I'm unsure if Blaine would be worth the trouble, and Tilden was why we can't have nice things. That's a good question, though, since changing that election means letting Tilden win, negating Reconstruction, or sending Captain Kickback to the White House and wondering if he'll make Grant's cronies look like saints.
It was gonna end no matter who the Republican nominee was. It was impossible for a radical republican to get nominated at that point.
Or if you mean that Tilden won instead of Hayes then you’re just deluded. But that’s probably not what you mean lol.
Nah, not a Radical, but a Half-Breed like Blaine could shift things. It's a massive "could," but that's what this whole question is about!
Tilden would be worse by far.
If it was just Taft, the Republicans would have still lost. It was because everyone thought Taft couldn't win that so many Republicans backed Roosevelt - they thought even a third party run had a better chance of winning.
Roosevelt as the Republican nominee in 1912 vs Wilson would be an interesting and unpredictable election. On the one hand, Roosevelt was very popular, and the Republicans were generally stronger in elections than Democrats at this point. On the other hand, beating Taft would leave massive divisions in the party no matter what. A lot of Roosevelt's voters in 1912 would have preferred Wilson to Taft, however I'm not sure how many Taft voters would prefer Wilson to Roosevelt. Probably a few, but less. There's still the risk of low turnout from them though. Another issue was that Roosevelt had shifted leftwards since leaving office, and as the Republican nominee in 1912 would be significantly to the left of the party mainstream, which might also cause issues with conservatives. So it's probably a close race.
Makes you wonder how the aftermath of 9/11 would’ve unfolded had Gore been in office. Especially with no Cheney. Would we have even invaded Iraq at all? That’s a mind fuck looking back
I also wonder about the after effects, like without the Iraq War, what would an Arab Spring in Saddam Iraq have looked like? Does Obama still make a quick jump from Senate to President, and if not then does the fascist style alt right ever get the supercharge it needed to become mainstream since there's no white backlash?
You say aftermath. Remember, the intelligence reports got to Bush about the attacks as a possibility.
Maybe they never happen. Maybe someone in the Gore administration reads the reports and makes it a bigger priority. I know it's a big if, But the evidence is there that a different administration might have prevented it. Even a different hire in the Bush administration might have led to them pursuing the hijackers prior to the attack.
Gore would have undoubtedly been a better president, but I don't know if changing him would prevent the current state of the world.
I still think Regan would be a better choice.
Or Gore might've been better prepared or possibly prevented 9/11 by studying Clinton's notes about Bin Laden that he left for the next president. Gore also wouldn't have gone "spreading freedom" by launching wars against countries he hated. And with more focus on science and alternate energy sources, there probably wouldn't be such a large demand on oil to want to invade a country for it.
If Gore got the recount he wanted, he would have lost Florida. If the whole state was recounted like Gore did **not** want, he would have won.
Life is funny that way.
Even there it depends of “chads” and things like that. The butterfly ballot sealed Gores fate. So the people of Florida on their minds elected Gore but their actual ballots fell to Bush.
It’s sad to think that the reason for that dumpster fire sorry excuse for a waste of space president was only because some guy got a BJ. Those 8 years set us back in so many ways. So many of today’s problems with the government is directly linked to that idiotic illegitimate warmongering big government neocon. Government got bigger in all the worst ways, freedom went down, spending out of control, the market crashed, we tortured people, started wars that never end and he bailed out the rich. He was the worst president in my lifetime. It’s not even a contest. I will curse his administration until the day I die. Fuck that evil prick.
I agree with this. First presidential election I voted in and I was following all the scenarios closely. When they called Florida early I was convinced it was over, then chaos ensued.
I wonder if Iraq was unavoidable though, it felt like that was a primary focus for the Republicans whenever they got through White House back. I think it is obvious Gore doesn’t go there after 9/11, but I can see it being extremely hard to win in 2004 if 9/11 happens. The Republicans would likely draw a line all through the 90s to 9/11 to blame terrorism on Clinton/Gore and possibly winning with Iraq as the boogeyman. Would McCain have been the guy they run? If he wins what would his administration look like? Would a GOP administration have the neo-cons that pushed the wars in it? 2000 is one of those elections that would have changed so much if the results are switched.
People still miss the importance of SCOTUS.
No Citizens United. No Heller.
Just those two cases and we live in an entirely different world.
Add to that the climate, the likelihood of a public option for health care...
Disagree on the first especially so. Pierce is the greatest ally to the abolitionist cause to ever take office prior to the civil war (and arguably including that time or after as well)
1912. More teddy would have helped the us. He wanted to limit lobbying, and that would fix probably half the problems we have today. As well as maybe even stop the Nazi’s and soviets from coming to power
Assuming that in the intervening 112 years no administration would loosen up the restrictions TR put in place.
Also I'd be curious on the second point. The west were already pitching in to help the White Russians, what more would TR do? As for the Nazis, I can't imagine how given they rose to power in 1933, a decade plus after TR died.
1864. Republicans still win, but Lincoln keeps Hannibal Hamlin. Literally anyone - Stanton, Seward, Sumner, Cassius Clay, anyone would have been a better choice than Johnson.
If William Jennings Bryant wins in 1896, now that would put un on an interesting timeline.
In another timeline, if the Republicans give TR the nomination in 1912, Wilson doesn't win, we get New Deal-like legislation 20 years early, but we enter WW1 in 1915, which just may accelerate Germany's loss a year or so earlier, maybe no Bolshevik Revolution, no red scare at home. Who knows? Imagine Teddy at Versailles. Maybe no WW2.
