrey and Paul Tsongas also jumped in, both looking to capture support from moderates and liberals, while Senator Tom Harkin and former Governor and Senator Jerry Brown both focused on the party’s progressive wing.

Al Gore, the early frontrunner for the Democratic Nomination

Early polling showed Gore narrowly edging Senator Kerrey, an early favorite due in large part to his military background and center-left view-points. Senator Rockefeller was in a close third place, but the nature of the primary schedule did not favor any of the early frontrunners. The opening shots were fired in Iowa, where favorite son Harkin won an easy victory. New Hampshire was also a fairly wide victory, as neighboring Senator Tsongas won there, followed by a victory in Maine. South Dakota would be a solid win for Kerrey, and so going into March it was unclear who the frontrunner was. On March 3rd little would be resolved either, as Maryland and Utah would go to Tsongas, Minnesota to Kerrey, Colorado (surprisingly) to Brown, and Georgia to Gore. On the 7th, Gore would win in South Carolina, but Tsongas would score a strong win in Arizona, before Brown would win yet another upset in Nevada. Super Tuesday would be key, as Gore’s Southern Strategy would pay off, as the Tennessee Senator would win Missouri, Oklahoma, Florida, Tennessee, Texas, Mississippi, and Louisiana. Tsongas was another big winner, scoring Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Delaware, while Kerrey won Hawaii. Tsongas would also pick up a big win in Illinois, as he effectively portrayed himself as the “Ethnic Candidate”. In fact, many polls would show Tsongas as the race’s real frontrunner as, according to the Newsweek, he was “the only candidate in this race who has been able to win across the nation, not just in his home region.” But Tsongas’s momentum was cut short, as the Teamster’s Union endorsed Jerry Brown two days before the Michigan Primaries. Brown, already supported by many civil rights groups, had been trailing Tsongas and Kerrey there, but with this endorsement won a narrow victory. This victory would propel the fiscally-conservative yet socially liberal Californian to wins in the next two primaries in Vermont and Connecticut. These victories would lead conservative pundit Bob Novak to call Brown “The next James Polk. He’s the first true Dark Horse who nobody thought could do it, and he might actually get the honor to go down in flames to Jack Kemp. It’s really quite something.”

Former California Governor and Senator Jerry Brown paved a surprisingly successful populist image.

But the race was far from over, as Gore, Kerrey, and Tsongas were confident that there respective strategies would prevail. Gore felt confident that his Southern Firewall, combined with decent showings in the north would give him the plurality going into the convention. Then he would draw enough support from the establishment to win the nomination. Kerrey choose to look forward to the polls, which showed him running quite well in the upcoming Midwestern and western primaries. Tsongas, still portraying himself as the real frontrunner, believed his confidence would lead him to victory. Kerrey’s strategy showed signs of life as he carried Alaska, the first primary in April. But he would fall in a major upset to Gore in Kansas, as Gore would rack up big tallies in the urban areas and the Oklahoma border. Many social conservatives would also support him, as Reverend Pat Robertson would offer his endorsement following Gore’s Super Tuesday showings. The withdrawal of Rockefeller would also help Gore, as he would get more support from liberal southerners. The same day as Kansas, two bigger primaries also took place. The first, in Wisconsin, proved to be another win for Brown, while Tsongas would edge Brown by 1% in the crucial New York Primary. The next two primaries would resolve little, as Gore would win as expected in Virginia, while Kerrey would win Pennsylvania, due in large part to a slew of endorsements in the Philadelphia region (a city he would carry by large margins). This helped to offset Governor Casey’s endorsement of Gore, as Gore was the only pro-lifer in the field.

Bob Kerrey and Paul Tsongas appealed to very different parts of the Democratic Party, but both made solid primary runs in 1992.

The race was still anybody’s game, and the possibility of a convention showdown seemed increasingly likely. Gore and Kerrey would split the May 5th Primaries, with Gore carrying North Carolina and Indiana and Kerrey winning Washington D.C. and Wyoming. He would follow that up with a win in his home state of Nebraska, while Gore would win West Virginia with the help of Rockefeller’s endorsement. The next two primaries would also split, as Kerrey carried Oregon while Tsongas won Washington. On May 26th, three states would hold primaries. Surprisingly all three states (Arkansas, Kentucky, and Idaho) would vote for Gore, with Idaho being effected by strong campaigning by Robertson and Governor Cecil Andrus. On June 2nd there would be one bigger day of primaries, before things got even crazier going into the convention. Despite Gore’s momentum, he would fail to carry more than Alabama and (again with the help of the endorsements of local pols and conservatives) North Dakota. Kerrey would make up for this by winning big in Ohio (over Tsongas), New Mexico, and Montana. Tsongas would win two more big states to stay in contention, as he would win New Jersey and California in an upset over Brown. Going into the convention, the race was anybody’s game as Gore lead the field with 1200 delegates, followed by Kerrey with 1082, Tsongas with 744, and Brown with 379. And with these personalities, this race had been the most exciting since the 1950’s!

