Describe and discuss the aftermath of The Disaster: "Bush Wins The Election"

What I miss in the posts about “Kerry versus Bushs” (or maybe I don’t read well) are serious thoughts/prognoses/ideas about what happens next if (God forbid) Bush gets an other term.

Of course I’m mostly interested about what you think shall happen with the mess the US foreign policy (and not only regarding the ME) represents today. Don’t let that stop you to describe other, more directly domestic US disasters you see coming. Please add also your idea as how the world shall react to such a re-election and why.

I’m of course also interested to hear the lonely SDMB voice of the Bush defenders and how they think an other 4 - year- disaster shall be able to repair the current catastrophy. (For me that shall take not less then a few million of miracles happening all at the same instant, but I understand that you find that a lunatical thought.)

Thank you.
Salaam. A

I don’t see how Kerry winning because he can portray himself better will do anything positive for American people in general.

It is not about that.
It is about what happens if Bush wins.

Salaam. A

Well, I’m glumly looking at this election as a no win situation. Damned if we do, damned if we don’t. That said however, I think the US will muddle through fine. I don’t see the previous 4 years as a disaster of course…just not an optimal situation of how I think America SHOULD have handled it. I think if Bush wins:

  1. The economy: I think we are on the road to recovery now, so whichever candidate wins the economy will pick up. It might not pick up as fast or as strong as it COULD under a more competent president (neither of the two current possible winners constitute competent IMO from an economic perspective), but it will still pick up in the next 4 years and be pretty strong by the end of the next term.

  2. Iraq: I think it will be more of the same for the near future…again, no matter who wins. The only dramatic change I could see if IF the UK decides to pull out of Iraq. I think we’ll have more months and perhaps years of a steadily winding down insurgency as it slowly starves of resources and outside assistance, and a slow ramping up as the Iraqi’s regain their feet and take a more active role. Within the next 4 years I think the situation will stabilize.

  3. Afghanistan: Pretty much the same thing. I think the situation will eventually stabilize.

  4. War on terror: Gods know. Iraq was a distraction from this IMO. Strides have still been made on this, but I think they’ve been made in spite of Iraq not because of it. That said I think that the noose will tighten around the necks of some of the bigger terror organizations…IF the US can keep its resolve in Iraq. Iraq may have started off having nothing to do with terror, but its the focus NOW, and the US MUST stabilize that situation if we are to make any strides.

The rest of the issues are mostly domestic and probably wouldn’t interest you. Abortion I think will continue to be a bread and circus’s issue with no resolution…just a lot of hot air. I don’t foresee any changes. We will get some new (and costly) entitlements, but it won’t be enough to appease the left while pissing off fiscal conservatives (like me) even more. Education, healthcare, etc will continue to languish in the twilight zone half assed between privatization and full government socialization…and so will continue to be fucked up while costing us an arm and a leg. The environment will somehow survive the depredations of GW and his crew. Science will also some how muddle through this new dark age and the bible still won’t be taught in public schools. The Patriot Act (and act II) still won’t make major inroads in putting GW on the throne as the first emperor.

But don’t lose heart Aldebaran!! Its neck and neck right now and Kerry MIGHT win. I actually hope he does so I can see what you make of HIM. :slight_smile:


You will see the quick resignations of Rhenquist and O’Connor from the Supreme Court. I’m guessing the only reason they didn’t resign earlier is the ugly legacy of the 2000 election.

If there is a 50/49/1 Senate split, look for Lincoln Chafee to pull a Jeffords. He can name his price.

“Laugh about it shout about it when you’ve got to choose
Anyway you look at it you lose”

It’s not the end of the world no MATTER who wins. I prefer Kerry over Bush but that’s largely because he’s not Bush. That is…I might not know what I’m getting with Kerry but I do know what I’m getting in Bush and I don’t want any more of it.

The odd thing is I wasn’t always this way. I fully supported the Afghan war and largely agree with the concept of a ‘war on terror’. I just think Iraq isn’t that. And efforts are homeland security are largely cosmetic. I see a lot of disingenuousness on the part of the administration and want to give someone ELSE a chance at being disingenuous for a while.

So it wouldn’t mean the apocalypse or nothing.

I expect that if Bush wins we’ll have another round or two of tax cuts while running up military and DHS spending leading to more deficit spending (something that drives me nuts). I also expect we’ll start pressuring Iran more and more with the aim of overthrowing the existing power structure.

I also think we’ll be in Iraq through the next President’s term no matter who wins.

There will be much howling from the left about another “stolen election” in a state with a close vote. Ohio, Florida or New Mexico perhaps.

The relationship between GWB and much of the media will become more adversarial than it already is.

GWB will have to deal with a nuclear Iran and possibly North Korea in the next four years. No matter what he does, it will be considered wrong.

Iraq will calm down and the economy will improve. The democrats will nominate a moderate in 2008 after Kerry joins Humphrey, McGovern, Carter, Dukakis and Mondale in showing them that a liberal cannot win the presidency.