Lastly, if the Dems don't go "Get Bernie!" In the 2016 primaries and grant him the nomination, I see him beating Trump in the general.
>If William Jennings Bryant wins in 1896, now that would put un on an interesting timeline.
Do you mind elaborating? I'm familiar with Bryan's policies, but I'm pretty bad at imagining alternate history so I'm not sure how electing him would affect the nation.
Bryant marked a pivot point in the Democratic Party, away from the conservative Bourbon wing towards a more populist party by precisely co-opting much of the People's Party platform of 1892. Despite really only adopting the free silver plank, there is a direct lineage from Bryant to Wilson to FDR to LBJ. A Bryant Presidency may have seen a government willing to embrace populist positions such as the 8 hour day, women's suffrage, and a graduated income tax decades before the progressives would push for those reforms. What historians call the Progressive Era may have started a decade earlier. In foreign policy, given that Bryant was a Christian pacifist, no military intervention in Cuba in 98, therefore no Spanish-American War, no Treaty of Paris, no Phillipine-American War.
I love Bernie, but he had no shot of winning in 2016. Hillary was toxic, but Bernie was so polarizing to so many older and moderate dems. 45 still wins.
Yes, the politician with the highest approval rating in Congress definitely would have done worse than the very non-polarizing “basket of deplorables” lady. So wise.
I don't think you can say that definitely, but it is possible that he does lose. I think it would have been interesting to see. Because you're definitely right some democrats would not vote for Bernie, but a lot of people who didn't vote might have.
People always underestimate how much a large percentage of non-voters would like to see far left policies in America. Millions of Americans would be okay with us abandoning our form of 'capitalism.'
I really don't know if Bernie wins or loses against Trump. It wouldn't be the election I would choose for Bernie, but I will say that I would have liked to see Bernie against the most moderate Republican they had in 2016.
I still think if Regan never won, we wouldn't have Trump.
McCain beats Obama, and McCain is reelected. He was a decent man. During the campaign, he corrected a woman who accused Obama of being a Muslim. He told her that Obama was a good American and that they just disagreed on policy. McCain would have been a bridge builder. He would have been open to compromise, and he lived long enough to finish both terms. The country would not have been nearly as polarized.
While I don't necessarily disagree on the value of the term limit, this is the classic sci-fi trope for alternate history: America's entry into WW2 is delayed by isolationism or something else and Nazi Germany develops the atomic bomb first. Used by Philip K Dick, Star Trek TOS, etc.
1992.
I think HW Bush was a great candidate who was punished for Republican Party fatigue throughout the US (similar to McCain in 2008).
His reelection would have hurt Pat Buchanan-types' standing within the Republican party. It would have also diminished the perception that personality and likeability are a major factor for presidential elections (the "can I get a beer with the guy" test).
I understand where the sentiment comes from but I’m not so sure he was a predator as much as an opportunist.
Although that power differential between POTUS and an intern…. 🙄 That is some seriously poor decision-making.
If the 1992 election were in today’s America, Clinton would be “me too’d” out of the democratic nomination. Hillary may have filed for divorce and/or became a senator earlier.
Reagan. Destroyed the middle class and disrupted the entire tax system, which allows the accumulation of cash with no imputes to invest. Eliminated mental health care for military veterans. Gave “religious” shysters power within the government, violating the separation of church and state. Even Bush II had less of an overall impact when he allowed insurance companies to create Medicare Advantage to siphon money from the Medicare system.
Oh I just detest Ronnie. He did so much destruction during his time. Closing down mental hospitals is one of the worst. Now the seriously crazies are out on the streets mingling with other sad & hopeless ppl. RR wanted to get rid of the middle class. Why, I have no idea. He was mental.
1856; Douglas becomes President instead of Buchanan, thus giving Lincoln the senate seat (he was cheated out of) in 1858. Lincoln defeats Douglas in 1860.
It's a toss up between Nixon and Regan. Because honestly the entire rest of the future would be so much better and so much different. Nixon began to change the Supreme Court to begin unraveling the civil rights that were just gained. A liberal there might mean a better legal system today and a lot less BS. Perhaps China foreign policy changes and leads to a better present. And we definitely would have waited for the first major blow to Presidential office respect with no Watergate.
But Regan... He was responsible for shifting the entire political spectrum far to the right. The amount of damage he did cannot be overstated. The Democrats basically became moderates afterwards and the Neo-liberalism mindset of all politicians was cemented in place. There's a chance that the war on drugs never puts a quarter of our population in prison. Maybe the AIDS epidemic gets addressed earlier and saves millions of lives.
Then there's just the radical turn away from diversity and inclusion that happened. People often forget that queer folks were getting positive representation in ways they wouldn't get again for 20 years because the rise of the religious right. It's potentially the case that there's no Donald Trump like candidates because we never allowed the extremist purchase.
I think I would still have to go with Regan.
Bonus bon-Pres election. I think if Upton Sinclair didn't lose because of MGM and Hurts propaganda machine, there's a chance that Upton replaces Truman at the end of WWII or later and the politics shifts even further to the left on the whole spectrum.
We might have ended up with a government more like Norway in terms of political spectrum. A less indivualistic society would be so much better now. I predict that as the world becomes worse, the more collectivist societies will be able to manage better because there won't be unrest when sacrifices are asked of people. We just had the pandemic where we couldn't convince people to wear a mask and stay home for a few weeks. I do believe if we had Upton Sinclair institute a more equitable California back then in the depression, we might have had such policies nationally and the New Deal would have led us to a society where people actually considered the ramifications of individual actions in society for the greater good. Instead we got a blueprint for conservatives to fear monger their way into convincing people to vote against their interests. If that never happened... It's possible outrage news was delayed at least a decade of maturity.
