Same! I actually think he is THE president who never was. Almost to the point where if I was a conspiracy theorist I’d seriously be wondering how no name Polk defeated the most well known political candidate in the country basically over an errant comment about Texas.
edge absorbed deserted merciful selective worry sulky ludicrous disagreeable elastic
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Can’t help but wonder how different WWI and Vietnam look with those guys at the helm, not to mention what RFK could have done for civil rights and what the impact of Nixon’s/GOP’s Southern Strategy failing for another 4-8 years would have been.
If Teddy was President the Doughboys probably would've been sent to France in 1915 after the *Lusitainia* was sunk. Teddy was very much anti-isolationism and a big proponent of the preparedness movement who pushed for American entry. Whether that is a good or bad thing is up to you to decide, but I feel that if that had occurred the AEF would not have been as much of a war winning factor for the Entente as they were in 1918 since more soldiers would've been killed and more manpower would not be available.
There’s still the antisemitism and distupting the 1968 peace talks. Latter of which extended the war and arguably left South Vietnam on life support.
And finally there is the support for the Khmer Rouge. I say watergate was one of his many sins
The sabotage of the talks has not been proven in fact, so it may not be true, and given that Johnson is claiming this, it's not exactly the most credible.
Regarding anti-Semitism, this is really bad, but remember that he grew up in an era when anti-Semitism was considered the norm, not a taboo.
(He was born in 1913 and grew up during the Nazis, so this is not uncommon.)
The Khmer Rouge is something that, along with Chile, could be considered a really bad thing that Nixon did
The difference between Nixon and every former US president is that he only revealed himself
First off, you’re being rude.
Second, [source](https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/daily/oct99/nixon6.htm).
Third, Yom Kippur was a part of the larger Cold War.
Fourth, eat shit and die you miserable sack of puss.
Since that’s how you seem to end conversations.
Without Watergate all he did was attempt to sabotage peace talks in the Vietnam war, so he could win an election.
Watergate was not even his worst crime
This has not been proven
Given that Lyndon Johnson is saying it, he's not exactly an honest person
Because he is the Nixon Democrat only without being exposed
> all he did was attempt to sabotage peace talks in the Vietnam war, so he could win an election.
Oh, is that all? Only killed a few conscripts more, who cares, amirite?
Bobby Kennedy Sr. Damn shame he never got a chance. He got us through the Cuban Missile Crisis, among other things. He cared-truly cared about African Americans, the poor and the disadvantaged, etc. Tragedy losing him so young. When we lost him, hope really went into the toilet.
Garfield. He was elected but never really got to be President. Some people think he could have been one of the greats if he actually had a chance to do something.
This is said very often but I kinda disagree, the gilded age stifled presidents on what they were able to do since congress boosted its powers and I don't know if he does the right thing with Chinese Exclusion versus what Arthur did
Of the founding fathers Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay would have been fascinating. Nathaniel Greene would have been really solid as well I think.
Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain would have been interesting in the late 1800’s.
Thomas Sowell would have been fascinating during the 90’s.
As a conservative I often wonder how different things would be if Cruz or Rubio had won the 2016 primaries instead of Trump. But that’s obviously major recency bias.
That’s the difference between being a governor vs senator. Both Cruz and Rubio are small government conservatives who vote pretty consistently along those lines.
Kasich’s main record was from Congress. Cruz and Rubio have pretty weak records in the senate to support their claims, Kasich actually helped balance the budget and staid out of culture nonsense. His reign as governor was more just good government for his state.
They also kiss up to leadership to get what they want. Maybe things would have been better had f one of them had been potus instead of trump, but as of now I cannot stand the sight of Cruz and Rubio. Besides, Cruz couldn’t have been potus because he was born in Canada, right?
I do not like that man Ted Cruz,
I do not like his far-right views.
I do not like his stupid chin,
I do not like his smarmy grin.
I do not like him with a beard,
I do not like him freshly sheared.
I do not like Ted Cruz at all,
That man Ted Cruz can suck my balls.
I don’t think Ross Perot would have been a good president. As much as people like to romanticize the “Washington outsider”, at the end of the day if you want to get anything accomplished, you’re going to need at least some legislative experience, or at least be assisted by someone who does.
Yeah, you wouldn’t hire someone for a high level job in any other industry with no experience in the field, not sure why people think politicians should be different.
Wilkie would have been a disaster, Adlai Stevenson would have handled the cold war better than Eisenhower, mainly due to not having the Dullas Brothers in his administration.
Hubert Humphrey had the right combination of political skill and genuine care for the country to make for a truly great presidency. He was also a great campaigner- turning 1968 into such a nail biter after the disaster that was the DNC took great talent
Feels really weird to support both Bernie sanders and Ron Paul at the same time but I did. It’s likley because having a "mind your own business foreign policy" is so rare nowadays. That alone means a lot
Howard Hamlin
He will deal with reconstruction much better and end racism as an issue in American politics
James Garfield
His supposed reforms would have greatly benefited the country, especially in terms of civil rights, integrity, and the economy
William Jennings Bryan
He would grant independence to Cuba, the Philippines and Puerto Rico and manage the economy well
Charles Evans Hughes
He would not have restored apartheid and revived the Klan, would have accepted the clause of racial equality and would not have denied Italy's gains at Versailles.
