If Kerry won in 2004...

[IceSpear]

Let's say Kerry narrowly managed to win in 2004 by flipping Ohio. How do the next few elections, up until the present day, work out? Would 2008 be a Republican wave, followed by a Democratic wave in 2010 due to the continually stalled economy? Would McCain be re-elected in 2012? What about 2006/2014?

[BaconBacon96]

Kerry would lose 2008 to McCain or Romney, 2012 would be won by Obama, who wins reelection in 2016 against someone.

[Mr. Morden]

How would the Iraq War have unfolded from 2005-2008 with Kerry as president, and how big of an issue is it in the 2008 primaries?  That helps determine who the GOP nominates in 2008.

[President Johnson]

Kerry would lose 2008 to McCain or Romney, 2012 would be won by Obama, who wins reelection in 2016 against someone.

I totally agree with this scenario.

[Mister Mets]

Democrats would never be in a position to take the House, since the 2006 and 2008 elections would have happened under more favorable conditions for Republicans.

In 2006, Republicans would have kept the Senate. Santorum might have lost in Pennsylvania, and DeWine might have lost in Ohio, given how significant their losses were. Michael Steele might have won in Maryland, and Thomas Kean Jr could have won in New Jersey. Kerry might have picked fellow Senators for cabinet posts, which could have complications for individual races.

Kerry would still have botched Katrina (maybe not as badly) and whatever he did in Iraq would be divisive.

Giuliani would have been stronger in the Republican primary. He's just more effective when trying to challenge a Democratic incumbent than when trying to win a third term for the party. With different conflicts in the Middle East, it might not have been a good cycle for McCain. George Allen would likely have won reelection convincingly, so he might have been the right wing's choice in the nomination. Though I think someone else would have won.

Due to the financial crisis, Kerry would have lost in 2008 to whoever the Republicans nominated.

2010 would likely have gone much better for Democrats.

The 2012 primary would still likely have been beaten Hillary and Obama. Hillary's Iraq war vote would have been less of a detriment, but Obama would be more experienced.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Romney would win in 2008

[Lief 🗽]

The Democratic Party as we know it would be dead.

[Skill and Chance]

The Democratic Party as we know it would be dead.

Nah.  Republicans would have tried something stupid in 2009 and Democrats would probably fully control 30 states after 2010 and the median House district this decade would be D+ PVI.  It's also difficult to imagine a Republican running in 2008 who would be charismatic enough to prevail in the 2012 economy.   

[Libertarian Socialist Dem]

Assuming the 2008 collapse happens on schedule per OTL

Romney/Pawlentey 327
Kerry/Richardson 211

Kerry drops Edwards from the ticket due to something like the Rielle Hunter scandal happening. That combined with the bad economic conditions throws the election to Romney. McCain decided to sit out rather then run against his old friend Kerry.

2012:

Obama/Richardson 358
Romney/Pawlentey 180

[bobloblaw]

Who ever was elected in 2004 would have lost in 2008 who then would have won 2012.

There is no way the GOP candidate would havewin 2008 then lost in 2012 given the decline in the unemployment rate. You dont go from winning 327 EVs to 180 without things getting worse. And they didnt

Remember that if Kerry flipped OH, we would have been elected president depsite GW Bush getting 50.8% of the vote and winning by over 3m votes.

[The Other Castro]

Who ever was elected in 2004 would have lost in 2008 who then would have won 2012.

There is no way the GOP candidate would havewin 2008 then lost in 2012 given the decline in the unemployment rate. You dont go from winning 327 EVs to 180 without things getting worse. And they didnt

Remember that if Kerry flipped OH, we would have been elected president depsite GW Bush getting 50.8% of the vote and winning by over 3m votes.

Bush's margin of victory in Ohio was only a little bit less than his national margin, so a Kerry win in Ohio would have also meant a much closer popular vote. Also, who's to say that a Republican getting elected in 2008 would have led to the same kind of drop in unemployment rate. You're assuming that the winning Republican would have had just as much economic success as the Obama administration IRL.

[Skill and Chance]

Who ever was elected in 2004 would have lost in 2008 who then would have won 2012.

There is no way the GOP candidate would havewin 2008 then lost in 2012 given the decline in the unemployment rate. You dont go from winning 327 EVs to 180 without things getting worse. And they didnt

Remember that if Kerry flipped OH, we would have been elected president depsite GW Bush getting 50.8% of the vote and winning by over 3m votes.

Bush's margin of victory in Ohio was only a little bit less than his national margin, so a Kerry win in Ohio would have also meant a much closer popular vote. Also, who's to say that a Republican getting elected in 2008 would have led to the same kind of drop in unemployment rate. You're assuming that the winning Republican would have had just as much economic success as the Obama administration IRL.

He still would have lost the popular vote, and that's all people care about, even if was by 1 vote.

There's another level of outrage when the losing candidate gets >50%.  See 1876 and the serious threats of a 2nd civil war that followed.