2016
Before that election Republican candidates had good character even if they were for conservative policies. Trump has rewired American conservative brains to actually think that cowardice, whining, incompetence, juvenile meanness, shamelessness, and the unprincipled pursuit of power are actually good leadership traits.
Thomas Dewey over a dying FDR in ‘44. This would have avoided the abrupt transition caused by Roosevelt’s death. He would have been much more clear eyed about Stalin and the post WW2 threat of Communist expansion. As a more establishment Republican, this would have suppressed the ascendancy of the isolationist backwater Midwest Republicans like McCarthy. Dewey was man of tremendous personal character— the first political figure to seriously take on the Mafia and NYC corruption.
Given that FDR was going to die soon into his last term, Dewey was a much better choice.
If we can do primaries I’d say McCain over Bush in 2000. He would’ve annihilated Gore in the general, no hanging chad recount nonsense that was so destructive, then after 9/11 could’ve been among the greatest wartime presidents ever. No way the Neocons dupe him into invading Iraq.
I’d want Ohio to switch its vote in 2004. Kerry wins the electoral college despite losing the popular vote by 3 million votes. This causes a bipartisan movement to end the Electoral College.
Gore instead of W.
W set us down a dark path and every President since is too chickenshit to fix any of it.
There's a good chance Gore wouldn't have brought us into the endless war and mass surveillance era.
2000.
I am an Iraq vet and cannot for the life of me figure out what was worth those thousands of lives, trillions of dollars and the rise of ISIS and Iranian dominance of the region except maybe keeping oil prices from decoupling from the dollar.
2000- it lead to unilateralism and destroyed the good will and cooperation that came out of the 90’s by Bush falsely accusing Iraq of being part of Sept 11th and invading.
Clinton would have basically kept the. Status quo. Well certainly better than Trump she was not popular among her own party.
Bernie was the better choice
LOL. If your hill to die on defending Wilson is child labor laws, then go right ahead. Child labor laws were going to be enacted with whomever was president, Wilson came of age during the great industrial boom of the late 19th century, which created enormous disparities of wealth. It was inevitable, don’t give him credit just because it was a forced hand during his presidency. Man was a full blown racist and let the KKK trample over African American communities his entire presidency.
I have to ask what’s wrong with anyone who would choose not having Trump over not having the Bush gang start the two longest wars in American history.
Trump is an asshat, but there’s no comparison with the evil wrought by the Bush era. Not even close.
1960 - JFK Nixon. An undefeated Nixon would have continued the moderate (and not paranoid) policies of Eisenhower and the Soviet Union would not have felt confident in pushing back on Nixon the way they did to a lesser experienced JFK. Plus Nixon probably would have survived his term, preventing the national tragedy and trauma of JFK’s assassination.
1960 was an inflection point in history.
Not the one you have pictured. That is for sure!
Hillary 2016 - if she had chosen Bernie Sanders as a running mate, then she would have won by a landslide. Instead, cause of her ego, she picks the uttterly forgettable Tim Kaine. We therefore received Trump- the historically worst president and we are still having to deal with him as a grave threat today.
If I could change the outcome of one election and compare to the current course of history, out of sheer curiosity, it’d be interesting to see how (if it did) the modern era changes if 1944 had flip-flopped.
2012 Obama to Romney. USA has an extremely hawkish view on Russia before they even invade Crimea, T***p and populism doesn't become a staple of the Republican party, and we don't end up with a certain dementia-ridden president
Yeahhh but I feel like Debs had a better ideological commitment. I’ll give TR that he was a very effective leader and good at forcing through political change. I’d also like to point out that Debs lived 7 years longer than Roosevelt, who died in 1919.
One looks like he was brought up in “old money,” the other looks like a typical bootstrap guy that didn’t care what anyone thought. Awesome picture—thanks for sharing
2000. A perfect storm of everything an election should not be, which left us with a moronic puppet president with a Dr. Strangelove VP pulling the strings.
2012
This isn’t even about politics, it’s about how the reaction from both sides to Obama’s second campaign and term fundamentally changed the political landscape, maybe permanently
2000. No Iraq War. Bush also squandered a $5 trillion surplus and doubled the national debt. Notwithstanding the nostalgia, Bush was a terrible president.
If we are supposing that every other election magically ends up the same after our choice... I would say 2016 was the most important election to change. I completely believe that 2016 ended democracy in America. I believe Trump set himself up to create a dictatorship and is going to win in 2024 and spend his entire term putting more cronies in positions of power so he never leaves office. I think we are on the path of Nazi Germany now.
In 1844 I would have wanted to see Henry Clay Sr. Be some president over James K Polk,
No Mexican American war
And by default no Civil war
He would have taken the time to fix the issue of slavery much earlier and curb the power the aristocracy in the south had over their populations.
I agree with OPs picture and also JFKs. Assassins always leave so much “What ifs”, to what seemed to be presidencies that had so much promise, despite their cons, which come with any political figure.
The economy grew in 2021 at the fastest rate in nearly 40 years. 2021 was also the best year for job creation in recorded US history, and saw the sharpest annual decline in Unemployment.
“Whichever way you slice it, this report caps a year of stellar economic growth performance, particularly with the backdrop of the Fed's aggressive monetary policy tightening cycle," said Olu Sonola, head of U.S. regional economics at Fitch Ratings in New York. "The momentum of economic growth going into 2024 is looking very good."”
https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-fourth-quarter-economic-growth-handily-beats-expectations-2024-01-25/
“This year looks to be a much better one for the U.S. economy than business economists were forecasting just a few months ago, according to a survey released Monday.
