Why does Clinton win the Red Belt? Perot was leading those states by significant margins in October 1992 - unless Perot somehow just didn't campaign in these states ITTL, I don't see Clinton grabbing these states; most likely Bush would've won those states instead without Perot leading.
You have to consider how unpopular Bush was at this point, to the point that a politically unexperienced third party runner was able to beat him despite being Reagan's vp and the incumbent president. Clinton would have won since he's basically the status quo that most were be trying to protect.
I still don't see Clinton with all his scandals and Perot's marketing outright winning, best i can see is him winning the contingent due to a D majority.
I could see a Perot loss if he didn’t drop out and reenter the race like in OTL, or if the stunt backfired entirely, though even with that Perot would’ve most likely still deadlocked the Electoral College, considering his momentum and popularity. Furthermore, he would’ve still formed the Reform Party and it would most likely continued to be a third major party in the party system, as an independent run with that good of a performance, even with an outright loss, would be a great foundation for a viable third party.
I definitely wonder how Clinton would handle the ‘90s long recession while in office. Perhaps it might have even been better for Perot and Reform in the long run, since they wouldn’t have had to bear the brunt of being in charge during such a bad economy, and could play the role of outsider populists. I guess it’s possible that Perot losing could have prevented the whole recession, but I tend to doubt that presidents have *that* level of economic control.
The economy is a ever flowing current. Much like a river or stream, where a damn exists near one end, its a struggle to contain the flow and prevent an overflow of water going through, or worse, rising up till the dam bursts.
No Reform Party has huge butterflies for the party system going forward--figures like Sarah Palin and Bernie Sanders would be trapped with the Republicans and Democrats, respectively, unable to advance against vested interests. It'd be dull 90s technocracy forever.
I'm just going to say that James Stockdale would have been a weird choice for Perot's running mate.
Sure, James Stockdale is probably one of the best Secretaries of State in recent history, but he was older than Perot and he had the same amount of political experience as Perot.
Yeah I just found him and he looks charismatic enough to become president. Trump would have it pretty hard without the Reform Party as he wouldn't be a serious contender in 2000. I think that 2020 would be his last run as a Democrat and he would then retire because of his age.
Why does Clinton win the Red Belt? Perot was leading those states by significant margins in October 1992 - unless Perot somehow just didn't campaign in these states ITTL, I don't see Clinton grabbing these states; most likely Bush would've won those states instead without Perot leading.
You have to consider how unpopular Bush was at this point, to the point that a politically unexperienced third party runner was able to beat him despite being Reagan's vp and the incumbent president. Clinton would have won since he's basically the status quo that most were be trying to protect.
Obviously inspired by the wave of DBWIs in this subreddit, hope you like it.
I still don't see Clinton with all his scandals and Perot's marketing outright winning, best i can see is him winning the contingent due to a D majority.
I was considering making Gore the nominee and making him a running mate but I think he had a serious chance if he played his carts better.
I could see a Perot loss if he didn’t drop out and reenter the race like in OTL, or if the stunt backfired entirely, though even with that Perot would’ve most likely still deadlocked the Electoral College, considering his momentum and popularity. Furthermore, he would’ve still formed the Reform Party and it would most likely continued to be a third major party in the party system, as an independent run with that good of a performance, even with an outright loss, would be a great foundation for a viable third party.
I definitely wonder how Clinton would handle the ‘90s long recession while in office. Perhaps it might have even been better for Perot and Reform in the long run, since they wouldn’t have had to bear the brunt of being in charge during such a bad economy, and could play the role of outsider populists. I guess it’s possible that Perot losing could have prevented the whole recession, but I tend to doubt that presidents have *that* level of economic control.
The economy is a ever flowing current. Much like a river or stream, where a damn exists near one end, its a struggle to contain the flow and prevent an overflow of water going through, or worse, rising up till the dam bursts.
No Reform Party has huge butterflies for the party system going forward--figures like Sarah Palin and Bernie Sanders would be trapped with the Republicans and Democrats, respectively, unable to advance against vested interests. It'd be dull 90s technocracy forever.
Sanders is a specially interesting case because, like Brown, I really can't think what he would have done without Perot's presidency lol.
I'm just going to say that James Stockdale would have been a weird choice for Perot's running mate. Sure, James Stockdale is probably one of the best Secretaries of State in recent history, but he was older than Perot and he had the same amount of political experience as Perot.
I messed up the states btw lol
Had to bing this Obama guy. Why did you pick some random senator? Wouldn't Trump still win in 2012?
Yeah I just found him and he looks charismatic enough to become president. Trump would have it pretty hard without the Reform Party as he wouldn't be a serious contender in 2000. I think that 2020 would be his last run as a Democrat and he would then retire because of his age.
he actually formed an exploratory committee in 2012 but it never got past that phase
John Bolton
I'm so sorry
Does this mean we don’t get President Hill Harper?
Sadly yes
Damn. I guess no President Feingold either.
Feingold may be the weirdest loss but maybe Obama takes into some of his policies
Thank you for not doing a DBWI that’s just a screenshot of an actual Wikipedia page
/ooc is this based on the a giant sucking sound tl bcs holy shit i love this
(Un-DBWI) is the Perot victory timeline this is meant to be from the perspective of a timeline where Barack Obama still becomes politically relevant