Green=Kerrey, Blue=Gore, Pink=Tsongas, Red=Brown, Grey=Harkin

[hcallega]

1992 Democratic Convention

For the first time since primaries became national, the Democratic Party was forced to choose their Presidential Nominee at the Convention. This year’s convention was held at Madison Square Garden, appropriate for the upcoming showdown. After all it was any ones game, and this was for a spot in the finals.

The primetime matchup primarily focused on two men: Senator Al Gore of Tennessee and Senator Bob Kerrey of Nebraska. The two delegate leaders going into the convention, these two represented different branches of the Democratic Party. Gore represented the “New Democrats”, a group primarily made-up of moderate Southerners who wished to pave a “third-way” between the conservative and liberal wings of the party. Gore was socially conservative; opposed to abortion on demand, affirmative action, and supportive of welfare reform. He balanced these policies with strong environmentalism and support of universal health care. Gore’s base was southerners and farmers, in many ways the Jefferson-Jacksonian Democratic Party. Evangelical Democrats also flocked to his campaign, draw in by prominent endorsements from the Reverends Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell.

Kerrey also ran as an “anti-establishment” candidate, but in a much different way. Rather than attempting to forge a new middle path for the Democrats, he believed that the key to winning was focusing on creating a coalition of suburban whites and racial minorities that could defeat the increasing GOP strength among rural voters throughout the country. Kerrey appealed to suburban voters, who were generally a reliable Republican voting bloc, via support for abortion rights, tax cuts, and free trade policies intended to lead to greater economic growth. Kerrey also made a concerted effort to woo blacks and Hispanics by emphasizing his support for many liberal domestic policies that had benefited them. However by doing so Kerrey lost support among westerners, his native constituency. In fact, several farming states went for Gore due to his social conservativism over the native son Kerrey.

But Kerrey and Gore were not the only candidates in the race. Both Paul Tsongas and Jerry Brown had kept their candidacies alive, believing that they would be the ones to benefit from the divided field. Tsongas still had large support from ethnic voters and the traditional liberal branch of the party, though the ADA made a passionate appeal to its members to support Kerrey over Tsongas, who had been critical of the groups focus on redistribution of wealth rather than economic growth. Brown was supported by a strange coalition of liberals, libertarians, and some blue-collar whites supportive of his protectionist views on trade. In fact, the conservative Teamsters Union endorsed Brown as “the only candidate who believes that the North American Free Trade Agreement is wrong, and the only one with the guts to do something about it.”

The first ballot gave Gore a narrow lead in the delegate count, and many of the speakers gave strong endorsements to him as the “next man up” (Rep. Pat Schroeder) and “the best possible candidate to beat President Kemp in November” (Rev. Jesse Jackson). After the first ballot the delegates from Brown and Tsongas’s camps were freed up, and both men were given the opportunity to speak and make their case for endorsements. The first was Brown, who urged his delegates “to choose the brave Senator from Nebraska who has fought for this nation abroad. He has fought in the race paddies, not on the football fields and he will tell you that it takes more than a strong arm to lead this nation forward!” With this endorsement, Kerrey took a narrow lead over Gore, with Paul Tsongas being the deciding voice. Tsongas’s speech was short and precise, but inspired the convention to a fever pitch. “In my honest opinion, there is no debate as to who we need to nominate. He has served in the Senate for almost a decade, and he understands that to lead is to understand, to be compassionate, and to be strong. He has been on the ticket before and has fought hard for the Democratic Party, the Party of the people. And for that, and for many other reasons we must nominate Senator Al Gore of Tennessee!” With Tsongas’s explicit support, Gore was given the delegate lead and catapulted to the nomination. Gore would choose Representative Pat Schroeder of Colorado as his VP nominee in an attempt to bring in support from women and liberal skeptical of some of his views.

