Talk: Myers Way

Major Problems

Are you just making this stuff up without any thought, your infoboxes say that Barack Obama is elected president in 2008, yet it also says he is not going to run until 2012, it also says at one point he's from Michigan, which is just not true. You say Richard Myers is elected president in 2005, yet you also say in your president list that both he and Gale norton served as president until 2009. You desperately need to go over these pages and take control of it so there is some level of continuity.

yes i know there are some problems, i was have some "interference" by others users, add that is (abandoned by funder) a adopted TL by I. i will work in there, i am working in them--Fero 16:20, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

that ATL are in some point of view a alternative timeline of war on terrorism starged diferent, harder with assassination of almost american goverment, by a 747 crash in capitol, your help in wellcome--Fero 15:37, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

January 29, 2002 Posted: 11:10 PM EST (0410 GMT) that is the hour? of 2002 State of the Union Address by Bush in OTL (real world)--Fero 00:15, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

No way

Even with much of the US Government decapitated, there would be NO WAY that the US would be carved up between Canada and Mexico. Buk5 19:32, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

• i not talk about conquisted/almost conquisted, that is democracy, referendum, try of pacific expantion in the presice moment and place, and maybe not sucessfull--Fero 00:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, this is an awesome idea, but the outcomes do not seem historically likely. You wouldn't see States seceding if the President had a 97% approval rating.````

• • See Dixie and cry on us states seceding. Buk5 16:57, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

United States presidential line of succession

2001, try a rescue for antique the bush-time United States presidential line of succession, any help is wellcome--Fero 23:58, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Linconnnn

visit User:Lincolnnn and her Death of President George W. Bush, 2002, to use with permition some good ideas--Fero 01:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

add normal years event

oscars awards 2001-2009

superbolw 2001-2009

"24"hs tv show, season event tematic

2002 president De La Rua cisis in argentina

The west Wing, season event tematic

FIFA World Cup 2002, 2006

Olimpics 2004, 2008

Person of the year, 2001-2009

Nobel Prize, 2001-2009

G-20 (G-25 in this TL) and G-8 year meeting--Fero 19:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

War

About canada and Mexico carving up the US, that would be a justification for war against the 2, because the US government did not approve of the referenda.

The US would probably end up conquering Canada and Mexico. Buk5 10:21, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

The 2000 US Presidential Election

Bill Clinton doesn't lie about Lewinsky, Gore isn't embarrassed by him and accepts Clinton's help in winning the election.

Hillary Clinton does more to help Gore's election campaign.

"Butterfly Ballots" are not used in Florida, and the voters there are not confused.

Just a few hundred more people go to the polls, and Al Gore wins a few more electoral votes, and the election.

Ramifications:

-Earlier transition to fuel effecient and hybred vehicles.

You overestimate the President's influence here.

Look what he is doing with a single doccumentary. You underestimate to most powerful position in the country.

-Possible electoral reform, including constitutional amenments to have a proportional electoral college, or even to abolish it all together.

Any party which has achieved power is unlikely to have the rules-of-the-game changed.

This depands on how Gore would have one. If he won through straight numbers then there would be no incentive to change the electoral system. But if it was post- Florida and the Supreme Court ruling in his favor then there could be a push for changes in the way we handle our elections.

-No Iraq or Afghanistan wars, as it's quite probable that 9/11 would have been reacted to differently.

Afghan War is still likely (assuming 9/11 occurs) but Iraq War would not happen

Posibile Saudi war, considering the ties between the Royal family and the bin Ladens. Also there would be no personal/political friendship between the Saudis and Gore.

-No record economic upswings.

Definitely a matter of opinion on how the economy was handled under GWB.

Economy would have been much better without Bush wasting trillions on the military and as plums to his rich friends. History has shown that liberal presidents lead to economic prosperity, while conservatives destroy the economy and attempt to blame liberals.

-Shoe bombers and other attempted terrorist attacks may have succeeded.

Does the election ensure that the stewardess Hermis Moutardier is not on flight AA 63 or that she is not attentive enough to notice that Mr. Reid is trying to light a fuse on his shoe? Consider also that the Department of Homeland Security was an idea forced on the Republicans by the Democrats and by propaganda stating (untruthfully) that there was popular support - a different president may change its nature but not its existence.

-Tax cuts may have not happened.

. . . but federal spending would also be much smaller.

... thus leading to the continuation of Clinton's surplus.

-Iraq and Afghanistan war/invasion/occupations may not have happened (depending on your political POV)

-System of Carbon Credits adopted to reduce pollution and "Climate Change".

-Greater federal control of the internet.

Not sure how you mean that. Do you mean censorship? I'm not so sure a liberal president would be behind censoring free speech.

-No 9/11, since Al Gore might have paid serious attention to the CIA document that Bush ignored and took action to prevent the terrorist attacks or at least to be able to take down the airplanes before they hit their targets.

The 2004 US Presidential Election

Howard Dean doesn't give that scream during one of his speeches, he doesn't get ridiculed, and more people vote for the Democrats.

A few thousand more people go to the polls, John Kerry wins a few more electoral votes, and the election.

Evidence that the Republicans were cheating during George W. Bush's debates with John Kerry, is publicized before the election.

Justification:

Here are web sites with articles on accusations of cheating by the Bush team:

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2012 http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_10/004929.php http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff10162004.html http://mediastudy.com/articles/av1-20-05.html

And an accusation of Kerry cheating by using note cards during a debate:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1234124/posts

Ramifications:

Kerry may go "Nixon-1968" and instead of "winning in Iraq", prolong it as much as Bush is in OTL, in an effort to stave off being "the Democratic President who lost Iraq". (Given his stance during OTL's 2004 campaign, not his post-defeat stance).

The Republicans may have kept Congress in 2006, despite the Abramoff and Foley scandals, due to public desire for "divided government".