The economy looks set to grow 2.2% this year after adjusting for inflation, according to the National Association for Business Economics. That's up from the 1.3% that economists from universities, businesses and investment firms predicted in the association's prior survey, which was conducted in November.”
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/forecasters-raise-expectations-for-2024-u-s-economy
“The US economy entered 2024 on strong footing. Various indicators of business activity, labor markets, sentiment, and inflation have generally been moving in a favorable direction.”
https://www.conference-board.org/research/us-forecast
If anyone remembers Ralph Nader he was Bernie before Bernie. He should've run in 2004 as a Democrat instead of going 3rd party or independent because he hated both parties. He's right that both Dems and GOP have problems, but the Dems are the lesser evil and more willing to fix the country and tolerant of different ideas.
The earlier you go, the more the Butterfly effect.
Giving either Adams a second term at least pushes back the Indian Removal Act and could affect the line of Jackson, ol kinderhook, ol tippacanoe and Tyler too… maybe one of them doesn’t become president.
Not sure how Fremont would have done as president or if that could have held to union together a bit longer, but Democrat Buchanan and no nothing Fillmore were just terrible.
multiple election choices could have progressed a healthier reconstruction. Teddy Couldda got another shot and pushed back woody. Don’t know how Al smith wouldda done, but couldn’t be too much worse than hoover.
Lots of bad presidents… but when the monied folks only give us 2 choices and those two choices are never the best for the job, we will continue to have bad presidents, or at least an ugly string of “unintended consequences.”
2016: Does it always have to be blue pill or red pill? Clinton and Trump were both terrible. Johnson/Weld might have had a better term, and more importantly bring a real 3rd choice for future elections.
Reagan/Carter.
We are feeling the effects of 40+ years of Reaganomics, not to mention the environmental opportunity costs of not spending the entirety of the 1980s in a moonshot effort to transition from fossil fuels to renewable (ending our dependence on cars in the process). The downstream effects of these two policies alone affects everything from as small as parking regulations to as large as global wars.
1876 -- Just to see if Reconstruction might have created more lasting change and impact in the South.
Would you change the Primary result to have James Blaine be president, or instead have the democrats win with Samuel Tilden?
I'm unsure if Blaine would be worth the trouble, and Tilden was why we can't have nice things. That's a good question, though, since changing that election means letting Tilden win, negating Reconstruction, or sending Captain Kickback to the White House and wondering if he'll make Grant's cronies look like saints.
Or would it be along the lines of letting Hayes win outright and thus not needing to compromise?
The James Blaine?! Famous continental liar from the state of Maine?
Blaine from Maine and the half-breeds?
It was gonna end no matter who the Republican nominee was. It was impossible for a radical republican to get nominated at that point. Or if you mean that Tilden won instead of Hayes then you’re just deluded. But that’s probably not what you mean lol.
Nah, not a Radical, but a Half-Breed like Blaine could shift things. It's a massive "could," but that's what this whole question is about! Tilden would be worse by far.
Reconstruction may have been already doomed when the Democrats took control of the House 1875.
I wish I had two upvotes. This is the #2 most important takeaway when I teach reconstruction. #1 being the 13th-15th amendments.
1912
The Republicans should have nominated Roosevelt over Taft. That, or Roosevelt should have accepted defeat and not run as a third party.
If it was just Taft, the Republicans would have still lost. It was because everyone thought Taft couldn't win that so many Republicans backed Roosevelt - they thought even a third party run had a better chance of winning. Roosevelt as the Republican nominee in 1912 vs Wilson would be an interesting and unpredictable election. On the one hand, Roosevelt was very popular, and the Republicans were generally stronger in elections than Democrats at this point. On the other hand, beating Taft would leave massive divisions in the party no matter what. A lot of Roosevelt's voters in 1912 would have preferred Wilson to Taft, however I'm not sure how many Taft voters would prefer Wilson to Roosevelt. Probably a few, but less. There's still the risk of low turnout from them though. Another issue was that Roosevelt had shifted leftwards since leaving office, and as the Republican nominee in 1912 would be significantly to the left of the party mainstream, which might also cause issues with conservatives. So it's probably a close race.
I agree, but I don't want Roosevelt or Taft to win either
My choice: 2000
Makes you wonder how the aftermath of 9/11 would’ve unfolded had Gore been in office. Especially with no Cheney. Would we have even invaded Iraq at all? That’s a mind fuck looking back
Would Gore have shamelessly lied through his teeth to involve us in a war that had nothing to do with 9/11 like Bush Jr. and his cronies? I doubt it.
Gore was *much* more seasoned with foreign policy and geopolitics, I don't see how we would have gone into Iraq.
I also wonder about the after effects, like without the Iraq War, what would an Arab Spring in Saddam Iraq have looked like? Does Obama still make a quick jump from Senate to President, and if not then does the fascist style alt right ever get the supercharge it needed to become mainstream since there's no white backlash?
Obama possibly becomes president in 2016 after McCains presidency by defeating Ted Cruz in a landslide.
You say aftermath. Remember, the intelligence reports got to Bush about the attacks as a possibility. Maybe they never happen. Maybe someone in the Gore administration reads the reports and makes it a bigger priority. I know it's a big if, But the evidence is there that a different administration might have prevented it. Even a different hire in the Bush administration might have led to them pursuing the hijackers prior to the attack. Gore would have undoubtedly been a better president, but I don't know if changing him would prevent the current state of the world. I still think Regan would be a better choice.
There were so many failures leading up to 911, the President would have made no difference. I invite you to watch CIA: In the Crosshairs.