[hcallega]

1992 Presidential Election

Kemp vs. Gore was by no means the most exciting President race in American history, nor was it the closest. But nonetheless it proved for some entertainment for political enthusiasts and the American people. Kemp entered the race with fairly high approval ratings, while many Americans were unsure about Gore. Also, Gore’s choice of the very liberal Colorado Congresswoman Pat Schroeder proved to be a liability, as she was often the butt of conservative critiscm and late-night talk show joke.

However a bigger issue for the Gore campaign was motivating the base. Liberal groups were very unsure about Gore, a social and fiscal conservative who only “came home” on issues of the environment and social programs. This was not enough for many in the party who decided to stay home rather than vote for a less than adequate choice. The other key interest groups in the party (Labor and Southern Whites) were also reluctant to shell out the big bucks. Gore had supported the free trade agreement of the Americas, while also claiming in a speech to the Southern Democratic Leadership Conference that “The Democratic Party cannot win in the suburbs or the west without breaking from labor. We cannot simply represent the workers in industry; we need to represent the small business owners and the farmers. We simply cannot beat the Republicans forever by rallying around Archie Bunker.” Gore’s moderation of his pro-life and anti-affirmative action views also cost him some support from southern whites, who saw him as bending to the liberal branch of the party. Ultimately things were not helped when Schroeder made her now infamous quote on “Meet the Press”

Tim Russert: Mrs. Schroeder, since being elected Mayor of Denver in the 1970s, and then being elected to congress in 1980, you have been an outspoken advocate for a women’s right to an abortion. Now on the other hand Senator Gore has always maintained a pro-life voting record in the House and Senate. How do you balance your beliefs on the issue with Senator Gore, and if elected President how will you two work out your differences when it comes to issues like government funded abortions?
Schroeder: Well I think you can look to our party platform, the Democratic Party platform, for a middle ground that appeases both women and the fundamentalists. But no I can guarantee that if elected President, Al Gore will not let any of the wackos from the mega churches into the Oval Office, or even the West Wing for that matter! But seriously, lets talk about real issues, abortion isn’t what matters to people right now, its leadership.
Tim Russert: Are you implying that the pro-life movement even within your own party is made up of fundamentalists and “wackos”?
Schroeder: Well no, I mean certainly there are extremists in both camps but I was simply making a joke.

Schroeder’s quote and response were hit hard by Kemp who would repeatedly say in his national town hall meetings something to the equivalent of “Mrs. Schroeder thinks abortion is something to joke about. Now I think most people, whether pro-choice or pro-life would disagree” or “It is clear that abortion is simply not something to joke about.” Within the Democratic Party, Reverends Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell would release a joint release stating “Mrs. Schroeder has insulted pro-lifers, southerners, and Christians all in one fell swoop. She has embarrassed many within her own party including many of her closest supporters. Therefore we must withdraw our endorsement of the Gore-Schroder ticket, while not endorsing any other candidates.” Senator Jesse Helms of North Carolina would go a step further by stating “I urge all pro-life Democrats to vote for the Kemp-Perot ticket. Senator Gore’s choice of Representative Schroeder shows a lack of the decision making skill necessary to be Commander-in-Chief, and I cannot in good conscience support him.”

The debates would offer Gore the opportunity to bounce back, as he would challenge Kemp on his “trickle-down policies that only trickle down to the lower-upper class” and his “pro-corporate policies that do nothing but boost the paychecks of the CEOs while providing no help to those whose jobs have been lost.” Gore would win the two debates by hammering Kemp on any number of perceived follies, while ignoring issues like the Gulf War and free trade. Entering election day, Kemp lead by only 5%, enough to feel good but not enough to feel safe.

Kemp/Perot (R) 342 Electoral Votes, 55% of the Popular Vote
Gore/Schroeder (D) 196 Electoral Votes, 45% of the Popular Vote

Congressional Elections
Despite Kemp’s landslide reelection, the balance of power in the Senate would remain the same, due in large part to the number of southern states. Several southern Democrats (Wyche Fowler, Terry Sanford, Fritz Hollings) would win very narrow victories in states carried by Kemp. The Senate would now remain 62-38 Democrat. In the House the Republicans would make sizable gains and expand their majority.
-California: Diane Feinstein
Republican Gains
-California: Bruce Herschenhorn

[hcallega]

Jack Kemp's Second Term

Entering his second term, President Kemp was forced to deal with the expectations from both conservatives and moderates. The Republican base hoped that he would continue and expand his supply-side economics, while independents and conservative Democrats hoped that he would continue his more moderate proposals. In fact, President Kemp would go from being the “gunslinger” to the “game-manager” quarterback.

