If elected, how badly do you think Kerry would have lost in 2008?

[phk]

Assume he wins 2004 with a slim victory all-around and picks up Ohio.

[Derek]

http://

I can't imagine how bad it would look to go from the days where Bush was so popular to how things went in Bush's second term which were unrelated to his presidency. Kerry would have been about as popular as Bush was in his second term and only won the states I have in red because of the democrat machine. Not a single battleground state outside of the usual democratic states and democrat battlegrounds.

[Bo]

Depends on who his opponent would have been, how Iraq and Afghanistan would have looked, and at the timing of the financial crisis (whether it would have occured before or after the election). IMO, I think Kerry would have been able to win up to 250 EVs without a financial crisis and up to 200 EVs with a financial crisis. That being said, any scandal-free GOPer would have probably beaten Kerry in 2008.

[Derek]

Depends on who his opponent would have been, how Iraq and Afghanistan would have looked, and at the timing of the financial crisis (whether it would have occured before or after the election). IMO, I think Kerry would have been able to win up to 250 EVs without a financial crisis and up to 200 EVs with a financial crisis. That being said, any scandal-free GOPer would have probably beaten Kerry in 2008.

Scandal free is important but other than that, it doesn't take a great candidate to defeat Kerry on a national level. The financial crisis would have been prevented had Kerry gotten into office because it would've been Kerry's first move. Look any idiot could've seen the financial meltdown of 2008 12 years in advance with the policies that were put in place at that time. In fact Bush called on congress in 2003 to solve it and McCain proposed his own bill in 2005. As for an EV, McCain was less than a point away from getting 200. Kerry was back and forth on foreign policy, but going off of how democrats have been in the last 40 years on that, I'd say even if we'd won the wars and brought our troops home, the GOP would be viewed as better on those issues.

[Bo]

Depends on who his opponent would have been, how Iraq and Afghanistan would have looked, and at the timing of the financial crisis (whether it would have occured before or after the election). IMO, I think Kerry would have been able to win up to 250 EVs without a financial crisis and up to 200 EVs with a financial crisis. That being said, any scandal-free GOPer would have probably beaten Kerry in 2008.

Scandal free is important but other than that, it doesn't take a great candidate to defeat Kerry on a national level. The financial crisis would have been prevented had Kerry gotten into office because it would've been Kerry's first move. Look any idiot could've seen the financial meltdown of 2008 12 years in advance with the policies that were put in place at that time. In fact Bush called on congress in 2003 to solve it and McCain proposed his own bill in 2005. As for an EV, McCain was less than a point away from getting 200. Kerry was back and forth on foreign policy, but going off of how democrats have been in the last 40 years on that, I'd say even if we'd won the wars and brought our troops home, the GOP would be viewed as better on those issues.

Kerry would not have prevented the financial crisis, but it might have occured after the election due to the buttefly effect. And I said Kerry would ahve lost in any case due to the 2008 recession.

[Derek]

Depends on who his opponent would have been, how Iraq and Afghanistan would have looked, and at the timing of the financial crisis (whether it would have occured before or after the election). IMO, I think Kerry would have been able to win up to 250 EVs without a financial crisis and up to 200 EVs with a financial crisis. That being said, any scandal-free GOPer would have probably beaten Kerry in 2008.

Scandal free is important but other than that, it doesn't take a great candidate to defeat Kerry on a national level. The financial crisis would have been prevented had Kerry gotten into office because it would've been Kerry's first move. Look any idiot could've seen the financial meltdown of 2008 12 years in advance with the policies that were put in place at that time. In fact Bush called on congress in 2003 to solve it and McCain proposed his own bill in 2005. As for an EV, McCain was less than a point away from getting 200. Kerry was back and forth on foreign policy, but going off of how democrats have been in the last 40 years on that, I'd say even if we'd won the wars and brought our troops home, the GOP would be viewed as better on those issues.

Kerry would not have prevented the financial crisis, but it might have occured after the election due to the buttefly effect. And I said Kerry would ahve lost in any case due to the 2008 recession.

I didn't mean he could have prevented it but it wouldn't have been made into a big deal by the media or the democrats. I mean honestly, do you think Barney Frank and Chris Dodd would have taken the stances they did if Kerry was in office? Kerry would have done something to prolong the situation from happening.

[Bo]

Depends on who his opponent would have been, how Iraq and Afghanistan would have looked, and at the timing of the financial crisis (whether it would have occured before or after the election). IMO, I think Kerry would have been able to win up to 250 EVs without a financial crisis and up to 200 EVs with a financial crisis. That being said, any scandal-free GOPer would have probably beaten Kerry in 2008.

Scandal free is important but other than that, it doesn't take a great candidate to defeat Kerry on a national level. The financial crisis would have been prevented had Kerry gotten into office because it would've been Kerry's first move. Look any idiot could've seen the financial meltdown of 2008 12 years in advance with the policies that were put in place at that time. In fact Bush called on congress in 2003 to solve it and McCain proposed his own bill in 2005. As for an EV, McCain was less than a point away from getting 200. Kerry was back and forth on foreign policy, but going off of how democrats have been in the last 40 years on that, I'd say even if we'd won the wars and brought our troops home, the GOP would be viewed as better on those issues.

Kerry would not have prevented the financial crisis, but it might have occured after the election due to the buttefly effect. And I said Kerry would ahve lost in any case due to the 2008 recession.

I didn't mean he could have prevented it but it wouldn't have been made into a big deal by the media or the democrats. I mean honestly, do you think Barney Frank and Chris Dodd would have taken the stances they did if Kerry was in office? Kerry would have done something to prolong the situation from happening.