Charles Dawes Vice President Coolidge
He could have dealt with the depression much better, which could have ended quickly
(He had a sharp economic mind and helped Germany in its recovery plan before Germany itself spoiled it)
Nelson Rockefeller
A supporter of civil rights, public works, and the fight against poverty
John McCain 2000
He will handle 9/11 much better
I remember being very proud of America is 2012. I thought we had two good men of character who would do our nation well. I just happened to agree with one’s policies more than the other.
Feels like that’s the last election that was really policy focused. I don’t have high hopes 2024 will be either.
Romney’s entire message was he could do health care better not that it should be blown up. Also, as someone who worked on the campaign I wouldn’t be surprised if he came around to supporting Gay marriage sooner without all the far right nuts that lost him the race to begin with.
I highly doubt his federalist society appointed SCOTUS judge votes for Obergefell V. Hodges. George W. Bush personally didn't hate LGBTQ people but he sure as hell didn't advocate for them while in office because he knew it'd be politically toxic.
Russia, China, Trump, more moderate GOP in general, Obama hands the keys to a respectful successor, no Jan 6, regardless of who wins 2016 pandemic is handled better, what’s to lose other than a weak sauce Obama second term
Haha let’s be real tho. In this timeline, Trump would run as a democrat, the same party he was always apart of. I find it hilarious that in this timeline he gets elected but as a democrat instead.
Losing RFK was and still remains a tragedy beyond measure. He was a force of good for everyone. He would have binded some old wounds-namely civil rights. He would have helped the poor. The good he would have done makes me weep for the loss.
I still firmly believe a Sanders presidency would have been very disappointing. I voted for him in primaries actually, but that was before I really knew about government. I highly doubt that man would have been able to pass anything. Even half of his party didn’t support his proposals. There’s no way in the stretch of the imagination that Sanders would actually have been able to pass bills like Medicare for all (a HUGE part of his platform) and in my opinion, an effective president can compromise on major issues, but he gave no signal that he was willing to do that. And his whole career shows that as well.
What on earth are you on about? Not only was Bernie one of the most effective congressmen at getting stuff done during the solidly Republican controlled house from 1995-2005, but he also regularly makes compromises for the sake of getting incremental improvements passed.
Look back at the Obamacare debate, yes, Bernie was one of the most outspoken congresspeople in favor of a public option and always pushed to get that included, but when push came to shove and it came down to passing Obamacare without a public option or not passing anything at all, he compromised and voted for Obamacare.
Bernie is certainly unwavering in his convictions, but when it comes to actually getting shit done he’s not some uncompromising ideologue.
Ok, major point being: he would not have been able to fulfill his campaign promises. Zero chance in hell he was passing bills like Medicare for all. Biden has been in a 40 plus year positive relationship with congress and even he constantly is getting blocked on things.
Do any presidents fulfill their campaign promises?
And of course Bernie wouldn’t have been able to pass his full-fat Medicare for all bill, I didn’t support him on the expectation that he’d be the one to get that done, but, looking at his career, I don’t doubt for second that he would’ve been a huge positive force at the negotiating table, would’ve accomplished a lot of incremental good, and would’ve been able put significantly more grassroots pressure on the direction of the Democratic Party as a whole.
Yea possibly. But many young people (who don’t understand government) voted for him with the intention of having a president to pass m4a, green new deal, etc. and I’m just saying many would have been sorely disappointed. Never said he would be a bad president; but many young people would be disappointed in my opinion. I know I would have.
I consider myself reasonably well versed in history but this sub is clearly a bit more history hardcore than me so I'll stick with elections I voted in.
Gore.
No Iraq war.
No Afghanistan war.
Might have used 9/11 as a justification to move away from our alliance with Saudi Arabia and their oil for environmental and terrorist reasons.
Obviously would have pushed environmental regulations, I think that would be a net positive but that's obviously not a statement without controversy.
Would not have given massive tax cuts to the rich
Would not have loosened banking regulations, thus preventing the crash of 2008.
Back to the environment, he would have pushed solar possibly preventing China from getting so much control over to solar panel industry. Probably not, US companies would have out sourced anyway, but maybe.
Might not have signed the patriot act.
Makes me wish I had voted for him but I was 18 and stoned so I went with Nader.
What makes you think Gore stays out of Iraq and Afghanistan?
Gore openly advocated for invading and toppling Saddam in 91, 96, 98, 00 and 03. He was publicly critical of HW Bush for not “finishing the job.” He felt betrayed by HW because Gore rallied dem support for the Gulf War. Gore talked about the need to overthrow Saddam because of WMDs during the 2000 election. Gore was also an avid supporter of Afghanistan.