Kemp’s first goal was to change the focus on the so called War on Drugs. The term, coined by Winnie Rockefeller, had become something of a joke among both liberals and conservatives. Liberals, such as Governor Jerry Brown of California, called it “the most illogical war ever fought by the United States of America! And we’ve fought some pretty ridiculous wars.” Conservatives were critical of the war for another reason: “This is the least funded war we have ever fought, and the enemy is the most dangerous.” (Pat Buchanan). Kemp would change the focus from these two opposites: the focus would be on letting capitalism work for poor blacks. Kemp would fight to allocate record high funds for free enterprise zones, while also encouraging inner-city schools to have “lil’ capitalism” classes. These initiatives would have a positive impact, though crime and drug abuse would still remain at high levels.

Kemp’s other major focus would be foreign policy. Starting with the bombing of the World Trade Center, Kemp would declare a war on “radical extremists across the world, whether they be at home or internationally.” Kemp would step up bombings of Iraq in an attempt to pressure Saddamn Hussein to end his support of terrorists and chemical weapons development. Kemp would also call for a “swift and tough response to the militant Branch Dividians in Waco, Texas.” In this case the response would be criticized by liberals for the death of many women and children due to the firestorm reportedly caused by the use of flammable objects by the FBI forces.” Kemp would also deploy forces to Somalia, Haiti, and Rwanda in response to violence and instability. For the most part these actions would be very successful and limit the violence in those nations, receiving support from liberals and conservatives alike. Kemp would also successfully work to negotiate peace with the peoples in Bosnia, a nation that was no longer under Soviet control.

Kemp would also push for positive interaction with other nations, expanding free trade with Vietnam, and pushing for talks with China to eventually open up trade. Kemp would also support negotiations in the Middle East, while always supporting Israel. The greatest achievement for Kemp was negotiating with Soviet Leaders to install a Democratic Government in Russia, while also allowing for elections in Russian-speaking nations as to their independence. Several nations would remain a part of Russia, while most would leave. Russian President Boris Yeltsin would announce “President Kemp has made our people free! We will not let him down!” Leaving office, the President was one of the most popular in recent history, and by far the most popular Republican since Dewey.

1994 Congressional Elections

The 1994 Congressional Elections were rough for both the Democrats and Republicans. In the House, the Democrats would retake their majority, with a new Speaker in Tom Foley of Washington. In the Senate, the Republicans would gain five seats, narrowing the Democratic Majority to 57-43.
Republican Gains
-Arizona: Jon Kyl
-Maine: Olympia Snowe
-Michigan: Spencer Abraham
-Ohio: Mike DeWine
-Oklahoma: Jim Inhofe

[hcallega]

1996 Republican Primaries

As Jack Kemp prepared to exit the White House in 1996, the Republican Party was caught in a little bit of a crisis. Fiscal conservatives and paleo-conservatives united behind Vice-President Ross Perot, who promised to deliver “more good policies, more good practices, and more of less government and taxes.” Perot’s support was very strong among westerners and opponents of Kemp’s trade policies. Perhaps his most vocal advocate was conservative advocate Pat Buchanan. Buchanan focused his message at social conservatives skeptical of Perot’s pro-choice, pro-gay rights, and pro-gun control policies: “Mr. Perot is the best candidate for the nomination because, simply put, he will stand up for our interests before he stands up for anyone or anything else.”

But Perot was not the only prominent Republican in the field. Senator Dick Lugar of Indiana rallied around the supply-side economics of Kemp, focusing on increased deregulation and tax cuts to stimulate growth. Governors Pete Wilson of California and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee both focused on moderate policies and their governing experiences, while also focusing on pet issues (Wilson-illegal immigration, Alexander-education reform). Finally, businessman Steve Forbes jumped in the race to oppose Perot and his “isolationist, back-wards, policies). Polling showed Perot as the frontrunner, but with Lugar in a close second and Forbes in third.

The first race of the primary schedule came, as always, in Iowa. In the caucuses Perot would pick up the win, with Lugar in second, Alexander in third, Forbes in fourth, and Wilson in a weak fifth. Perot would pick up another big win in New Hampshire, as he rallied populist support against what he called “the establishment leaders of the party who don’t want to see a people’s candidate win!” In the following races, Lugar would do quite well in the Midwest, with Alexander picking up victories in the south, with Wilson winning only his home-state of California, and Forbes winning in some of the more business friendly areas.

