Alternate History Who could have been a viable alternate VP for Reagan, and thus default successor in 1988?

[raharris1973]

In place of George Herbert Walker Bush, who could have been a viable alternate VP for Reagan in 1980, and thus default successor in 1988?

Also, although George H.W. Bush won the nomination in 1988, and had the advantage all along, (Republicans generally "falling in line" while Democrats have to "fall in love") his nomination was contested. How would one of his challengers, like Bob Dole, or an even longer shot like Jack Kemp or Pat Robertson have prevailed?

 

[Circle of Willis]

Paul Laxalt was Reagan's best friend and considered for the VP slot historically. However, as the similarly conservative Governor of neighboring Nevada, he wouldn't have brought much to the ticket ideologically or geographically.

If Reagan wanted a more stridently conservative running mate than Bush and was willing to overlook his friendship with Laxalt for the sake of geographic advantages, I'd imagine Phil Crane would be a natural choice. He was a conservative Midwestern Congressman representing Chicago's suburbs, and had already supported Reagan's unsuccessful 1976 run.

If Bush doesn't get the nomination in 1988, I still expect the campaign to proceed much as it did historically, just maybe with a narrower margin of victory for the GOP candidate (much narrower if it's someone as extreme as Pat Robertson, who was one of the OG hard-line televangelists). It seems that despite enjoying an early lead in polling Dukakis just absolutely couldn't stop burning his own campaign down if his political career depended on it, which it did.

 

[WolfBear]

What about Donald Rumsfeld? Or even ex-US President Gerald Ford?

 

[raharris1973]

Do we think all the potential Reagan successors would have remained tight with the PRC after Tiananmen like Bush was? Would they all have handled Gorbachev and the end of the Cold War similarly?

 

[WolfBear]

Do we think all the potential Reagan successors would have remained tight with the PRC after Tiananmen like Bush was? Would they all have handled Gorbachev and the end of the Cold War similarly?

Yeah, probably. I mean, why exactly would they have departed from neoliberal "End of History" orthodoxy in regards to this? For instance, re: China: Who cares about Tiananmen if China will democratize in several decades anyway as a result of increased economic liberalization, their logic would go.

 

[WolfBear]

Paul Laxalt was Reagan's best friend and considered for the VP slot historically. However, as the similarly conservative Governor of neighboring Nevada, he wouldn't have brought much to the ticket ideologically or geographically.

He'd be a good fit also for longevity reasons: US Presidents since Ford have tended to live extraordinarily long lives, and with Laxalt living to age 96, he'd be well-on path to continue this trend. Donald Rumsfeld lived to age 88, which is impressive but not quite as impressive as living to age 96. Laxalt lived longer than any US President other than Jimmy Carter in real life.

 

[Skallagrim]

Although it's unlikely for the reason given by @Circle of Willis, I do think Laxalt would be a cool choice. He'd obviously work great together with Reagan, and I love the notion of these two "Men of the West" just taking the White House and putting their mark on the country. With how things went in OTL, I could easily imagine Laxalt winning in '88. He was also a likable man, who had good friends across the aisle. He could build winning coalitions for a variety of issues.

It would be cool if he won in '92. He was more in Reagan's line than Bush ever was, so you'd see the "Reagan years" basically extended by two terms. I'm sure than by '96, the country would want a change anyway, but it would be an interesting scenario compared to OTL.

 

[raharris1973]

Yeah, probably. I mean, why exactly would they have departed from neoliberal "End of History" orthodoxy in regards to this? For instance, re: China: Who cares about Tiananmen if China will democratize in several decades anyway as a result of increased economic liberalization, their logic would go.

Well I am wondering here if Laxalt or another longstanding conservative with less foreign policy experience like Bush (former Director of CIA and 2nd Chief of the Liaison Office (unofficial Ambassador) to the PRC)) would still have enough 'old right' sentiment in 1989 to have their anti-PRC, and pro-Taiwan feelings rekindled by the simultaneity of Tiananmen, Taiwan's liberalization, and reduced strategic need for the PRC with the easing of USSR-PRC and USSR-USA tensions?

Possibly leading to the punishment of the post-Tiananmen, isolated PRC with a turn to an American "Two Chinas" policy.
Maybe "old right" sentiment would lead to skepticism about Red China fundamentally changing its spots as a guarantee too. Not sure it was guaranteed. There was still some skepticism even of Gorby in Cold Warrior circles at this time.

Speaking of, will the end of the Cold War still be handled as delicately at its crucial points from 1989-91?