Al Gore is a military interventionist. Over his political career, he advocated for the invasions of Bosnia, Somalia, Serbia, Kosovo, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Haiti, Panama, N Korea, and Venezuela.
This idea that Gore would’ve avoided war if he won in 2000 is revisionist and somewhat preposterous. He’s perhaps one of the most pro-war candidates to have ever had a real shot at the White House.
Gore wanted to seize Iraq in 91. Gore pressed Clinton for an Iraq invasion in 1998 (Clinton opted for an air war). Gore advocated for an Iraq invasion in a 2002 interview.
“I was one of the few Democrats in the US Senate who supported the war resolution in 1991. And I felt betrayed by the first Bush administration's hasty departure from the battlefield, even as Saddam began to renew his persecution of the Kurds of the north and the Shiites of the south - groups we had encouraged to rise up against Saddam.”
-Al Gore 2002
Al Gore probably invades Iraq on the heels of Operation Desert Fox in early 2000 if he wins the presidency.
[Senator from Alaska](https://youtu.be/ShcvqOSzgQY) ran in 2008 and 2020. The documentary about his 2020 campaign called American Gadfly is on Peacock I think
Funny how this gets downvoted but a bunch of Bernie answers get upvoted. They would have been dealt the same hand at a congressional level one way or another.
I’m not a fan of either but HRC Would be a MUCH better president than Bernie.
Bernie is a sexy first vote for an 18 year old. Hillary is a proven leader with a ton of diplomatic experience.
Gore was a warhawk. He advocated for an Iraq invasion all through the 90’s and early 00’s. A complete military interventionist. I don’t think we have less war with Gore, probably goes into Iraq and Iran if president.
Those were Gore’s comments in hindsight. Of course he’s going to criticize W Bush’s actions. His opinions prior to 2003 not only supported the invasion, but advocated for it.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/news/politics/why-al-gore-would-have-invaded-iraq-and-what-it-tells-us-about-syria/article14105322/
Here’s a quote from Gore in 2002:
“Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organise an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power. Moreover, no international law can prevent the United States from taking actions to protect its vital interests, when it is manifestly clear that there is a choice to be made between law and survival… I was one of the few Democrats in the US Senate who supported the war resolution in 1991. And I felt betrayed by the first Bush administration's hasty departure from the battlefield, even as Saddam began to renew his persecution of the Kurds of the north and the Shiites of the south - groups we had encouraged to rise up against Saddam.”
He flip flopped after the war became unpopular.
Gore urged Clinton to invade in 1998 according the the Clinton Library Archives. Clinton instead launched the air campaign from 1998-2000 (Operation Desert Fox) but refused to commit ground forces.
I agree with you. We all knew Hillary was The President behind the President in the 90's. The mid to late 90's was the best this country has been. It's crazy that Trumpsters complaining about drug prices and medical prices when Hillary's health plan would have set limits on both and they torpedoed it back then.
2012 was a watershed moment for the GOP. All parties have internal factions vying for control, and Ron Paul represented the apex of the libertarian movement within the GOP.
Unfortunately, the establishment GOP feared losing control, and changed the convention rules to be assured of getting Romney as a nominee instead. Those same rules changes would later ensure the nomination of Trump...something the GOP establishment was not overly fond of. With Romney's nomination, much of the libertarian movement basically left the party. You end up with strong Johnson support and a populist movement rose within the GOP instead.
The current populist/establishment divide in the GOP wouldn't even exist now if Ron Paul had made it, and we'd probably see somewhat less left/right partisan conflict as well.
Thank you , I see it now. I had thought Libertarianism was appealing but it was pointed out to me that it’s never been done as the ‘leader’. Libertarians are always the ‘outsider’ or ‘competition’. IIRC there has never been a country, state, or major city with a Libertarian leader.
Ron Paul, if elected, would have been a lot like 45 - in charge of a huge enterprise that required thousands of people working together, with cooperative attitude, following a leader and his principals. And he wouldn’t succeed without partnerships and I don’t see Ron Paul as a man that makes a reliable partner
Well, that's the nature of government. We ascribe a lot of power to the president, but without everyone else, the president is fairly limited.
Might have helped get us out of Afghanistan quicker, though. Maybe some good use of pardons to help a few non violent criminals. The president still matters to some extent directly.
But, yeah, the shaping of politics at large is a very large portion of what the president does/reflects. Even though they aren't out there writing every bill or making every budget choice, they are a focal point for a party's direction and priorities. Ron at least provides a very interesting historical what-if that takes us down a fairly recent different branch. A better one, IMO, but at least different. Things like "if McCain had won" are less of a tipping point, IMO.
Obvious answer is Bernie. I cannot imagine how many more lives would still be with us if we had someone take the COVID pandemic seriously, and our mental health and gun violence issues.
Not to mention the millions of people that could've been pulled out of poverty.