Perot’s solid victory would still rub some Republicans the wrong way, especially with his speech at the convention: “We are still the party of Lincoln, still the party of TR, still the party of Dewey, and still the party of Kemp. We are not the party of business; we are not the party of Wall Street. We are not the party of any group. We are a party of individuals. A party of people.” Perot would choose Pete Wilson as his Vice-Presidential nominee to appeal to conservatives on the issue of illegal immigration.

1996 Democratic Primaries

While Ross Perot ran through the Republican Field with his populist rhetoric and tacit support of the President, the Democratic field lacked a clear frontrunner. Neither Gore nor Schroeder jumped into the race, while several lesser-known Democrats jumped into the field.

Early frontrunners were New Jersey Senator Bill Bradley, Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut, Senator Jim Folsom Jr. of Alabama, and New Hampshire Governor Jeanne Shaheen. Governors Ann Richards and Doug Wilder both declined to run, instead stating to focus on their local governing. The race, filled with “small-shots” seemed like it had little shot of doing much good in the general election. However the race would prove to be surprising for many, both in the outside and the inside.

Entering Iowa, the polls showed a slight lead for Bradley, who had made popular his moderate views and focus on reform. However, in what was a major upset, Senator Folsom of Alabama would beat Bradley by five points by running a populist focused campaign. In New Hampshire Bradley would make the risky decision to take on Shaheen in an attempt to regain his frontrunner status. This would end up backfiring as Shaheen would win by 12 points over Bradley. The next race in Delaware would favor Dodd, but once again Folsom’s support among working class voters and farmers would give him the win and make him the favorite. Folsom would continue to pick up win after win, with Bradley scoring wins only in New Jersey, Dodd in some of the more liberal states, and Shaheen winning in upper New England. Folsom’s surprise win would set him up as the Democratic nominee heading into the convention.

At the convention, Folsom would shift the focus to that of the common people: “The Democratic Party that I grew up in was the party of the people. And you know what, it still is. We are still the party of the unions, the miners, the steel workers. We are still the party of the teachers, the janitors, and the hotel workers. And yes, we are still the party of the farmers, the fishermen, and the buss drivers. We are, as we always have been, the party of the people, and this November we will show it!” Folsom would choose New York Governor Mario Cuomo as his Vice-Presidential Nominee to balance the ticket geographically and ideologically.

[hcallega]

1996 Presidential Election

Perot vs. Folsom. A classic matchup of two southern populists fighting to take the White House. Both sides lined up the endorsements and the money. Labor, southerners, liberals, and Catholics stood by Folsom, a product of a New Deal Democratic Household. Anti-tax, isolationist, and business groups supported Perot. Now the real question was who would win it.

Polls initially showed a dead heat, as Kemp’s popularity had positive effects for Perot, but Folsom’s charismatic campaign style wooed over many undecideds. The key issues in the campaign were primarily domestic: deficit reduction, health care, and the economy. Perot came down generally as center-right, however he came to the left on some issues. Folsom was generally a liberal, combined with social conservative. Perot pledged to be a “Reformer with Results”, while also making clear that he supported “Government of, by, and for the people...not the monied interests”. Folsom would campaign on traditional southern populist rhetoric, stating that “I grew up looking up to Roosevelt, Wallace, Huey Long, and my father” and pledging to “put the people first.”

Going into the debates, held two weeks before the general election, the polls showed that Folsom had taken a slight lead in the polls over Perot, primarily due to his energetic campaign swings through the country that featured country artists, local politicians, and as always, “Little Jim” himself. Perot’s campaign was more national in theme, as he faired better speaking to the cameras and Sunday morning talk show hosts than to the crowds of people chanting “Ross for Boss!” Nonetheless his campaign still held a large lead in advertising, meaning that a victory in the debates could be the opportunity he needed to get his campaign on track.

