Battle of the Runners Up: John McCain vs. Bill Bradley, 2000
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:07:55 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs?
  Past Election What-ifs (US) (Moderator: Dereich)
  Battle of the Runners Up: John McCain vs. Bill Bradley, 2000
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Battle of the Runners Up: John McCain vs. Bill Bradley, 2000  (Read 2997 times)
Indy Texas
independentTX
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,258
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: -3.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 05, 2014, 12:14:06 AM »

Who wins and in what states? Discuss with maps.
Logged
Mister Mets
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,434
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2014, 11:21:56 PM »

McCain would have been stronger than Bush. Bradley would have been weaker than Gore.

I'll give McCain every state Bush lost by six.



McCain/ Engler- 356 Electoral Votes
Bradley/ Gephardt- 182 Electoral Votes
Logged
Cryptic
Shadowlord88
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 891


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2014, 07:28:16 AM »
« Edited: February 06, 2014, 07:47:15 AM by Cryptic »

McCain would have been stronger than Bush. Bradley would have been weaker than Gore.

I'll give McCain every state Bush lost by six.

Bradley wouldn't have been a weak candidate.  He'd served three terms in the Senate and he wouldn't lose support to Nader like Gore did. Given how Nader managed to snag around 5-6% in some states, like Maine, Minnesota, and Oregon due to dissatisfaction with Gore, I doubt Bradley would do so bad as to lose every state Bush lost to Gore by six. 

I will agree McCain would've been stronger than Bush and probably would've won the general given he was seen as more moderate back then, but it would've been close. 

Something like this probably. 



McCain: 289
Bradley: 249
Logged
I Will Not Be Wrong
outofbox6
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,346
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 06, 2014, 07:47:08 AM »

McCain blowout.
Logged
Mister Mets
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,434
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2014, 10:56:02 AM »
« Edited: February 06, 2014, 10:03:18 PM by Mister Mets »

McCain would have been stronger than Bush. Bradley would have been weaker than Gore.

I'll give McCain every state Bush lost by six.

Bradley wouldn't have been a weak candidate.  He'd served three terms in the Senate and he wouldn't lose support to Nader like Gore did. Given how Nader managed to snag around 5-6% in some states, like Maine, Minnesota, and Oregon due to dissatisfaction with Gore, I doubt Bradley would do so bad as to lose every state Bush lost to Gore by six.  

I will agree McCain would've been stronger than Bush and probably would've won the general given he was seen as more moderate back then, but it would've been close.  

Something like this probably.  



McCain: 289
Bradley: 249

My guess is that the things that would make Bradley more appealing to the 2.74% country that went for Nader, would also have likely sent more centrists Dems into the arms of a Republican war hero considered more moderate than Bush.
Logged
Cryptic
Shadowlord88
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 891


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2014, 11:14:59 AM »
« Edited: February 06, 2014, 11:24:07 AM by Cryptic »

My guess is that the things that would make Bradley more appealing to the 2.74% country that went for McCain, would also have likely sent more centrists Dems into the arms of a Republican war hero considered more moderate than Bush.

A fair bit of that 2.74% is clustered in some of those close states.  For instance, I doubt McCain would win Maine where Gore beat Bush by six AND Nader carried over 5% of the vote on top of that. 

I also doubt Bradley would've lost many centrist Dems to McCain.  While he ran to the left of Gore on some issues, he wasn't far left.  Remember, he co-sponsored the Tax Reform Act of 1986, one of Reagan's tax cuts. 

McCain would've undoubtedly picked up more independents and undecideds and won the election, but I do think Bradley would do respectable as well. 
Logged
Mister Mets
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,434
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2014, 10:06:57 PM »

My guess is that the things that would make Bradley more appealing to the 2.74% country that went for McCain, would also have likely sent more centrists Dems into the arms of a Republican war hero considered more moderate than Bush.

A fair bit of that 2.74% is clustered in some of those close states.  For instance, I doubt McCain would win Maine where Gore beat Bush by six AND Nader carried over 5% of the vote on top of that. 