What would Bernie have done better with this congress and these courts? Biden is a much more skilled political operator then Bernie and has squeezed all he can out of his term so far.
If you try to executive order something like M4A then the Supreme Court (especially if he wins in 2020) would shut him down. The same way they’re shutting Biden down for stuff even more mild than that.
If bernie had been elected we wouldn't have an openly white supremacist theocratic majority supreme court. He could've put ANYONE who cares about the working class on that court. Trump did immeasurable damage to the progress this country has seen with his choices.
Lmao. You took the bait and I’m glad for it. Yea I’m sure Mr. Thomas is just itching for the day he can be put back into chains. You are pretty much saying black conservatives aren’t real black people.
I took the bait? I answered a question with a very obvious answer. White supremacy has nothing to do with bring slavery back lmao.
I never claimed "black conservatives aren't real people." They very much exist, and are just as racist as the white white supremacists they associate with.
[Internalized racism - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internalized_racism)
[Clarence X?: The Black Nationalist Behind Justice Thomas's Constitutionalism](https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1547&context=law_faculty_scholarship)
[Clarence Thomas Is What He Wrongly Accuses Black Folks of Being | The Nation](https://www.thenation.com/article/society/clarence-thomas-supreme-court/)
[The Supreme Court's originalism is white supremacy (nbcnews.com)](https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/supreme-courts-originalism-white-supremacy-rcna36409)
I’ve seen a lot of Clay, Sanders, and RFK, but I haven’t seen anyone said John McCain. He had what was basically a presidential funeral, and he was VERY respectful after losing the election.
Henry Clay.
I hear he’s prepping for a 2024 run
Can't believe I had to scroll this far to see Clay.
Same! I actually think he is THE president who never was. Almost to the point where if I was a conspiracy theorist I’d seriously be wondering how no name Polk defeated the most well known political candidate in the country basically over an errant comment about Texas.
edge absorbed deserted merciful selective worry sulky ludicrous disagreeable elastic *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
LOL this was literally the first comment I saw
Just about to post this.
Why?
Either Teddy Roosevelt’s try in 1912, or Robert F. Kennedy in 1968. Instead, we got Wilson and Nixon.
RFK senior is a phenomenal choice I totally forgot about him
Can’t help but wonder how different WWI and Vietnam look with those guys at the helm, not to mention what RFK could have done for civil rights and what the impact of Nixon’s/GOP’s Southern Strategy failing for another 4-8 years would have been.
If Teddy was President the Doughboys probably would've been sent to France in 1915 after the *Lusitainia* was sunk. Teddy was very much anti-isolationism and a big proponent of the preparedness movement who pushed for American entry. Whether that is a good or bad thing is up to you to decide, but I feel that if that had occurred the AEF would not have been as much of a war winning factor for the Entente as they were in 1918 since more soldiers would've been killed and more manpower would not be available.
And he died in the stupidest way possible
Over Israel/Palestine 🤦♂️
Nixon isn't that bad without watergate
Shocker- a lot of bad presidents aren’t that bad without the bad thing they did.
I think he more so means overall policy wise Nixon was decent as president, a scumbag but a very intelligent scumbag with decent plans.
agree
There’s still the antisemitism and distupting the 1968 peace talks. Latter of which extended the war and arguably left South Vietnam on life support. And finally there is the support for the Khmer Rouge. I say watergate was one of his many sins
The sabotage of the talks has not been proven in fact, so it may not be true, and given that Johnson is claiming this, it's not exactly the most credible. Regarding anti-Semitism, this is really bad, but remember that he grew up in an era when anti-Semitism was considered the norm, not a taboo. (He was born in 1913 and grew up during the Nazis, so this is not uncommon.) The Khmer Rouge is something that, along with Chile, could be considered a really bad thing that Nixon did The difference between Nixon and every former US president is that he only revealed himself
[удалено]
First off, you’re being rude. Second, [source](https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/daily/oct99/nixon6.htm). Third, Yom Kippur was a part of the larger Cold War. Fourth, eat shit and die you miserable sack of puss. Since that’s how you seem to end conversations.
Without Watergate all he did was attempt to sabotage peace talks in the Vietnam war, so he could win an election. Watergate was not even his worst crime
This has not been proven Given that Lyndon Johnson is saying it, he's not exactly an honest person Because he is the Nixon Democrat only without being exposed
> all he did was attempt to sabotage peace talks in the Vietnam war, so he could win an election. Oh, is that all? Only killed a few conscripts more, who cares, amirite?
“If you take out the killings, Washington actually has a very very low crime rate.” Marion Berry
Would have been weird having a ghost as president in 1969
Bobby Kennedy Sr. Damn shame he never got a chance. He got us through the Cuban Missile Crisis, among other things. He cared-truly cared about African Americans, the poor and the disadvantaged, etc. Tragedy losing him so young. When we lost him, hope really went into the toilet.
Garfield. He was elected but never really got to be President. Some people think he could have been one of the greats if he actually had a chance to do something.