The three debates would each focus on an individual area: foreign policy, domestic issues, and economic issues. The debates would be a very open set up, a format both campaigns favored as it would allow them to both flex their rhetorical muscles. Perot was able to come off as both a supporter of the limited government policies of Kemp, as well as being more liberal on key issues: “We need to tackle this health care crisis in America. First off, we need to work to cut costs and focus on better health for our people. Secondly, we need to create a national health care system, and we can do that by expanding Medicare to all Americans.” Folsom was often caught off guard by Perot’s frankness to take liberal positions of health care, trade, and foreign policy. However he failed when he tried to create the perception that Perot was too much an outsider: “Mr. Perot hasn’t had a lick of government experience. Even as Vice-President he hasn’t done enough to earn the Presidency.” Perot would fire back with one of the most famous responses in debate history: “Senator Folsom this is not a monarchy. In America we don’t choose people by the number of years they’ve served in the Congress or what family they’re from. We choose them because of what they believe in and what they stand for!” The three debates were viewed as solid victories for the VP, leading to an equally solid victory on Election Night.

Perot/Wilson (R) 53%, 295 Electoral Votes
Folsom/Cuomo (D), 47%, 243 Electoral Votes

1996 Congressional Elections
Once again the Republicans made gains in the Senate, lowering the Democratic margin to 54-46, and presenting Perot with a unique opportunity to pass much of his generally moderate legislation. In the House the GOP regained the Majority.
Republican Gains
-Nebraska: Chuck Hagel
-Massachusetts: William Weld
-Montana: Dennis Rheberg

[hcallega]

   

Ross Perot's First Term

Most in Washington expected new President Ross Perot to have a rough time working with legislators, but few expected him to go on the war path so early. Following the election, the economy began to show signs of heading towards a recession, as the markets posted particularly weak showings following bad economic indicators. Addressing the nation from a town hall meeting, Perot, flanked by his economic team, took an aggressive approach to the issue: “We will not be held hostage by our debts, deficits, and downturns. When I enter the White House in January I will attack, attack, and attack to make sure that the economy will return to prosperity, without expanding the size of government.”

   The focus of Perot’s plan was on downsizing the size of the federal government, while raising taxes on the wealthy and business to reel in the debt. Perot believed strongly in a balanced budget, and was quick to remind the public that “FDR believed in a balanced budget to, and always planned to cut spending once the Depression ended.” However liberal critics often shot back “So did Hoover.” Perot also proposed a withdrawal from the North American Free Trade Zone. When many Republicans and Democrats alike criticized this plan, Perot did not waiver, claiming that “If I don’t have the votes, I’ll do it anyway!” Perot also supported expanding the role of the EPA to punish corporations that “played outside of the box”. The populist slant of his views rubbed many the wrong way, including Speaker Newt Gingrich: “The President seems to forget that this is a democracy and not a dictatorship. No one gave him absolute power, and no one here in Washington wants to see it happen.”

   Perot first major action was to withdraw from the NAFTZ via executive order. This was viewed as a very symbolic measure in criticism of the pro-business views of the GOP, and turned many conservatives against him. However Perot’s chief economic adviser, Pat Choate, would hit the talk shows to praise the move as “a huge leap in the right direction. Without doing this we would continue to loose jobs until there weren’t any left.” Perot would also propose a balanced budget to congress, cutting defense, welfare, social security, and education spending, while expanding EPA, AIDS, and Free Enterprise Zones and raising taxes. The budget ran into strong opposition initially, as Liberals and Conservatives alike saw it as a “blind shot to the back” (Ted Kennedy). Nonetheless, Democratic Deputy Whip Billy Tauzin (LA-3) took the initiative in passing the plan: “My entire legislative career I have been fighting for less spending so that our children and grandchildren won’t have to bear the weight that we have for so long. I am a Democrat, but first I am a public servant.” Tauzin would unite a coalition of Southern Democrats, moderate Republicans, and a big enough number of conservative Republicans and Liberal Democrats to get the budget passed. From that point on out, Tauzin would be Perot’s go to man for negotiations with the Democrats in congress.

   On foreign policy Perot would attempt to reel back US involvement in Eastern Europe and any foreign engagements for that matter. While openly denouncing Slobodan Milosevic, Perot refused to send military aid to fight the Serbian leader. NATO would succeed in pressuring Milosevic to withdraw, but many believed that had the US intervened they could have deposed of the leader. Former NATO commander Wesley Clark, who lead the US forces in Bosnia during Kemp’s term and had been named Commander of the Joint Chiefs by Perot, was one of the fiercest critics of Perot for this, and went as far as to step resign in1997 when Perot first refused to send aid: “I have been a military man all my life, but I cannot support the President for his inaction in the face of genocide.” Many began to wonder if Clark would make the run for public office in 2000 against Perot.

