Gore wins in 2000-the difference?

[Defeated Romanticist]

I wonder if we could consider this question for a moment. Objectively one could come to the conclusion that a lot of things would be different, but when one scratches the surface I am sceptical.

Let's take foreign policy and the main features of the Bush administration, namely the war in Iraq. Now it is true that when the war war started in 2003 Gore came out against it, but the sincerity of his stand is very questionable. Mr Gore was the self confessed foreign policy man in the Clinton White House. It was in this white house that noises about Weapons of mass destruction first emanated. Added to this Mr Gore's choice of the positively belligerent Joe Lieberman as his vice Presidential candidate and as far as one can make judgements on these matters the chances of war increase. The White House of which he was part also had a record of interventionism to speak of. In Somalia and Bosnia the US intervened with supposed peace on their minds, they also interviewed in Haiti, which was described by Margaret Thatcher as US immigration policy by other means and the Kosovo intervention, the reasoning for which was a flimsy if not more so than Iraq's.
Mr Gore's opposition to Iraq can be viewed cynically also. The Republicans opposed US foreign entanglements unless they were of a threat to US security in their 1994 Contract with America. I personally think that Mr Gore was taking aim at a run in 2008 as Nixon did after he lost the 1960 election.

On the economy, the causes of the current US slow-down, the sub-prime crisis, seem unlikely to have been avoided had their been a Gore presidency for the simple reason that it would seem doubtful that he would have removed Alan Greenspan from his job.
These are the two main planks of any presidency. In terms of the role of the federal govt, given that Bush expanded it more than any president since Lyndon Johnson, it is difficult to see much differences there either. Perhaps in 2008 however we would have a Republican running a hollow campaign based on a loose premise of change and Ralph Nader at 10% on the other hand.

[FutureTaoiseach]

I don't think we would have had the Iraq War but I do think we would have had the Afghanistan war, as that was a clear case of self-defence because of 911. The pro-Israel policy is bipartisan and would have continued, including sanctions on Iran. I have argued that Obama might be more neutral as he has a history of friends from the Palestinian side and in the past spoke of the suffering of the Palestinians. Missile-defence would have went ahead as Gore had spoken of the need for such a system to protect against North Korea as Vice President. The pro-China policy is now also bipartisan so that would have continued. I do think however that dialogue with Iran would have been a possibility to coax them away from nuclear weapons.

[petey]

i agree with FT's post completely, except maybe the missile defense bit.

[FutureChiefJustice]

I like to think that the Iraq war would have not went ahead under Gore but then I slap myself for being a naive twat, because after all, this war was about economics, and no president is going to quench the thirst for oil. So the only alternative is to invade those who have it and install friendly governments. The difference under Gore would have been that he would have ensured that the international community and the public was onside and not hobbled together some half-assed justifications and then just go for it cowboy style, despite also being a southerner.

[Corcaigh33]

One of the many imponderables of a Gore victory, does 9/11 happen at all?

[FutureChiefJustice]

One of the many imponderables of a Gore victory, does 9/11 happen at all?

Yes. Leaving aside conspiracy crap about neo-cons blowing up their own citizens, it was too big a job to be planned within the time frame of Bush's victory to the day itself. Besides, I doubt America hating terrorists see Democrat/Republican any clearer than Americans see Sunni/Shiite.

[Corcaigh33]

One of the many imponderables of a Gore victory, does 9/11 happen at all?

Yes. Leaving aside conspiracy crap about neo-cons blowing up their own citizens, it was too big a job to be planned within the time frame of Bush's victory to the day itself. Besides, I doubt America hating terrorists see Democrat/Republican any clearer than Americans see Sunni/Shiite.

No I didn't mean it from the point of view of the Bush administration setting it up, allowing it to happen yes, which is incidentally what I think actually happened as opposed to them setting it up themselves. I think a Gore presidency removes the need for Al Qaeda to attack on 9/11 as it would have been essentially the continuation of the Clinton initiatives in the ME.

[Defeated Romanticist]

One of the many imponderables of a Gore victory, does 9/11 happen at all?

Yes. Leaving aside conspiracy crap about neo-cons blowing up their own citizens, it was too big a job to be planned within the time frame of Bush's victory to the day itself. Besides, I doubt America hating terrorists see Democrat/Republican any clearer than Americans see Sunni/Shiite.

No I didn't mean it from the point of view of the Bush administration setting it up, allowing it to happen yes, which is incidentally what I think actually happened as opposed to them setting it up themselves. I think a Gore presidency removes the need for Al Qaeda to attack on 9/11 as it would have been essentially the continuation of the Clinton initiatives in the ME.

What on earth did the Bush administration do in the 8 and a half months of their first term to inspire 911?

If you study the response to 911 you would know that most certainly didn't know. If they did they would have handled tings better.

[cyberianpan]

I like to think that the Iraq war would have not went ahead under Gore but then I slap myself for being a naive twat, because after all, this war was about economics, and no president is going to quench the thirst for oil.

The Iraq War wasn't about WMD so many people seemed to start thinking oil ...

Hmmm what did the Iraq War do to improve oil security ? Not much, in fact oil got dearer.

Who actually benefited from the Iraq War ?

Warriors, defense contractors, hawkish think tanks ... the military-industrial complex.

Whilst Gore voted in favour of the resolution , his language around the time indicated he didn't like it.

cYp

[Universal_001]

If there had been 8 years of Gore.

THIS



Would be the democratic nominee, and we'd be in for another 2004 style snoozefest, instead of the exciting Obama/Hillary/Palin mouldbreaking interesting election that it is.

On the other hand several hundred thousand Iraqis would be alive and petrol would be cheaper...but would that be worth having media commentators talk about "joementum" again?...would it?