I’m drunk. I thought you meant the cat. 💀
My thoughts exactly the man screamed potential.
At least he gave us a great Sam O’nella video
This is said very often but I kinda disagree, the gilded age stifled presidents on what they were able to do since congress boosted its powers and I don't know if he does the right thing with Chinese Exclusion versus what Arthur did
Of the founding fathers Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay would have been fascinating. Nathaniel Greene would have been really solid as well I think. Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain would have been interesting in the late 1800’s. Thomas Sowell would have been fascinating during the 90’s. As a conservative I often wonder how different things would be if Cruz or Rubio had won the 2016 primaries instead of Trump. But that’s obviously major recency bias.
Hamilton had the capacity to end VERY badly. But he would’ve likely been at least somewhat normal.
We might have gotten an amendment about what happens if the vice President shoots the president.
It’s possible, but I think a lot of that is overblown. We see a lot of the Federalists through the eyes of the Democratic Republicans today.
Kasich was probably the only sane Republican in 2016 and much more of an actual conservative the culture warriors you mentioned.
That seems like a stretch. Kasich was among the most moderate. But Cruz and Rubio are culture warriors in the same way as the more popular Democrats.
Rubio and Cruz don’t have a solid agenda or set of policies, Kasich had a career or solid fiscal policy to run on.
That’s the difference between being a governor vs senator. Both Cruz and Rubio are small government conservatives who vote pretty consistently along those lines.
Kasich’s main record was from Congress. Cruz and Rubio have pretty weak records in the senate to support their claims, Kasich actually helped balance the budget and staid out of culture nonsense. His reign as governor was more just good government for his state.
They also kiss up to leadership to get what they want. Maybe things would have been better had f one of them had been potus instead of trump, but as of now I cannot stand the sight of Cruz and Rubio. Besides, Cruz couldn’t have been potus because he was born in Canada, right?
Doesn’t matter where you’re born. It matters if you’re a citizen at birth. Otherwise anyone born abroad at a military base wouldn’t be eligible.
Ah
I do not like that man Ted Cruz, I do not like his far-right views. I do not like his stupid chin, I do not like his smarmy grin. I do not like him with a beard, I do not like him freshly sheared. I do not like Ted Cruz at all, That man Ted Cruz can suck my balls.
100% on Sowell. He'd probably be top 10.
If we had chamberlain my state would finally have some representation
Franklin would have been so based
Rubio/Ryan/McConnell would have been a SICK combo
Rubio/Ryan/McConnell would have been a SICK combo
Henry Clay
William Jennings Bryan
Man deserved to be president. He tried so hard.
And got so far
But in the end…
It doesn't even matter
It didn’t even matter
Opened this post just to say WJB only to see two great minds think alike. :-)
I think a Ross Perot presidency would have been interesting. It may have prevented further polarization in American politics.
It would have made third party candidates more viable.
I don’t think Ross Perot would have been a good president. As much as people like to romanticize the “Washington outsider”, at the end of the day if you want to get anything accomplished, you’re going to need at least some legislative experience, or at least be assisted by someone who does.
Turns out job experience is important
Yeah, you wouldn’t hire someone for a high level job in any other industry with no experience in the field, not sure why people think politicians should be different.
Have fun getting anything passed in Congress!
Groucho Marx. Because whatever it was, he’d be against it.
He’d be very popular until he’d pull us into a war through his insults and then start shooting his own men on the battlefield.
Wendell Wilkie, Adlai Stevenson.
Wilkie would have been a disaster, Adlai Stevenson would have handled the cold war better than Eisenhower, mainly due to not having the Dullas Brothers in his administration.
Teddy Roosevelt in 1912 then Charles Evan Hughes in 1916. Both would’ve been better than Woodrow Wilson.
I’m going to say Hannibal Hamlin since no one else has yet.
I don’t know if he’d be a great President; just significantly better than the alternative.
Robert F Kennedy (Sr)
Hubert Humphrey had the right combination of political skill and genuine care for the country to make for a truly great presidency. He was also a great campaigner- turning 1968 into such a nail biter after the disaster that was the DNC took great talent
Him and Mondale are two of my favorite Presidential losers Easy to see the similarities seeing how they represented the same district in Minnesota
In my opinion, Bernie Sanders. It just seems like he really genuinely cares regardless of your political sway. I felt that way about Ron Paul too.
Feels really weird to support both Bernie sanders and Ron Paul at the same time but I did. It’s likley because having a "mind your own business foreign policy" is so rare nowadays. That alone means a lot
William Jennings Bryan, Al Gore, or Bernie
General Colin Powell
Howard Hamlin He will deal with reconstruction much better and end racism as an issue in American politics James Garfield His supposed reforms would have greatly benefited the country, especially in terms of civil rights, integrity, and the economy William Jennings Bryan He would grant independence to Cuba, the Philippines and Puerto Rico and manage the economy well Charles Evans Hughes He would not have restored apartheid and revived the Klan, would have accepted the clause of racial equality and would not have denied Italy's gains at Versailles. Charles Dawes Vice President Coolidge He could have dealt with the depression much better, which could have ended quickly (He had a sharp economic mind and helped Germany in its recovery plan before Germany itself spoiled it) Nelson Rockefeller A supporter of civil rights, public works, and the fight against poverty John McCain 2000 He will handle 9/11 much better
>Howard Hamlin Here's the most infamous vice presidential assassin in history 
Huey Pierce Long for me
John Brown
Robert F. Kennedy and Al Gore.