I also doubt Bradley would've lost many centrist Dems to McCain.  While he ran to the left of Gore on some issues, he wasn't far left.  Remember, he co-sponsored the Tax Reform Act of 1986, one of Reagan's tax cuts. 

McCain would've undoubtedly picked up more independents and undecideds and won the election, but I do think Bradley would do respectable as well. 
Good point on Maine.

I wasn't saying McCain would get a lot of centrist Dems, just more than enough to make up for Nader voters who'd go for Bradley, keeping in mind that Nader's total support was pretty small compared to Gore's numbers.
Logged
dudeabides
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,375
Tuvalu
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: March 20, 2014, 12:27:47 PM »

McCain would have won decisively over any Democrat in 2000.

John McCain (R) 57% 342 EV
Bill Bradley (D) 42% 196 EV
Logged
Chunk Yogurt for President!
CELTICEMPIRE
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,235
Georgia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: March 22, 2014, 12:22:08 PM »

So, McCain was really popular back then?  What changed to make him less popular?
Logged
Clarko95 📚💰📈
Clarko95
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,590
Sweden


Political Matrix
E: -5.61, S: -1.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: March 28, 2014, 08:09:52 PM »

So, McCain was really popular back then?  What changed to make him less popular?

The neocon turn with George W. Bush and the Iraq War probably has something to do with it.
Logged
Fuzzy Stands With His Friend, Chairman Sanchez
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,502
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: July 13, 2014, 07:04:59 AM »



Bradley 271
McCain 267

I gave Bradley WV (a Dukakis state), NH, and took away NM.  It's possible that IA could have gone to McCain, but IA's rather dovish.  It's also possible that MO would have went to Missouri native Bradley.

WV personally rebelled against Gore for his anti-coal stance; that may have been muted a bit by Bradley. 

Bradley was a highly respected Senator, whereas Gore was viewed as annoying and pandering, and a guy who didn't wear well.  McCain had popularity, but he's also a loose cannon.  Initially, I thought Bradley might lose worse than Gore, but, in restrospect, he would have been a better candidate.
Logged
Mister Mets
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,434
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: August 16, 2014, 10:53:18 AM »

So, McCain was really popular back then?  What changed to make him less popular?
It was probably timing more than anything else.

In 2008, the President of his party was rather unpopular.

Random thought. Who would their running mates have been?

With New Englanders like Joe Lieberman, Howard Dean and John Kerry off the table, I'd imagine Bradley's choice would come down to Dick Gephardt or John Edwards.

Hagel and Thompson were McCain backers, so they might have been on his short lists. He might have tried to woo Maine Governor Angus King to send a message on independence.
Logged
Jerseyrules
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,544
United States


Political Matrix
E: 10.00, S: -4.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: August 18, 2014, 05:48:36 PM »
« Edited: August 18, 2014, 05:56:03 PM by Jerseyrules »

This would probably be one of the most interesting (and amicable) match-ups seen in decades - if memory serves, McCain and Bradley are pretty good friends and have worked with each other on numerous occasions.  I can see something along the lines of otl 2004 - a swing of 2% would make it a landslide but only a decisive victory for McCain.  However I think Mac would fare just a bit better in TTL 2000 than Bush in otl 2004

Also, I'm pretty sure McCain said he wanted Liddy Dole to be his running mate in 2000.

As for Bradley, I know that Jim Hunt was heavily considered for the VP spot - I think that it would be a good idea for Bradley to pick a Southerner, and as of 2000 Edwards hadn't even been in the Senate for 2 years yet.  I think he'd pick someone with a proven record, and executive experience to balance the ticket rather than go for two senators.  And Hunt would be great to have on board if Bradley wanted to emphasize education.



John McCain / Elizabeth Dole: 51.3% PV, 317 EV
Bill Bradley / Jim Hunt : 47.6% PV, 221 EV
Ralph Nader / ?: ~1% PV, 0 EV
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.047 seconds with 12 queries.