Last one of this season - only 5 more..
Al Gore win the 2000 Presidential elections
Fifth radioprogramme of DR 31 December 2020
USA leading in renewable/sustainable energy – no 9/11?
Professor Jørn Brøndal, University of Southern Denmark, American etnic, racial and political history since 1865 – aspects of American Historiography. Have written as part of a work on a possible counterfactual but not a main theme. General interpretation of AH as an Intellectual pastime. Though think that it is interesting to ponder what would have happened to USA should Lincoln or Kennedy not have been assassinated!
Background to the main question – the votes of Florida deciding the outcome was a meagre 537 which was ultimately decided by the Surpreme Court of USA not to continue counting. A Surpreme Court dominated by members elected by Republican Presidents.
USA at the time was rich, there was no war. Gore wanted to pay off National Debts and continue developing Social Security. Bush wanted tax cuts. Both wanted rebuilding of the Military. Gore had served in Vietnam in an effort to aid his fathers political career.
Gore seen as progressive with an interest in science and computers. Had written ”Earth in the balance” 1992.
Now WI Gore had won the 2000 elections? He would preside over an America becoming increasingly polarized in the vein of Newt Gingrich ”contract with America”. A divided Congress would make ruling difficult. He would want to get out of the shadow of Bill Clinton so adopt a pragmatic course; pay off National Debt, increase Military funding, continue growth. Green energy adaption would be difficult – Gore had been party to negotiate the Kyoto Protocol though he wouldn't abide by it though he might try to do something about late in his presidency – possible 2 term – without involving Congress. Definately no end to fossil fuel.
The racial divide wouldn't be an issue of his.
Imprint on US society – 9/11 might have been averted as there had been terrorist attack on the US so the situation of a continued system may have reacted differently by going for al-Qaeda/bin Laden though if 9/11 happens which it might well he would undertake the situation seriously and probably invade Afghanistan to end al-Qaeda/bin Laden but not Iraq.
Brøndal refer here to a counterfactual book on the War in Iraq handled by Gore in the same way as Bush, jr. Brøndal think Gore might have treated the Iraqi's different during the immediate occupation to ease tension.
Gore had in a speech September 2002 mentioned that he wouldn't have greenlighted Iraq.
Would there have been a visible difference in politics with Gore? He would try finish Afghanistan before going on Iraq – on the new National Security Staff, the Patriot Act Gore said in a speech November 2003 that he would have chosen a more easy going approach though Gore at that time considered running for the next elections.
A jewish vice-president Joe Lieberman would probably be no problem during 2000.
Gore would have had another reputation because the individual do matter – small differences against Bush even if he did a lot of similar actions. So possibly not the heavy anti-Bush demonstrations in London and Germany during a Gore presidency.