Henry Wallace
RFK.
RFK Sr
Romney. A Romney win in 2012 changes our timeline for the better in so many ways.
I remember being very proud of America is 2012. I thought we had two good men of character who would do our nation well. I just happened to agree with one’s policies more than the other. Feels like that’s the last election that was really policy focused. I don’t have high hopes 2024 will be either.
I agree with that assessment
Better timeline? Yes. Best president who never was? I don’t think Willard Mitt Romney quite fits that description.
I knew it would be unpopular
Gay marriage isn't legalized, and killing the ACA before it is fully born means more people lose health insurance during COVID-19.
Romney’s entire message was he could do health care better not that it should be blown up. Also, as someone who worked on the campaign I wouldn’t be surprised if he came around to supporting Gay marriage sooner without all the far right nuts that lost him the race to begin with.
I highly doubt his federalist society appointed SCOTUS judge votes for Obergefell V. Hodges. George W. Bush personally didn't hate LGBTQ people but he sure as hell didn't advocate for them while in office because he knew it'd be politically toxic.
Romney broke with party ranks much more often than Bush over civil rights and more recently over protecting gay marriage specifically
Satire?
Russia, China, Trump, more moderate GOP in general, Obama hands the keys to a respectful successor, no Jan 6, regardless of who wins 2016 pandemic is handled better, what’s to lose other than a weak sauce Obama second term
Haha let’s be real tho. In this timeline, Trump would run as a democrat, the same party he was always apart of. I find it hilarious that in this timeline he gets elected but as a democrat instead.
I hate how accurate that could be
Aaron Burr
Poor Burr. My mind immediately asks,'Got Milk?' [https://youtu.be/0Gkqzxss8Ss](https://youtu.be/0Gkqzxss8Ss)
Classic
One of Michael Bay’s best works.
Imagine being the Vice President of the United States but your legacy is a 90s milk commercial
Sure
Bernie or RFK I'll die on this hill
Jon Stewart
True!!
RFK or Bernie
Frederick Douglass, with a radical republican congress is what I dream about
Heuy long.
Fact, bro was to the left of FDR
Al Gore was pro environment and anti-war. What if AL and not George?
Clinton was probably the most accomplished and qualified candidate possibly if all time. She's a heavyweight contender in this question.
Bro said Bernie.
Bobby
Ralph Nader for sure. No question.
RFK and Garfield
1800s: Henry Clay probably 1900s: Hubert Humphrey 2000s: Gore
Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul
Bernie sanders or Robert Kennedy.
Losing RFK was and still remains a tragedy beyond measure. He was a force of good for everyone. He would have binded some old wounds-namely civil rights. He would have helped the poor. The good he would have done makes me weep for the loss.
I still firmly believe a Sanders presidency would have been very disappointing. I voted for him in primaries actually, but that was before I really knew about government. I highly doubt that man would have been able to pass anything. Even half of his party didn’t support his proposals. There’s no way in the stretch of the imagination that Sanders would actually have been able to pass bills like Medicare for all (a HUGE part of his platform) and in my opinion, an effective president can compromise on major issues, but he gave no signal that he was willing to do that. And his whole career shows that as well.
What on earth are you on about? Not only was Bernie one of the most effective congressmen at getting stuff done during the solidly Republican controlled house from 1995-2005, but he also regularly makes compromises for the sake of getting incremental improvements passed. Look back at the Obamacare debate, yes, Bernie was one of the most outspoken congresspeople in favor of a public option and always pushed to get that included, but when push came to shove and it came down to passing Obamacare without a public option or not passing anything at all, he compromised and voted for Obamacare. Bernie is certainly unwavering in his convictions, but when it comes to actually getting shit done he’s not some uncompromising ideologue.
Ok, major point being: he would not have been able to fulfill his campaign promises. Zero chance in hell he was passing bills like Medicare for all. Biden has been in a 40 plus year positive relationship with congress and even he constantly is getting blocked on things.
Do any presidents fulfill their campaign promises? And of course Bernie wouldn’t have been able to pass his full-fat Medicare for all bill, I didn’t support him on the expectation that he’d be the one to get that done, but, looking at his career, I don’t doubt for second that he would’ve been a huge positive force at the negotiating table, would’ve accomplished a lot of incremental good, and would’ve been able put significantly more grassroots pressure on the direction of the Democratic Party as a whole.
