Bush winning re-election in 1992 leads to a different 90's politically. W/out a Democratic president in office, & one which the Republicans can run against & blame, & w/out the presidential loss & a subsequent political fit that was thrown, there's no "Republican Revolution" of any sort in 1994. In regards to Congress, Bush's presidency would've given Democrats somebody to run against, so I think Democrats would do quite well for themselves. There also wouldn't have been Clinton trying to push healthcare reform through, which was a big factor that led to the Gingrich era.
His ideas & policies would surely differ from Clinton's while in office. He would've had issues w/ deficit control, being faced by the Democratic-controlled Congress demanding increased taxes, while his own party wanted to slash spending. Foreign policy wise, we might well have gone into Rwanda to stop the mass killings, regardless of having U.N. backing or not, though our doing so may have drawn other countries to do the same.
By 1996, you would have what was planned for 1996 circa pre-1992: all the Democratic candidates who opted out of what they thought was an unwinnable 1992 seeking the nomination. That includes Mario Cuomo, Al Gore, & a long list of others. You'd also see the Republicans having been in office for 16 years, so the White House is due for a major change over to the Democrats. I don't know who the Republicans would nominate. Quayle is stupid, although he probably would've tried. You could likely still have Dole, as an elder statesman Republican, which was why the Republicans nominated him in 1996 anyway. You could also have somebody most people aren't even familiar w/.
Additionally, both W. & Jeb! wait 'til 1998 to run for their respective governorships, having expected that if Republicans lost the White House in 1996, then it'll be a Republican wave year in 1998.
I think the economy would have still been good in '96 even with a Bush victory, but after 16 years in the WH I think people would have been tired of the GOP and a Democrat would have been elected in '96 unless the Democrats put up awful candidates like they did in '84 and '88. I think the possible contenders for the nomination on the Democratic side would have been Mario Cuomo, Ann Richards, Dick Gephardt, Al Gore, Sam Nunn, Bob Graham, Bob Kerrey and John Kerry (that doesn't mean they all run of course). My personal feeling is the nomination would have gone to either Richards, Gephardt or Graham out of these (I think Democrats would be weary of nominating a Northeastern liberal after being out of office for 16 years, they probably would have preferred to nominate a safer candidate, but Cuomo would still have his shot of course, especially if he was the one major liberal running against several moderate and conservative candidates). The GOP doesn't nominate Quayle; I think their options would have been either Dole, Powell, James Baker or Kemp (you'll notice that the Democrats already have a much larger talent pool than the GOP, which should say something about their chances in 1996). I think any of them most likely end up being a sacrificial lamb. And then a Democrat is President until 2005 or 2009.
I generally agree with the quoted analysis.
Oh and I think the culture wars would have been much less intense, at least waiting until the mid to late 2000s to really take shape like in most of Europe rather than in the 1990s had Bush won in '92.
And a more honorable man would have been president, and was much less polarizing than any of his IRL successors, so I think the problem of hate and disrespect of the president wouldn't be there (or would have at least been delayed) had Bush won in '92.
And I think had HW won in '92, the son that would have been pushed to run for president would probably have been Jeb rather than Dubya, given the culture wars wouldn't have been as big of a factor.
At anyrate the country I think would be a lot better off and less divided today had Bush won in '92. I think if there's one election result I would have changed since WWII, it would probably be this one, as I think '92 is when America's trajectory started going downhill (the other contender would be 2012).
I wonder what would become of McVeigh. His belief in right-wing conspiracy theories about Waco was what drove him to bomb OK City.
Yeah I don't think Oklahoma City happens had Clinton not been president, but afterwards who knows, the conspiracy theorists were doing stuff even when Reagan and Bush were presidents.
