2000 GOP Primaries without Bush

[mencken]

It seems that Bush was able to quickly coalesce establishment support as early as 1998 to deter most establishment opponents from entering the race. Suppose Bush lost to Ann Richards in 1994; who sees an opening in this scenario? Would Dole, Quayle, or McCain be able to beat any new entrants in this scenario?

[Kingpoleon]

I'd expect Guiliani would do it, then. A McCain/Guiliani, Guiliani/McCain, or Guiliani/Kasich ticket all seem likely. Overall, these seem like the candidates who would win states and are most likely to be the nominee:

1. John McCain
2. Rudy Guiliani
3. Elizabeth Dole
4. John Kasich
5. George Pataki/Arlen Specter

[dudeabides]

Elizabeth Dole would have become the Republican nominee for President and the winner, ironically for the same reasons George W. Bush was a successful candidate. Dole has a familiar last name, she didn't serve as a legislator in Washington D.C., and without Bush in the race, most of his fundraisers would be looking to support an establishment figure who could win - Dole fit that bill. Some would have supported Orin Hatch or Dan Quayle, but neither of them could win a general election. The donor class favorite would have been Mrs. Dole. Remember, she was polling second before dropping out, citing lack of money. She would have actually been better in the general election than Bush. The historic factor of electing a woman President, plus she was a more experienced public servant than Bush, would have appealed to many voters.  

[Mr. Morden]

I'll repeat what I said on this topic a few years ago:

If Bush didn't run in 2000, then you would have had candidates like John Engler, Tommy Thompson, Frank Keating, and possibly one or two other GOP governors would have run (maybe Tom Ridge?).  It would have been the most crowded presidential primary field in modern history (until 2016).  There were a lot of popular, or at least somewhat popular, second or third term Republican governors at that time*, but all of them passed on running once they saw how formidable the Bush political machine was, and then lined up behind him.  I remember in 1999, Tommy Thompson being asked if there was any chance of him running for president, and he said "No, I have the wrong last name."

*Remember, there was an economic boom in the late 1990s, so quite a few governors of both parties were popular, but the GOP controlled more governorships at that time, especially in the Rust Belt.

[mencken]

I'll repeat what I said on this topic a few years ago:

If Bush didn't run in 2000, then you would have had candidates like John Engler, Tommy Thompson, Frank Keating, and possibly one or two other GOP governors would have run (maybe Tom Ridge?).  It would have been the most crowded presidential primary field in modern history (until 2016).  There were a lot of popular, or at least somewhat popular, second or third term Republican governors at that time*, but all of them passed on running once they saw how formidable the Bush political machine was, and then lined up behind him.  I remember in 1999, Tommy Thompson being asked if there was any chance of him running for president, and he said "No, I have the wrong last name."

*Remember, there was an economic boom in the late 1990s, so quite a few governors of both parties were popular, but the GOP controlled more governorships at that time, especially in the Rust Belt.

I asked this question with the Thompsons (Tommy and Fred) in mind, but as we saw in 2007, neither of them were particularly good candidates, to say the least. Would they have been more formidable with eight more years of youth, or are Engler and Keating more charismatic? Would Ridge, Giuliani, or Pataki be given greater slack on social heresies?

[VPH]

I'm going to take it one step farther and act like neither Gore nor Bush ran.

Republican Candidates:
John McCain-34%
Elizabeth Dole-30%
Jack Kemp-28-
Dan Quayle-6%
Lamar Alexander-2%
Bob Smith-2%

Democratic Candidates:
Dick Gephardt-29%
John Kerry-28%
Bill Bradley-17%
Jesse Jackson-14%
Zell Miller-12%

[Mr. Morden]

I asked this question with the Thompsons (Tommy and Fred) in mind, but as we saw in 2007, neither of them were particularly good candidates, to say the least. Would they have been more formidable with eight more years of youth, or are Engler and Keating more charismatic? Would Ridge, Giuliani, or Pataki be given greater slack on social heresies?

Keating might have been able to do it, I don't know.  Tommy Thompson wouldn't have been any better in 2000.  His shtick worked for Wisconsin, but was ill suited for the national stage.  It's not always easy to predict that in advance though.  Bill Richardson, for example, had lots of experience and was quite popular in NM, but seemed buffoonish in his presidential run.  Not always easy to see who's going to flop until they actually face the national media.

Elizabeth Dole, also, was not a good candidate in 1999/2000.  She just is not a natural politician, IMHO, at least when playing at that level.  She would have led the early polls because of name recognition, but I don't think she would have lasted even without Bush.

McCain--he could have won the 2000 nomination only if he'd run a very different kind of campaign.  Throughout the 1999/2000 campaign, he was fighting what seemed to be an insurgency against GOP orthodoxy.  See here for an elaboration on that point, written in January 2000:

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/politics/man-not-republican

Now, maybe that was just because he was a longshot insurgent running against the Bush machine, and he would have acted completely differently if he'd had a better shot at the nomination from the word go.  I don't know.  But if not, then I guess the nomination probably would have been won by either Kemp or one of the governors.

[dudeabides]

I'm going to take it one step farther and act like neither Gore nor Bush ran.