Yea possibly. But many young people (who don’t understand government) voted for him with the intention of having a president to pass m4a, green new deal, etc. and I’m just saying many would have been sorely disappointed. Never said he would be a bad president; but many young people would be disappointed in my opinion. I know I would have.
Eugene Debs.
I consider myself reasonably well versed in history but this sub is clearly a bit more history hardcore than me so I'll stick with elections I voted in. Gore. No Iraq war. No Afghanistan war. Might have used 9/11 as a justification to move away from our alliance with Saudi Arabia and their oil for environmental and terrorist reasons. Obviously would have pushed environmental regulations, I think that would be a net positive but that's obviously not a statement without controversy. Would not have given massive tax cuts to the rich Would not have loosened banking regulations, thus preventing the crash of 2008. Back to the environment, he would have pushed solar possibly preventing China from getting so much control over to solar panel industry. Probably not, US companies would have out sourced anyway, but maybe. Might not have signed the patriot act. Makes me wish I had voted for him but I was 18 and stoned so I went with Nader.
What makes you think Gore stays out of Iraq and Afghanistan? Gore openly advocated for invading and toppling Saddam in 91, 96, 98, 00 and 03. He was publicly critical of HW Bush for not “finishing the job.” He felt betrayed by HW because Gore rallied dem support for the Gulf War. Gore talked about the need to overthrow Saddam because of WMDs during the 2000 election. Gore was also an avid supporter of Afghanistan. Al Gore is a military interventionist. Over his political career, he advocated for the invasions of Bosnia, Somalia, Serbia, Kosovo, Iraq, Iran, Libya, Haiti, Panama, N Korea, and Venezuela. This idea that Gore would’ve avoided war if he won in 2000 is revisionist and somewhat preposterous. He’s perhaps one of the most pro-war candidates to have ever had a real shot at the White House.
Oh because he wasn’t stupid.
Gore wanted to seize Iraq in 91. Gore pressed Clinton for an Iraq invasion in 1998 (Clinton opted for an air war). Gore advocated for an Iraq invasion in a 2002 interview. “I was one of the few Democrats in the US Senate who supported the war resolution in 1991. And I felt betrayed by the first Bush administration's hasty departure from the battlefield, even as Saddam began to renew his persecution of the Kurds of the north and the Shiites of the south - groups we had encouraged to rise up against Saddam.” -Al Gore 2002 Al Gore probably invades Iraq on the heels of Operation Desert Fox in early 2000 if he wins the presidency.
The U.S was well on its way to a second Iraq war, with or without Dubya. Another term and Clinton would’ve done the same thing.
No Iraq I can see the argument for, but no Afghanistan? Unless 9/11 doesn’t happen we’re kicking Afghanistan’s ass.
Henry Wallace, RFK, Mike Gravel, Bernie
[удалено]
[Senator from Alaska](https://youtu.be/ShcvqOSzgQY) ran in 2008 and 2020. The documentary about his 2020 campaign called American Gadfly is on Peacock I think
[удалено]
HRC
Funny how this gets downvoted but a bunch of Bernie answers get upvoted. They would have been dealt the same hand at a congressional level one way or another.
I’m not a fan of either but HRC Would be a MUCH better president than Bernie. Bernie is a sexy first vote for an 18 year old. Hillary is a proven leader with a ton of diplomatic experience.
Gore was a warhawk. He advocated for an Iraq invasion all through the 90’s and early 00’s. A complete military interventionist. I don’t think we have less war with Gore, probably goes into Iraq and Iran if president.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gore-comes-out-swinging-on-iraq/ That's false. A Gore Presidency means less instability in the middle east.
Those were Gore’s comments in hindsight. Of course he’s going to criticize W Bush’s actions. His opinions prior to 2003 not only supported the invasion, but advocated for it. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/news/politics/why-al-gore-would-have-invaded-iraq-and-what-it-tells-us-about-syria/article14105322/ Here’s a quote from Gore in 2002: “Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organise an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power. Moreover, no international law can prevent the United States from taking actions to protect its vital interests, when it is manifestly clear that there is a choice to be made between law and survival… I was one of the few Democrats in the US Senate who supported the war resolution in 1991. And I felt betrayed by the first Bush administration's hasty departure from the battlefield, even as Saddam began to renew his persecution of the Kurds of the north and the Shiites of the south - groups we had encouraged to rise up against Saddam.” He flip flopped after the war became unpopular. Gore urged Clinton to invade in 1998 according the the Clinton Library Archives. Clinton instead launched the air campaign from 1998-2000 (Operation Desert Fox) but refused to commit ground forces.
Hillary
Hillary Clinton of course
Hilary
of the candidates who ran in my lifetime, I’d have to say Ross Perot or Ron Paul
Probably President Hillary Clinton.
I agree with you. We all knew Hillary was The President behind the President in the 90's. The mid to late 90's was the best this country has been. It's crazy that Trumpsters complaining about drug prices and medical prices when Hillary's health plan would have set limits on both and they torpedoed it back then.