   For the rest of his first term, Perot would focus on less government in the economy, and generally on keeping the budget balanced, as well as passing welfare reform. However the economy would continue to dredge along and the Democrats would retake the House in 1998. With a Democratic Congress, many believed that Perot would not be able to keep his small-government views alive. However Perot saw this as an opportunity to pass the most liberal piece of his legislation: Health Care reform. Perot would propose a two part plan to congress in 1999. The first part was an attempt to cut costs and focus on prevention in the short term. This would go into effect immediately and would entail a personal mandate, rewards for doctors that produced results, and tax breaks to companies that already covered their employees. The plan would also offer a public option as a way to lower costs across the board. This plan was narrowly passed by congress, in part due to the public endorsement by Tauzin and Speaker David Bonior of Michigan. The second part would go into effect in 2009, and would essentially be a single payer system that would expand Medicare to cover every American. Perot called this plan “The single most important piece of legislation before congress since Social Security.” Republican Tom DeLay responded “I agree with the President. This is the most important legislation to DEFEAT in many, many years.” But this time Perot would not get the support he needed (Tauzin would endorse the plan as it still allowed for drug companies, his biggest supporters), and would actually get strong opposition as Mississippi Democrat Senator Trent Lott would join hands with House Minority Speaker Dick Armey of Texas in opposition to the plan on the Capitol Steps. In response, the bills cosponsor Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts would state: “I suppose that the President was right when he said that he would bring bipartisanship to Washington.” The plan failed decisively, as very few Democrats who were not liberal joined the President. Tauzin would call the defeat “A real shame. The Republicans even made Medicare into socialism!”

1998 Congressional Elections
Despite mixed approval ratings for President Perot, the Republicans would loose the majority in the House, while gaining in the Senate. The GOP gains in the Senate were primarily by moderates in states were Perot was quite popular. Mark Neumann received a great deal of support in particular, as Perot campaigned for him several times against Russ Feingold (ironically a Senator fairly supportive of Perot). The makeup of the Senate was now 51-49 GOP Majority.
Republican Gains
-Illinois: Peter Fitzgerald
-Ohio: George Voinovich
-Wisconsin: Mark Neumann
-Nevada: John Ensign
-California: Matt Fong

[hcallega]

I'm not sure when I'll do my next update, but training camp opens tomorow so I have football from 8:30-5:00 all day everyday (minus the weekends), so it might be a little while before my next update:

But here is a preview: Tough GOP primary, fan favorite DEM nominee, and some excitement throughout

[hcallega]

Really sorry to end the TL this way, so let me explain: Football is hell, fun as hell, but also hell on the body. So with practice from 9:00-4/5, it's simply too much to do the updates on a regular basis. In september I will start my 1940 TL, but that will only be at the end of each week. So now I will do a fairly in depth rap-up post.

In December of 1999, Ross Perot declared that he would not seek the Republican nomination for President, due in large part to strong opposition from conservatives. Senator John McCain would win the nomination, splitting the difference between the pro-Perot (Pat Choate and Pat Buchanan) and anti-perot (notably Steve Forbes and Orin Hatch). McCain would choose former RNC chairman and conservative activist Carroll Campbell. On the Democratic side, many would push for Perot to run (in great part due to his support for health care reform and his opposition to free trade), but he would decline. The early frontrunners were Senator Chris Dodd, General Wes Clark, Governor Doug Wilder (elected as an independent), and Governor Ann Richards. Dodd would unite liberals, but fail to much enthusiasm. Richards would run a rural populist campaign, while also appealing to liberals due to her pro-choice stance. She would win the nomination after a win in Iowa and a strong super Tuesday run. She would choose Clark as her VEEP.

In the general election, McCain would take an early lead as he drew support from both the anti-perot and pro-perot factions. However in May, Perot would declare his candidacy as an independent, claiming that "not since Henry Wallace has the political establishment of the incumbents party pushed the President out of the race. I wanted to run, but knew I would be attacked and insulted. Therefore, I am now running as an independent." Perot would focus his attacks on McCain, and help to let Richards get back in the race. In the debates, McCain and Perot would get into a shouting match, with Richards coming out as the most presidential. This would give her a boost in the polls she would never give up, as she would win the White House.