No, it would have still been a very big deal, as unemployment would have been skyrocketing and the stock market would have collapsed. The media and the Democrats would also be acting like it was a big deal since people would be panicking and scared for their economic future. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd would have still acted the same way they did in RL. The housing bubble was already fully blown by 2005, and thus all would have needed to happen was for the housing bubble to pop to cause the recession and the financial crisis. There would have been no way to prevent the housing bubble from popping, and even once the housing bubble popped in RL (in 2007), almost no one foresaw that a massive financial crisis would follow afterwards. Thus, I honestly see nothing changing under a Kerry Presidency. And you act like the Democrats are the only ones responsible for the financial crisis and resulting recession. You forget that it was the GOP's idea to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act and to  deregulate derivatives, and that it was a GOP Fed Chairman (Greenspan) who kept interest rates too low for too long and thus blew a housing bubble under the watch of a GOP President (Bush Jr.). The Republicans also have their fair share of blame for causing the financial crisis and Great Recession.

[Thomas D]

McCain/Voinovich-290
Kerry/Edwards-248

[Bo]

McCain/Voinovich-290
Kerry/Edwards-248

Voinovich is too old and Edwards would probably not have his affairs if he was VP. I think a better VP for McCain would have been George Allen (assuming no Macaca gaffe), John Thune, John Hoeven, or Jim DeMint. And I'm assuming the financial crisis occurs after the election in your scenario?

[Thomas D]

No. The crash was in September just like in RL. I admit this map may be a best case for President Kerry.

[Bo]

No. The crash was in September just like in RL. I admit this map may be a best case for President Kerry.

You're probably right about best-case scenario for Kerry. Personally, I think Kerry would have lost by a much larger margin than this in 2008 (especially to McCain) if the financial crisis still occured at the same time as in RL.

[Derek]

W would have gone down as one of the greatest presidents too.

[hcallega]

W would have gone down as one of the greatest presidents too.

No, no he wouldn't. He would have been seen as Carter: an idealistic man who was met with a difficult situation(s) and was ultimately brought down by a foreign policy crisis.

Historians would have looked at 2004 as an election based on Bush's failures involving Iraq.

[Dancing with Myself]

McCain/Thune-307

Kerry/Obama-231

Mccain does really well, even winning Pennsylvania thanks to massive campaigning there. Kerry wins traditional Democratic states, but picks Obama as VP due to Edward's affair.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Kerry gets creamed, especially if Edwards stays on as Vice President.

[Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey]

Would Bush have pulled a Cleveland and run again? Especially considering he would've won a majority of the PV in 2004? He could simply ask: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

[Derek]

W would have gone down as one of the greatest presidents too.

No, no he wouldn't. He would have been seen as Carter: an idealistic man who was met with a difficult situation(s) and was ultimately brought down by a foreign policy crisis.

Historians would have looked at 2004 as an election based on Bush's failures involving Iraq.

He would have left with an approval rating above 50% whereas Carter was much lower. On election night, Bush would have been voted out with a 53% approval rating. That's unheard of for one term presidents.

[Derek]

McCain/Thune-307

Kerry/Obama-231

Mccain does really well, even winning Pennsylvania thanks to massive campaigning there. Kerry wins traditional Democratic states, but picks Obama as VP due to Edward's affair.

Haha that's true.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Say Kerry doesn't pick Edwards and picks Mark Warner as vP and he would of won OH and won it again in 2008 and maybe VA.

[Derek]

Say Kerry doesn't pick Edwards and picks Mark Warner as vP and he would of won OH and won it again in 2008 and maybe VA.

I don't think Mark Warner would have made much of a difference. VP choosing is over rated.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

Bush challenges Kerry in a rematch and wins easily.

John Kerry's approval rating would likely be in the low 30s on Election Day, which means a huge blowout. Even factoring in PBrower's absurd "approval plus six" rule, you still get a massive Republican victory. If I had to guess, I would say that there is a seven point swing away from Kerry at the bare minimum.

Romney/DeMint 484 Electoral Votes
Kerry/Edwards 54 Electoral Votes

(This presumes the financial crisis happening prior to the election, as in RL)

*FACEPALM*

[Bo]

Would Bush have pulled a Cleveland and run again? Especially considering he would've won a majority of the PV in 2004? He could simply ask: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

George W. Bush might have ran again, but I think it would have depended on a lot of factors. Kerry might have been relatively popular in 2006-2007 (45-55% approvals), and thus Bush might have decided to sit this one out. Also, Jeb might have wanted his turn at the Oval Office. Finally, despite Bush winning the PV, many Republicans might have still been disappointed at Bush for losing in 2004, and thus would have wanted someone else (not named Bush) as their nominee in 2008. Keep in mind that Al Gore didn't run again after winning the PV, and neither did Samuel J. Tilden.

[Bo]

W would have gone down as one of the greatest presidents too.

No, no he wouldn't. He would have been seen as Carter: an idealistic man who was met with a difficult situation(s) and was ultimately brought down by a foreign policy crisis.

Historians would have looked at 2004 as an election based on Bush's failures involving Iraq.

He would have left with an approval rating above 50% whereas Carter was much lower. On election night, Bush would have been voted out with a 53% approval rating. That's unheard of for one term presidents.

Approval and long term legacy are two completely different things.

[Derek]

W would have gone down as one of the greatest presidents too.

No, no he wouldn't. He would have been seen as Carter: an idealistic man who was met with a difficult situation(s) and was ultimately brought down by a foreign policy crisis.

Historians would have looked at 2004 as an election based on Bush's failures involving Iraq.

He would have left with an approval rating above 50% whereas Carter was much lower. On election night, Bush would have been voted out with a 53% approval rating. That's unheard of for one term presidents.

Approval and long term legacy are two completely different things.

Kerry would've inherited his legacy had he taken office. People would remember Bush from 2002 who championed the fight against terror even when things go tough.