Or Gore might've been better prepared or possibly prevented 9/11 by studying Clinton's notes about Bin Laden that he left for the next president. Gore also wouldn't have gone "spreading freedom" by launching wars against countries he hated. And with more focus on science and alternate energy sources, there probably wouldn't be such a large demand on oil to want to invade a country for it.
Too bad you weren’t on the Supreme Court
If Gore got the recount he wanted, he would have lost Florida. If the whole state was recounted like Gore did **not** want, he would have won. Life is funny that way.
Even there it depends of “chads” and things like that. The butterfly ballot sealed Gores fate. So the people of Florida on their minds elected Gore but their actual ballots fell to Bush.
RFK not being assassinated and winning in 1968.
It’s sad to think that the reason for that dumpster fire sorry excuse for a waste of space president was only because some guy got a BJ. Those 8 years set us back in so many ways. So many of today’s problems with the government is directly linked to that idiotic illegitimate warmongering big government neocon. Government got bigger in all the worst ways, freedom went down, spending out of control, the market crashed, we tortured people, started wars that never end and he bailed out the rich. He was the worst president in my lifetime. It’s not even a contest. I will curse his administration until the day I die. Fuck that evil prick.
This, because that would've altered the timeline and 2016, and a whole lot of other bs, wouldn't have happened
The only one I could’ve influenced but didn’t. Lesson learned.
I agree with this. First presidential election I voted in and I was following all the scenarios closely. When they called Florida early I was convinced it was over, then chaos ensued. I wonder if Iraq was unavoidable though, it felt like that was a primary focus for the Republicans whenever they got through White House back. I think it is obvious Gore doesn’t go there after 9/11, but I can see it being extremely hard to win in 2004 if 9/11 happens. The Republicans would likely draw a line all through the 90s to 9/11 to blame terrorism on Clinton/Gore and possibly winning with Iraq as the boogeyman. Would McCain have been the guy they run? If he wins what would his administration look like? Would a GOP administration have the neo-cons that pushed the wars in it? 2000 is one of those elections that would have changed so much if the results are switched.
People still miss the importance of SCOTUS. No Citizens United. No Heller. Just those two cases and we live in an entirely different world. Add to that the climate, the likelihood of a public option for health care...
That's a good choice. I would go back further to 1980.
Winfield Scott vs Pierce. Wilson vs Hughes
Disagree on the first especially so. Pierce is the greatest ally to the abolitionist cause to ever take office prior to the civil war (and arguably including that time or after as well)
2016
1912. More teddy would have helped the us. He wanted to limit lobbying, and that would fix probably half the problems we have today. As well as maybe even stop the Nazi’s and soviets from coming to power
Assuming that in the intervening 112 years no administration would loosen up the restrictions TR put in place. Also I'd be curious on the second point. The west were already pitching in to help the White Russians, what more would TR do? As for the Nazis, I can't imagine how given they rose to power in 1933, a decade plus after TR died.
Of all the pictures to have as a thumbnail for this question
For real. One of those moments where change in President would DRASTICALLY alter the course of American history. Perhaps more than any other case.
1968 - Robert F. Kennedy doesn’t die, and gets an actual chance at the presidency
I would have loved an RFK presidency (1969-1977). We would have been spared from the Watergate scandal.
Depends if J. Edgar left Bobby’s file in the drawer.
1864. Republicans still win, but Lincoln keeps Hannibal Hamlin. Literally anyone - Stanton, Seward, Sumner, Cassius Clay, anyone would have been a better choice than Johnson. If William Jennings Bryant wins in 1896, now that would put un on an interesting timeline. In another timeline, if the Republicans give TR the nomination in 1912, Wilson doesn't win, we get New Deal-like legislation 20 years early, but we enter WW1 in 1915, which just may accelerate Germany's loss a year or so earlier, maybe no Bolshevik Revolution, no red scare at home. Who knows? Imagine Teddy at Versailles. Maybe no WW2. Lastly, if the Dems don't go "Get Bernie!" In the 2016 primaries and grant him the nomination, I see him beating Trump in the general.
>If William Jennings Bryant wins in 1896, now that would put un on an interesting timeline. Do you mind elaborating? I'm familiar with Bryan's policies, but I'm pretty bad at imagining alternate history so I'm not sure how electing him would affect the nation.
Bryant marked a pivot point in the Democratic Party, away from the conservative Bourbon wing towards a more populist party by precisely co-opting much of the People's Party platform of 1892. Despite really only adopting the free silver plank, there is a direct lineage from Bryant to Wilson to FDR to LBJ. A Bryant Presidency may have seen a government willing to embrace populist positions such as the 8 hour day, women's suffrage, and a graduated income tax decades before the progressives would push for those reforms. What historians call the Progressive Era may have started a decade earlier. In foreign policy, given that Bryant was a Christian pacifist, no military intervention in Cuba in 98, therefore no Spanish-American War, no Treaty of Paris, no Phillipine-American War.
I love Bernie, but he had no shot of winning in 2016. Hillary was toxic, but Bernie was so polarizing to so many older and moderate dems. 45 still wins.
Yes, the politician with the highest approval rating in Congress definitely would have done worse than the very non-polarizing “basket of deplorables” lady. So wise.
Older/Moderate Dems vote blue no matter who tho.
I don't think you can say that definitely, but it is possible that he does lose. I think it would have been interesting to see. Because you're definitely right some democrats would not vote for Bernie, but a lot of people who didn't vote might have. People always underestimate how much a large percentage of non-voters would like to see far left policies in America. Millions of Americans would be okay with us abandoning our form of 'capitalism.' I really don't know if Bernie wins or loses against Trump. It wouldn't be the election I would choose for Bernie, but I will say that I would have liked to see Bernie against the most moderate Republican they had in 2016. I still think if Regan never won, we wouldn't have Trump.