As President, Richards would focus on education and economic growth. For education she would pass a major education overhaul, nicknamed Robin Hood, that would draw on property tax revenue from rich school districts to pay for increased funding of poorer districts. Richards would also successfully oversee positive economic growth. On foreign policy, Richards would respond aggressively to the 9/11 attacks by "committing our troops to a true war against terror in Afganistan". Richards would also take a hard-line stance against Pakistan, and by 2008 most believed that Osama Bin Laden was dead, while Afganistan remained barely stable. In 2004, Richards would defeat Republican Colin Powell by a narrow margin, due in large part to the strong economy. In 2006, Richards would pass away and Clark would step in as President. Clark would continue Richards policies, while also focusing his foreign policy on taking on genocide and terrorism in other nations. However in the 2008 Presidential election, Clark would be challenged by Senator Jesse Jackson Jr. who would upset Clark in Iowa and end up winning the nomination with strong support from liberals, african-americans, and labor (a group upset with Clark's support for free trade policies). Jackson would pick Arkansas's populist governor Mike Huckabee as VEEP in a "United We Stand" ticket. Jackson would beat Mitt Romney in the general election.


So, any questions about what happened between 2000-2009?

[hcallega]

K, so i'm shifting it from Jackson to Ford Jr.

List of Presidents (9 Democrats, 5 Republicans)
Henry Wallace-D (1945-1949)
Tom Dewey-R (1949-1957)
Henry Wallace-D (1957-1961)
Nelson Rockefeller-R (1961-1965)
John Kennedy-D (1965-1971)
George Smathers-D (1971-1973)
Winthrop Rockefeller-R (1973-1977)
Ronald Reagan-D (1977-1981)
Robert Kennedy-D (1981-1989)
Jack Kemp-R (1989-1997)
Ross Perot-R (1997-2001)
Ann Richards-D (2001-2006)
Wesley Clark-D (2006-2009)
Harold Ford Jr.-D (2009-Present)

Ranking in terms of "Greatness"
1. Jack Kemp
2. Ronald Reagan
3. John Kennedy
4. Tom Dewey
5. Henry Wallace
6. Ann Richards
7. Nelson Rockefller
8. Ross Perot
9. Robert Kennedy
10. Winthrop Rockefeller
11. Wesley Clark
12. George Smathers

In terms of most Liberal (by OTL modern definition) conservative from top to bottom
1. Henry Wallace (moreso the first time)
2. Robert Kennedy
3. Nelson Rockefeller
4. Jack Kennedy
5. Ann Richards
6. Wes Clark
7. Tom Dewey
8. Ronald Reagan
9. Ross Perot
10. Winthrop Rockefeller
11. George Smathers
12. Jack Kemp

[hcallega]

Wow Historico! Thanks for the recap. I suppose this is what it feels like for J.K. Rowling or George Lucas when people get into their work. I would only really change one thing: Replace Mike Huckabee with Jon Kyl in 2008, as Huckabee is still a Democrat ITTL

[hcallega]

It would be really cool to see some election maps for 2000, 2004, and 2008.

Here ya Go!

2000-I forgot to add that Perot ran as an independent in the summer, due to his unhappiness with the GOP!

Richards/Clark (D)-277
McCain/Campbell (R)-230
Perot/Choate (I)-31
The election hinges on Texas, Ohio, and Florida. The closest is Florida, but Texas is where Perot did the strongest. In her victory speech Richards would claim that "Tonight, I'm proud to say that Texas went pink!"

2004

Richards/Clark (D)-336
Campbell/Alexander (R)-202

2008

Ford Jr./Jack Reed (D)-316
Romney/Kyl (R)-222
Paul/King (I)-0

[hcallega]

Can you give us some details on the the political spectrum of the Democrats and Republicans?

Absolutely.

Democrats
Social Issues: Pretty moderate, but very big tent. Working class Catholics and Southerners are fairly conservative, but minorities and liberals are more liberal. Party leadership is generally more liberal than conservative.
Domestic Issues: Center-Left. Supportive of New Deal esque domestic programs, but more varied on bigger social programs. Liberals are more supportive of big government programs, such as universal health care and welfare, whereas conservatives are obviously not.
Economic Issues: Left. Catholics, Liberals, working class, and minorities are all pretty united as liberal on the economy. Southerners are the only group that are somewhat conservative on this.
Foreign policy: Center. Large neo-conservative chunk, as well as southerners and working class who are more pro-military.

Republicans
Social Issues: Center-center right. Northeastern and suburban voters much more moderate, westerners more conservative.
Domestic Issues: Center-right. Not entirely anti-big government, more libertarian than conservative.
Economic Issues: Center-Right. Pro free market, pro-buisness, pro-tax cut.
Foreign policy: Generally center-right, but more isolationists (Perot esque voters) than in OTL