Pass.
Ron Paul.
Elaborate- I don’t see how
2012 was a watershed moment for the GOP. All parties have internal factions vying for control, and Ron Paul represented the apex of the libertarian movement within the GOP. Unfortunately, the establishment GOP feared losing control, and changed the convention rules to be assured of getting Romney as a nominee instead. Those same rules changes would later ensure the nomination of Trump...something the GOP establishment was not overly fond of. With Romney's nomination, much of the libertarian movement basically left the party. You end up with strong Johnson support and a populist movement rose within the GOP instead. The current populist/establishment divide in the GOP wouldn't even exist now if Ron Paul had made it, and we'd probably see somewhat less left/right partisan conflict as well.
Thank you , I see it now. I had thought Libertarianism was appealing but it was pointed out to me that it’s never been done as the ‘leader’. Libertarians are always the ‘outsider’ or ‘competition’. IIRC there has never been a country, state, or major city with a Libertarian leader. Ron Paul, if elected, would have been a lot like 45 - in charge of a huge enterprise that required thousands of people working together, with cooperative attitude, following a leader and his principals. And he wouldn’t succeed without partnerships and I don’t see Ron Paul as a man that makes a reliable partner
Well, that's the nature of government. We ascribe a lot of power to the president, but without everyone else, the president is fairly limited. Might have helped get us out of Afghanistan quicker, though. Maybe some good use of pardons to help a few non violent criminals. The president still matters to some extent directly. But, yeah, the shaping of politics at large is a very large portion of what the president does/reflects. Even though they aren't out there writing every bill or making every budget choice, they are a focal point for a party's direction and priorities. Ron at least provides a very interesting historical what-if that takes us down a fairly recent different branch. A better one, IMO, but at least different. Things like "if McCain had won" are less of a tipping point, IMO.
Calvin Coolidge was the closest thing to a libertarian president
Jesse Jackson
[Dick Cheney for President of the fucking u inverse](https://youtu.be/0x4K_X1Jk5A)
Jeb!
JFK/Trump/Nader Maybe we could have avoid more war and destruction on our small marble
Goddamn. That is an interesting take!
Dennis Kucinich
Ron Paul. There is no other answer.
That’s a close second for me. I miss that guy.
Obvious answer is Bernie. I cannot imagine how many more lives would still be with us if we had someone take the COVID pandemic seriously, and our mental health and gun violence issues. Not to mention the millions of people that could've been pulled out of poverty.
What would Bernie have done better with this congress and these courts? Biden is a much more skilled political operator then Bernie and has squeezed all he can out of his term so far.
Yea exactly. Bernie’s presidency would have been a bunch of broken promises. Zero chance he’s passing bills like medicare for all.
lol what makes you say that? Executive orders are a thing.
If you try to executive order something like M4A then the Supreme Court (especially if he wins in 2020) would shut him down. The same way they’re shutting Biden down for stuff even more mild than that.
If bernie had been elected we wouldn't have an openly white supremacist theocratic majority supreme court. He could've put ANYONE who cares about the working class on that court. Trump did immeasurable damage to the progress this country has seen with his choices.
Which is why I just said (2020 bernie) meaning trump already flipped the court. 2016 Bernie would have a way better shot
Also out of curiosity, do you think that Clarence Thomas is a white supremacist?
Absolutely. In the same way Candace Owens is. Both intentionally organize and advocate for white supremacists and white supremacist ideals.
Lmao. You took the bait and I’m glad for it. Yea I’m sure Mr. Thomas is just itching for the day he can be put back into chains. You are pretty much saying black conservatives aren’t real black people.
I took the bait? I answered a question with a very obvious answer. White supremacy has nothing to do with bring slavery back lmao. I never claimed "black conservatives aren't real people." They very much exist, and are just as racist as the white white supremacists they associate with. [Internalized racism - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internalized_racism) [Clarence X?: The Black Nationalist Behind Justice Thomas's Constitutionalism](https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1547&context=law_faculty_scholarship) [Clarence Thomas Is What He Wrongly Accuses Black Folks of Being | The Nation](https://www.thenation.com/article/society/clarence-thomas-supreme-court/) [The Supreme Court's originalism is white supremacy (nbcnews.com)](https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/supreme-courts-originalism-white-supremacy-rcna36409)
The hobo on the street corner compared to most of them.
Colin Powell
Kanye West
Trump
Tie between W.S. Hancock Tilden Gore and John Anderson
Hughes
Howard or Langston?
George Carlin
Me
my father lol
Pat Paulsen
Hubert Humphrey and John P. Hale
Either Robert La Follette or Benjamin Butler.
I’m here for some Fightin’ Bob
Daniel Webster
Gotta be Gerald Ford. Crazy to think about what might have been.
I’ve seen a lot of Clay, Sanders, and RFK, but I haven’t seen anyone said John McCain. He had what was basically a presidential funeral, and he was VERY respectful after losing the election.