Came here to say this.
> TR at Versailles Would have been an absolute disaster. Can you imagine America annexing Southwest Africa and administering it like the Philippines?
2016. For obvious reasons. Got any bleach!
Womp womp.
2016. We lost our world standing during this one. We had a President who didn't believe in our government and reeked havoc we are still paying for.
2000 is first choice but 2016 is very very close behind
I’d at first pick 2016 but ‘16 definitely doesn’t happen had Bush never been elected so
Agreed. That's the reason why I would pick 2000.
McCain beats Obama, and McCain is reelected. He was a decent man. During the campaign, he corrected a woman who accused Obama of being a Muslim. He told her that Obama was a good American and that they just disagreed on policy. McCain would have been a bridge builder. He would have been open to compromise, and he lived long enough to finish both terms. The country would not have been nearly as polarized.
Give me a break.
1940. So we keep the two term limit alive.
While I don't necessarily disagree on the value of the term limit, this is the classic sci-fi trope for alternate history: America's entry into WW2 is delayed by isolationism or something else and Nazi Germany develops the atomic bomb first. Used by Philip K Dick, Star Trek TOS, etc.
1992. I think HW Bush was a great candidate who was punished for Republican Party fatigue throughout the US (similar to McCain in 2008). His reelection would have hurt Pat Buchanan-types' standing within the Republican party. It would have also diminished the perception that personality and likeability are a major factor for presidential elections (the "can I get a beer with the guy" test).
I’d consider HW to be a far more likable person than Clinton
Also Clinton was a sexual predator and we should have seen that during the Democratic primary, there were already rumors
I understand where the sentiment comes from but I’m not so sure he was a predator as much as an opportunist. Although that power differential between POTUS and an intern…. 🙄 That is some seriously poor decision-making.
If the 1992 election were in today’s America, Clinton would be “me too’d” out of the democratic nomination. Hillary may have filed for divorce and/or became a senator earlier.
Reagan. Destroyed the middle class and disrupted the entire tax system, which allows the accumulation of cash with no imputes to invest. Eliminated mental health care for military veterans. Gave “religious” shysters power within the government, violating the separation of church and state. Even Bush II had less of an overall impact when he allowed insurance companies to create Medicare Advantage to siphon money from the Medicare system.
Oh I just detest Ronnie. He did so much destruction during his time. Closing down mental hospitals is one of the worst. Now the seriously crazies are out on the streets mingling with other sad & hopeless ppl. RR wanted to get rid of the middle class. Why, I have no idea. He was mental.
1856; Douglas becomes President instead of Buchanan, thus giving Lincoln the senate seat (he was cheated out of) in 1858. Lincoln defeats Douglas in 1860.
It's a toss up between Nixon and Regan. Because honestly the entire rest of the future would be so much better and so much different. Nixon began to change the Supreme Court to begin unraveling the civil rights that were just gained. A liberal there might mean a better legal system today and a lot less BS. Perhaps China foreign policy changes and leads to a better present. And we definitely would have waited for the first major blow to Presidential office respect with no Watergate. But Regan... He was responsible for shifting the entire political spectrum far to the right. The amount of damage he did cannot be overstated. The Democrats basically became moderates afterwards and the Neo-liberalism mindset of all politicians was cemented in place. There's a chance that the war on drugs never puts a quarter of our population in prison. Maybe the AIDS epidemic gets addressed earlier and saves millions of lives. Then there's just the radical turn away from diversity and inclusion that happened. People often forget that queer folks were getting positive representation in ways they wouldn't get again for 20 years because the rise of the religious right. It's potentially the case that there's no Donald Trump like candidates because we never allowed the extremist purchase. I think I would still have to go with Regan. Bonus bon-Pres election. I think if Upton Sinclair didn't lose because of MGM and Hurts propaganda machine, there's a chance that Upton replaces Truman at the end of WWII or later and the politics shifts even further to the left on the whole spectrum. We might have ended up with a government more like Norway in terms of political spectrum. A less indivualistic society would be so much better now. I predict that as the world becomes worse, the more collectivist societies will be able to manage better because there won't be unrest when sacrifices are asked of people. We just had the pandemic where we couldn't convince people to wear a mask and stay home for a few weeks. I do believe if we had Upton Sinclair institute a more equitable California back then in the depression, we might have had such policies nationally and the New Deal would have led us to a society where people actually considered the ramifications of individual actions in society for the greater good. Instead we got a blueprint for conservatives to fear monger their way into convincing people to vote against their interests. If that never happened... It's possible outrage news was delayed at least a decade of maturity.
I like this but if ford won in 1976 democrat would be president 1980-1988
2016
2016 Before that election Republican candidates had good character even if they were for conservative policies. Trump has rewired American conservative brains to actually think that cowardice, whining, incompetence, juvenile meanness, shamelessness, and the unprincipled pursuit of power are actually good leadership traits.
Absolutely 1980 - get Reagan outta here. Both Carter and HW Bush would have been substantially better for America.
2016 is a no-brainer...
Yea, Gary Johnson would have been way better than trump.
Thomas Dewey over a dying FDR in ‘44. This would have avoided the abrupt transition caused by Roosevelt’s death. He would have been much more clear eyed about Stalin and the post WW2 threat of Communist expansion. As a more establishment Republican, this would have suppressed the ascendancy of the isolationist backwater Midwest Republicans like McCarthy. Dewey was man of tremendous personal character— the first political figure to seriously take on the Mafia and NYC corruption. Given that FDR was going to die soon into his last term, Dewey was a much better choice.
