As a general rule of thumb, when writing your own alternate history scenarios in response to other people’s alternate history scenarios, it helps if you can demonstrate at least a cursory knowledge of your subject matter. Like, say, knowing exactly what impeachment entails, the non parliamentary nature of the United States government, minor little details like that. As for being humorless and heavy-handed, well, Willis and Easterbrook were about even there anyway. Finally, when you get caught out, don’t get huffy about it.
(UPDATE: The mockery ends here, btw.)
Still, it’s a good question: how would have things gone under a hypothetical Gore administration? In my admittedly odd and heretical opinion: pretty much the same as under Bush. In my opinion, the recession, 9/11 and the Afghanistan invasion would have happened pretty much on schedule; as for Iraq… six month delay at most, more likely three, possibly even no delay at all, depending on how little said h.G.a. felt like humoring the UN. About the most significant difference would probably be that we’d probably have a Democratic Senate, maybe a Democratic House (I kind of doubt it, but it’s possible)… and a lot more lip service support from certain foreign countries. Everything else? Same old, same old: there’d be a recovering economy (none of this stuff about tax cuts and interest rates, it’s all about appeasing the economic gods with the appropriate animal sacrifices), a seething Iraq and a scandal-ridden UN* in this alternate, too.
As to how well Gore would have handled this… if you want to believe that he would have solved it all and wrapped it up in a bow, knock yourself out; likewise to those who’d consider the “We’d All Be Doomed” scenario to be more likely. We’re never going to know either way – or even if a third option (“Eh. He got through it, some good here, some bad there, got lucky a few times, got knocked back once or twice”) would have been the end result.
Read more
