Which Timeline Should I Pursue?

[David St. Hubbins II]

I'm new here and am planning on creating a new timeline. Deciding between several PODs:

-Harding does not die in office, and must face the fallout from the Teapot Dome scandal. With Robert LaFollette running strong as Progressive, higher profile Democrats angling for the nomination than in RL, and the Republicans weakened by Harding's unpopularity, 1924 promises to be a defining election.

-George Wallace over-performs in 1968, denying Nixon and Humphrey majorities in the electoral college. Wallace attempts to be "king-maker," and one fateful decision by another will forever alter American politics.

-Iran Contra gets bigger than in RL. George H.W. Bush "takes the fall" and resigns as he becomes further linked to the controversy. Who will Reagan pick as a new VP? What happens to the Reagan legacy? And which new Democrats will enter the race for President in 1988?

-Pat Buchanan upsets Bob Dole to win the 1996 GOP nomination. What looks to be a Clinton landslide in November is thrown into doubt when the Monica Lewinsky scandal surfaces earlier than in RL.

[Supersonic]

The second one looks fun.

[Enderman]

The final three seem cool.

[PPT Spiral]

Please do either the second or the fourth.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Do the second.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

The final three seem cool.

This. Also, is David St. Hubbins a "This is Spinal Tap" reference?

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

1. Wallace in '68
2. Bush 41 resigns
3. Buchanan vs. Clinton
4. Harding Lives.

[David St. Hubbins II]

The final three seem cool.

This. Also, is David St. Hubbins a "This is Spinal Tap" reference?

It most certainly is.

[David St. Hubbins II]

Thanks everybody for the feedback! Expect a timeline to start shortly.