According to Superman (1978) time will reverse.
I would imagine that continental drift is influenced by the flow of molten mantle in the earth’s interior - plates are just cooled off crust floating on the mantle. Are there slow currents in the mantle influenced by coriolis force? I’ve never seen anything about circulation in the earth’s interior.
Not exactly. The mantle isn’t ordinarily liquid. It’s only on geological timescales that it behaves liquid-like, and on those timescales, the Coriolis force is infinitesimal, because the velocity of the plates is minute. Velocity of the moving subject is a term in the Coriolis equations and if it’s tiny, so will the force be.
There’s a fundamental misunderstanding of how plate tectonics works at play here. The plates are not solid slabs sitting on a sea of liquid magma. And the drivers of plate tectonics are threefold (the sideways friction of mantle convection, spreading ridge push and subduction slab pull), and convection current friction is no longer thought to be the major one of those three.
True, and I can’t remember the source (maybe the Gould essay) but I vaguely remember reading that (c) is the least likely possibility. (My own amateur intuition tells me (a) is—I mean, slow the rotation of a planet to a stop??—but what do I know.)
Agreed that my (c) is the most unlikely. I just included it for logical completeness.
If Venus was a rogue planet formed elsewhere and captured by our solar system its rotation would be equally likely to be either way. But beyond that very10 
unlikely scenario it’s hard to see how anything could form in the swirling mass of a proto-star & proto-planets that’s spinning opposite from everything else in the neighborhood.
Over enough time, any rotating body will tidally lock to its primary. Hence the Moon showing us only one face. It’s still rotating (once every ~28) days but it’s also orbiting once in the same time period, so from our POV it seems to not rotate.
Given vast enough time, Earth and all the other planets would eventually be tidally locked to the sun, showing one face to the Sun at all times. In reality, the Sun will expand and eat the solar system long before enough time has elapsed, but the effect is real and operating in that direction: slowing planetary rotation.
Once any satellite is tidally locked to its primary, absent some outside influence, there’s nothing pushing or pulling to change the rotation rate either faster or slower (IOW either forwards or backwards from the primary’s POV).
And, as I understand it, Venus should have done so within 100 million to a billion years.
The fact that Venus is not locked shows there is some other influence. The tidal effect on its atmosphere is the best someone’s come up with.
Venus is an outlier in so many ways!
I had known the rotation rate was very very slow, but had not been aware of the theorized counter-tidal effect from the atmosphere.
Thanks!