The 2008 election will be close once again, due to the continued polarization of the electorate within a two-party system. Rudy Guiliani is elected President on November 4th, 2008.

War with Iran.

Depends on your definition of ‘war’ BG…as I said in your Iran war thread. If you are defining war as some air strikes then I rate the odds at just under 50/50. If you are defining ‘war’ with Iran as a massive invasion and occupation then I rate the odds at just over a snowballs chance in hell. The only thing that will improve the odds of either is if Iran does something overt and stupid…like touching off one of its nukes in, say, Iraq or Israel, or is caught red handed with its hand in the Iraqi cookie jar. The nuke will certainly bring down the wrath of America (and probably Europe too for that matter)…the hand in the Iraqi cookie jar will bring in the air strikes. Personally I don’t think either situation will be necessary in Iran whether Bush wins or not.

I’m talking about “regime change,” x. It’s already in the works. See “Is Iran Next?” by Tom Barry, In These Times, October 25, 2004 –

I think the world (and especially Europe) is cutting us A LOT of slack right now because he kind of “slipped through the cracks” the first time. This will not continue if we are stupid enough to re-elect him. I suspect travel to historically friendly countries will become more uncomfortable and terror attacks on the US will increase.

The war in Iraq will continue no matter who wins but there will be many more blunders with Bush and his cronies at the helm.

Another war will be started. Probably Iran, maybe North Korea.

Landslide win for the Democrats in 2008 as long as they don’t nominate Hillary “It Takes a Village” Clinton.

“The world” does not generally react with one voice to any US Presidential election, and I see no reason to think that it would react that way to a second Bush term.

Particular foreign policy issues I see during a second Bush term:

  1. Phased withdrawal of US troops from Iraq starting no later than Q1 2005. No matter what else happens, Iraq will be left to its fate, which more likely than not is a civil war resulting in its breakup.

  2. Moderate increase in troop strength in Afghanistan, as assets withdrawn from Iraq become available.

  3. Increased pressure on Iran to halt its presumed nuclear weapons program. This may eventually result in US military action, but since Bush has publicly promised that there will be no draft (conscription) during his next term, a full invasion is unlikley due to a lack of sufficient military assets for a full invasion.

  4. No significant action against North Korea; none will be necessary. Any nukes already in its possession are bargaining chips, not a practical threat, and I believe even this administration can figure that out.

  5. No effective US contribution toward bringing the Israel-Palestine conflict to an end.

  6. A generally isolationist foreign policy, except where energy supplies or another large-scale economic issue is concerned.

In other words, pretty much the situation we’ve got now minus the Iraq deployment. All of this assumes the status quo concerning the state of conflict worldwide over the next four years.

As we have seen already, if there is a major terrorist strike on US territory during the period, there will almost certainly be a major US military strike against any country deemed to have aided the terrorists in their actions.

If Bush is re-elected, I think Colin Powell will step down as Secretary of State thereby eliminating the last force of moderation with regard to our foreign policy and leaving everything entirely in the control of the warhawks.

As was stated previously, there will be at least two Supreme Court justices who’ll step down and be likely be replaced by two conservatives who want to overturn Roe v. Wade.

Confirmation will also not be a problem for these justices because, more likely than not, the Republicans will pick up at least a few more seats in the Senate. This is partly due to the fact that five Southern Democrats are leaving this year and, of these open slots, only Florida’s looks like it may remain in Democratic hands. In any case, Bush and his supporters will have a lot easier time pushing their conservative agenda through Congress.

I think that’s all I’ll mention for now. I’m starting to get nauseated.

Despite all that, there’s a very good chance the Dems will win control of the Senate in November. See this thread –

True, but I was basing my prediction on Bush winning. I think if W has the momentum going in his favor on November 2nd, it will be like what happened with Reagan in 1980 (i.e., a lot of voters–especially those in the South–will just simply vote a straight GOP party line).

I think the twin deficit situation is so bad that even if Kerry does everything sensibly during his term, economically speaking, we could still see a dollar crisis. But with Bush, the odds of such a crisis happening at some point in the next 5-10 years would approach certainty.
What this would mean is that when it’s all over, it’s entirely possible that the dollar will have lost its status as reserve currency of choice around the world, and that if the US wants to borrow from abroad it may have to do so in the currency of the lender, thereby facing the same choices and challenges in doing so that a Brazil or Argentina faces today.

Just quickly checking…
Thank you all for the replies so far, it was interesting to read.
I don’t abandon my thread, but we have here already a few hours past midnight and my presence is expected elswhere… If I want to survive, I have to obey :slight_smile:

Salaam. A

I don’t think it will be the apocolypse, but I do not like the fact that the administration will not have to worry about re-election, or even an election of Cheney (IIRC he has stated he will not be seeking nomination).

I have no idea what thy might do, but I also had no idea about their insatiable hard-on for war with Iraq.

Maybe, if we ask real nice and make a lot of apologies, they’ll let us join the EU and then we can use Euros! :slight_smile:

Personally, I think the euro is a disaster that’s already happened; but the Chinese yuan, OTOH, may just be the place to go.