Republican Candidates:
John McCain-34%
Elizabeth Dole-30%
Jack Kemp-28-
Dan Quayle-6%
Lamar Alexander-2%
Bob Smith-2%

Democratic Candidates:
Dick Gephardt-29%
John Kerry-28%
Bill Bradley-17%
Jesse Jackson-14%
Zell Miller-12%

Mine is different:

Republican Primary
Elizabeth Dole: 45%
John McCain: 20%
Dan Quayle: 19%
Orin Hatch: 10%
Steve Forbes: 3%
Lamar Alexander: 1%
Alan Keyes: 1%
Other: 1%

Democratic Primary
Dick Gephardt: 42%
Bill Bradley: 30%
John Kerry: 15%
Evan Bayh: 8%
Jesse Jackson: 3%
Other: 2%

[rpryor03]

Something like this is what I think.

McCain/Midwesterner (Engler/Voinovich/Kasich/Thompson) - 318, 50.1%
Gephardt/Dodd - 220, 49.9%

[dudeabides]

Something like this is what I think.

McCain/Midwesterner (Engler/Voinovich/Kasich/Thompson) - 318, 50.1%
Gephardt/Dodd - 220, 49.9%

General election would be:
Elizabeth Dole / Tommy Thompson (R) 51% 278 EV
Dick Gephardt / Evan Bayh (D) 48% 260 EV

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Something like this is what I think.

McCain/Midwesterner (Engler/Voinovich/Kasich/Thompson) - 318, 50.1%
Gephardt/Dodd - 220, 49.9%

Quayle/McCain

[ViaActiva]

Without George W., surely Jeb would be tempted?

Was Giuliani really a potential nominee before 9/11? I don't know too much about the internal politics of the GOP in the 1990s.

Donald Trump and Colin Powell as wildcards?

[Maxwell]

I'm thinking George Allen probably runs.

[Maxwell]

Most Likely to Run:
John McCain
Elizabeth Dole
Dan Quayle
Lamar Alexander
Steve Forbes
Pat Buchanan

Likely to Run:
George Allen
Tommy Thompson
Frank Keating
John Ashcroft
Alan Keyes

Potential Run:
Connie Mack
Jack Kemp
Bob Dole
Jeb Bush
Fred Thompson

Wildcards:
Colin Powell
Donald Trump
Christine Todd Whitman
Bob Dornan
Rudy Giuliani

[mencken]

Another question on this train of thought. Was Steve Forbes's good performance in Iowa that year mostly an anti-Bush vote (a la Santorum 2012), or would he have had a good shot at winning the state with a crowded establishment field? In the latter event, I expect that the New Hampshire primary may have been taken greater significance than in IRL 2000. Of course, as Morden said, McCain likely would have run a more conventional campaign had he not had to compete with the Bush juggernaut, and thus may not have been as favored in New Hampshire in this scenario.

Without George W., surely Jeb would be tempted?

Was Giuliani really a potential nominee before 9/11? I don't know too much about the internal politics of the GOP in the 1990s.

Donald Trump and Colin Powell as wildcards?

I cannot picture Jeb running a campaign only a few months after winning his first term as Governor, but then again, I could not picture Jeb running a campaign 14 years after winning his final term as Governor.

[Mr. Morden]

Was Giuliani really a potential nominee before 9/11? I don't know too much about the internal politics of the GOP in the 1990s.

Giuliani would have had absolutely no chance pre-9/11, and never would have run.  He was well to the left of the median Republican primary voter at that time.

And on top of that, he was preparing to run for US Senate against Hillary Clinton that year, but then when his marriage started falling apart and he got prostate cancer, he decided to bow out.

[dudeabides]

Was Giuliani really a potential nominee before 9/11? I don't know too much about the internal politics of the GOP in the 1990s.

Giuliani would have had absolutely no chance pre-9/11, and never would have run.  He was well to the left of the median Republican primary voter at that time.

And on top of that, he was preparing to run for US Senate against Hillary Clinton that year, but then when his marriage started falling apart and he got prostate cancer, he decided to bow out.

I actually disagree with that. Even before 9/11, Rudy Giuliani cleaned up New York City through getting the homeless off the streets, getting pornography out of Times Square, and implementing new policing policies in which all crimes, even quality of life crimes, were prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Additionally, he cut taxes and put New York City's fiscal house in order. The result was 450,000 jobs, an overall crime rate down 57%, and New York once again became a place where families could visit, and people could feel secure working and living there.

New York City has a population larger than 39 states, so he has more power and responsibility than most Governors even.

[Sumner 1868]

Was Giuliani really a potential nominee before 9/11? I don't know too much about the internal politics of the GOP in the 1990s.

He was frequently discussed for a Senate run for Moynihan's open seat, but I don't think anyone expected him to run for President. Irregardless, Giuliani was widely despised by 2000 (his approval ratings were dismal before 9/11) and has more skeletons than any potential candidate mentioned here.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Was Giuliani really a potential nominee before 9/11? I don't know too much about the internal politics of the GOP in the 1990s.

He was frequently discussed for a Senate run for Moynihan's open seat, but I don't think anyone expected him to run for President. Irregardless, Giuliani was widely despised by 2000 (his approval ratings were dismal before 9/11) and has more skeletons than any potential candidate mentioned here.

He was actually running for the Senate seat before he dropped out. I think his popularity tanked after he told his wife he was divorcing her via press conference.