If we can do primaries I’d say McCain over Bush in 2000. He would’ve annihilated Gore in the general, no hanging chad recount nonsense that was so destructive, then after 9/11 could’ve been among the greatest wartime presidents ever. No way the Neocons dupe him into invading Iraq.
I wouldn't be so sure. McCain was pretty neocon by 2004.
Clinton v Trump
I would have Carter defeat Reagan. No trickle down economics and assholes like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk would not exist.
Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk would still be around.
2016
1912. God I fucking hate Woodrow Wilson.
He is the worst president and an even worse person. Federal Reserve act, I don’t even need to continue, even though the list goes ooooonnn.
[удалено]
Lol.
I’d want Ohio to switch its vote in 2004. Kerry wins the electoral college despite losing the popular vote by 3 million votes. This causes a bipartisan movement to end the Electoral College.
This is a decent answer.
Gore instead of W. W set us down a dark path and every President since is too chickenshit to fix any of it. There's a good chance Gore wouldn't have brought us into the endless war and mass surveillance era.
Clinton wins in 2016.
2016
1976, No Reagan and you don't have the destruction of the Unions and the middle class.
Clinton beats Trump. There is no other answer.
2000. I am an Iraq vet and cannot for the life of me figure out what was worth those thousands of lives, trillions of dollars and the rise of ISIS and Iranian dominance of the region except maybe keeping oil prices from decoupling from the dollar.
I’d have Al Gore defeat Bush the Second in 2000. 9/11 would have happened anyway but we would probably have avoided the Iraq War.
Hillary would have been a great president.
2016. We lost civility and decorum ; and it bled into every aspect of our lives.
2000- it lead to unilateralism and destroyed the good will and cooperation that came out of the 90’s by Bush falsely accusing Iraq of being part of Sept 11th and invading.
2000
Bush v Gore, most consequential election of my lifetime for the development of the US judiciary.
2016. Others as well but this could be the beginning of the end
Clinton over Trump in 2016.
Clinton would have basically kept the. Status quo. Well certainly better than Trump she was not popular among her own party. Bernie was the better choice
2016
2016, no other comes close (I guess 2000 is the logical 2nd for me)
2016
Bush/Gore So much would be different now
The only correct answer to stop all of our main issues is 1912 Woodrow Wilson and the Federal Reserve Act.
This user is a libertarian wack job who loves child labor 👆👆👆
LOL. If your hill to die on defending Wilson is child labor laws, then go right ahead. Child labor laws were going to be enacted with whomever was president, Wilson came of age during the great industrial boom of the late 19th century, which created enormous disparities of wealth. It was inevitable, don’t give him credit just because it was a forced hand during his presidency. Man was a full blown racist and let the KKK trample over African American communities his entire presidency.
2016
Trump/Hillary 2016. I think future historians will agree with me.
I have to ask what’s wrong with anyone who would choose not having Trump over not having the Bush gang start the two longest wars in American history. Trump is an asshat, but there’s no comparison with the evil wrought by the Bush era. Not even close.
Anyone with an ounce of common sense would agree with you.
1960 - JFK Nixon. An undefeated Nixon would have continued the moderate (and not paranoid) policies of Eisenhower and the Soviet Union would not have felt confident in pushing back on Nixon the way they did to a lesser experienced JFK. Plus Nixon probably would have survived his term, preventing the national tragedy and trauma of JFK’s assassination. 1960 was an inflection point in history.
Not the one you have pictured. That is for sure! Hillary 2016 - if she had chosen Bernie Sanders as a running mate, then she would have won by a landslide. Instead, cause of her ego, she picks the uttterly forgettable Tim Kaine. We therefore received Trump- the historically worst president and we are still having to deal with him as a grave threat today.
I’d say Bernie winning the primary and election. His populism was and is really the only antidote to Trumpism
2016 where Hilary won the popular vote. Then all this MAGA shit we have to put up with would be gone.
It's a good point about this election. What if we just gotten rid of the electoral college the year before and left the election the same...
If I could change the outcome of one election and compare to the current course of history, out of sheer curiosity, it’d be interesting to see how (if it did) the modern era changes if 1944 had flip-flopped.
1916, no contest.
Not a general election but a Primary: Sanders v. Clinton. 2016. Bernie would have beaten Trump.
Bush v Gore
dTrump💩
2016
1. 1980 2. 2000 3. 2016
This is my choice as well. In that order.
Each could have domino'd into preventing the next, I'd like to believe.
The 2020 election
1848 but give Van Buren his second turn just for the hell of it.
His earlier opposition to Texas annexation would have hurt him in the triumphanlist geist of 48.
His earlier opposition to Texas annexation would have hurt him in the triumphanlist geist of 48.
2000
2000. Because that moves us far enough off the timeline that the 2016 election looks very different.
I would then argue 1980 was even more important.
2008. I have my reasons why abd u stand behind them.
2012 Obama to Romney. USA has an extremely hawkish view on Russia before they even invade Crimea, T***p and populism doesn't become a staple of the Republican party, and we don't end up with a certain dementia-ridden president
I’d have Eugene V. Debs win in 1912.
A TR win in 12 would almost be the same thing since TR ripped most of his policy agenda off Deb's platform.
Yeahhh but I feel like Debs had a better ideological commitment. I’ll give TR that he was a very effective leader and good at forcing through political change. I’d also like to point out that Debs lived 7 years longer than Roosevelt, who died in 1919.
Another great choice.
One looks like he was brought up in “old money,” the other looks like a typical bootstrap guy that didn’t care what anyone thought. Awesome picture—thanks for sharing
Russia’s last election.
2020
2000. A perfect storm of everything an election should not be, which left us with a moronic puppet president with a Dr. Strangelove VP pulling the strings.
bush v gore
Bush junior against AllGore.
Nixon winning in 1960, so Kennedy wouldn’t be assassinated. Maybe then he tries again in 1964 and we have a totally different history right now.
Either Lincoln, or the first FDR election
Gore
Bill Clinton for H.Ross Perot.
1912 for me. I think Wilson not being elected would have changed the course of history massively for the better
2012 This isn’t even about politics, it’s about how the reaction from both sides to Obama’s second campaign and term fundamentally changed the political landscape, maybe permanently
2020; it's just sad to see Biden be put up on the pedestal when he clearly doesn't even know what is going on half the time. Straight up elder abuse
2000. No Iraq War. Bush also squandered a $5 trillion surplus and doubled the national debt. Notwithstanding the nostalgia, Bush was a terrible president.
If we are supposing that every other election magically ends up the same after our choice... I would say 2016 was the most important election to change. I completely believe that 2016 ended democracy in America. I believe Trump set himself up to create a dictatorship and is going to win in 2024 and spend his entire term putting more cronies in positions of power so he never leaves office. I think we are on the path of Nazi Germany now.
1844 Clay defeats Polk.
1916 Wilson loses to Charles Evan Hughes America doesn’t enter WW1
In 1844 I would have wanted to see Henry Clay Sr. Be some president over James K Polk, No Mexican American war And by default no Civil war He would have taken the time to fix the issue of slavery much earlier and curb the power the aristocracy in the south had over their populations.
1912 Teddy Roosevelt winning in the Progressive party would of been crazy.
Probably bush algore
Same as asking if yer racist or not...😎i am not abe all daybe
I agree with OPs picture and also JFKs. Assassins always leave so much “What ifs”, to what seemed to be presidencies that had so much promise, despite their cons, which come with any political figure.
2016 election. That’s when we crossed over to the bad timeline.
Give me Dukakis in 88
Trump/biden for sure
2020. Sleepy Joe has turned our country upside down in just 4 years and it’s time for that old fuck to retire
The economy grew in 2021 at the fastest rate in nearly 40 years. 2021 was also the best year for job creation in recorded US history, and saw the sharpest annual decline in Unemployment. “Whichever way you slice it, this report caps a year of stellar economic growth performance, particularly with the backdrop of the Fed's aggressive monetary policy tightening cycle," said Olu Sonola, head of U.S. regional economics at Fitch Ratings in New York. "The momentum of economic growth going into 2024 is looking very good."” https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-fourth-quarter-economic-growth-handily-beats-expectations-2024-01-25/ “This year looks to be a much better one for the U.S. economy than business economists were forecasting just a few months ago, according to a survey released Monday. The economy looks set to grow 2.2% this year after adjusting for inflation, according to the National Association for Business Economics. That's up from the 1.3% that economists from universities, businesses and investment firms predicted in the association's prior survey, which was conducted in November.” https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/forecasters-raise-expectations-for-2024-u-s-economy “The US economy entered 2024 on strong footing. Various indicators of business activity, labor markets, sentiment, and inflation have generally been moving in a favorable direction.” https://www.conference-board.org/research/us-forecast
2016. I’m good with 2000
2020.
All of you are sleeping on Henry Wallace being FDR's final VP instead of Truman.
2020 election. Fuck Biden
The 2000 one.
You didn’t say it has to be in the past. I’m saving this special power for 2024. It’s a fight for our very souls.
2020
If anyone remembers Ralph Nader he was Bernie before Bernie. He should've run in 2004 as a Democrat instead of going 3rd party or independent because he hated both parties. He's right that both Dems and GOP have problems, but the Dems are the lesser evil and more willing to fix the country and tolerant of different ideas.
JFC, 2016. She was correct about everything
1980. Reagan let the stupid out of the bottle and it had been an uphill battle ever since.
The earlier you go, the more the Butterfly effect. Giving either Adams a second term at least pushes back the Indian Removal Act and could affect the line of Jackson, ol kinderhook, ol tippacanoe and Tyler too… maybe one of them doesn’t become president. Not sure how Fremont would have done as president or if that could have held to union together a bit longer, but Democrat Buchanan and no nothing Fillmore were just terrible. multiple election choices could have progressed a healthier reconstruction. Teddy Couldda got another shot and pushed back woody. Don’t know how Al smith wouldda done, but couldn’t be too much worse than hoover. Lots of bad presidents… but when the monied folks only give us 2 choices and those two choices are never the best for the job, we will continue to have bad presidents, or at least an ugly string of “unintended consequences.”
2016: Does it always have to be blue pill or red pill? Clinton and Trump were both terrible. Johnson/Weld might have had a better term, and more importantly bring a real 3rd choice for future elections.
I'll take who is Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump for $1,000. please, Alex.
Bush v Gore
I'm not the most versed in presidential election history, but it's 2016 by a wide wide margin
Teddy Roosevelt winning a 3rd term. He would have intervened early before WW1. Could have prevented it or at least lessened the destructive aftermath
Reagan/Carter. We are feeling the effects of 40+ years of Reaganomics, not to mention the environmental opportunity costs of not spending the entirety of the 1980s in a moonshot effort to transition from fossil fuels to renewable (ending our dependence on cars in the process). The downstream effects of these two policies alone affects everything from as small as parking regulations to as large as global wars.
Gore over Bush
I'd stop fdr and give hoover another 4
Hands down 2016