Which election's outcome would have been best reversed?

[Anarchist420]

I've included a poll.

I've started with Tilden v. Hayes, then ended with Bush v. Gore.

Most of these are historical elections, but some aren't, mainly the the 1904 and 1924 elections.

I picked Smith v. Hoover, mainly because FDR would never have become President and Smith may have averted the Great Depression somehow, as he left New York with a good economy. However, Goldwater v Johnson may also have had a sizable and good impact on today, and possibly Davis v. Coolidge if Davis got rid of the Fed which would've ultimately averted the Great Depression.

 

[dainthomas]

No way Smith would have been able to institute the large-scale changes necessary to avert the Depression.

I voted Bush-Gore (even though Gore won) simply because we wouldn't have gotten bogged down in Iraq and would probably have Afghanistan wrapped up by now.

 

[nageov3t]

Bush vs Kerry

I'm not convinced that Al Gore would have done much differently than Bush following 9/11

 

[MovingTarget]

I went with Bush v. Gore. I supported McCain in the primary in 2000 and was wondering at the time what this Bush idiot ever did to be qualified to be president. A Gore presidency would have had its issues, but nowhere near what we had with Bush (wars, continuation of Reagan 'trickle-down' policies, deregulations, etc.).

My own personal preferences on the winner aside, I am still steamed that the case was decided in SCOTUS. It should have properly been immediately kicked over into the House of Representatives. Bush still would've won, but it would have been more legitimate imho.

 

[Carmen813]

I'll be honest and say I do not know enough to make an informed decision.

 

[Lemon law]

Sadly, only the first and last choice has any validity as choices. The rest of the elections named were clear correct choices where the person who got the most electoral college delegates won. And LBJ v Goldwater was a total one sided land slide.

The one election the OP forgot to include was Kennedy v Nixon in 1960, it was clear that Daily in Chicago was engaged in massive vote fraud upstate and downstate the GOP was fraudulently stuffing ballot boxes to make up for it. And in 1960, whomever won Illinois, won the election. But whatever, Nixon, decided not to challenge, and Kennedy won that very close election.

 

[Drako]

People that voted Bush-Gore need to get over it - Gore couldn't even win his home state.

 

[nageov3t]

Gore couldn't even win his home state.

neither could Bush. /shrug

 

[PokerGuy]

Thankfully the Goron and his minions didn't win. It would make all the stupid things Bush did look like brilliant strategies.

 

[Drako]

neither could Bush. /shrug

Interesting, I thought Bush won both Texas and Tennessee .

 

[nageov3t]

Interesting, I thought Bush won both Texas and Tennessee .

he lost Connecticut

 

[Possessed Freak]

Perot winning in 1992 would have been... interesting. If only he didn't bow out and re-enter later.

 

[khon]

Easily Gore v Bush.

Might have avoided a great many problems that way, of course it would also have created some new ones, but overall I have to assume it would have been better. Even if it Gore had been pretty bad, it'd still beat the disaster that was Bush.

 

[CallMeJoe]

No Nixon/Humphrey in your poll? Who knows what might have become of the modern Republican party without the Reaganite aftermath of the Nixon debacle, not to mention the improbability of a Carter presidency...

 

[Greenman]

Bush V Gore by a landslide, who'd a guessed that.

 

[Double Trouble]

The interesting thing is that is Gore had won and Bush had lost, Obama would likely never have become the current president. Bush, with his incompetence and general arrogance set the stage perfectly for the people to demand "hope and change", in whatever form is was offered.

 

[Balt]

People that voted Bush-Gore need to get over it - Gore couldn't even win his home state.

And Bush couldn't even win a majority (or plurality) of the popular vote.

 

[Double Trouble]

And Bush couldn't even win a majority of the popular vote.

... which is, just like the Tennessee comment, completely irrelevant. Bush won based on the system that was in place. If we don't like it, we can change the system, but don't whine about him not winning the popular vote is no more relevant than the Indians losing a baseball game.

Gore losing Tennessee is embarrassing, but also doesn't impact if he should have won the election or not. I'll tell you this though, if the people of his own state (that know him better than others) don't want him, I sure as heck want no part of him... and that's been proven to be the correct assessment in hindsight (as far as Gore being a douche).

 

[Craig234]

I'll be honest and say I do not know enough to make an informed decision.

Kudos for that.

If you have any questions, feel free.

On the topic - another post put Bush v. Kerry above Bush v. Gore, and I think that's impressive to notice the benefits to that.

The downside is how the public would have blamed all the problems already set in motion on Kerry, instead of Bush getting the blame, as he did with rational people.

Bush would have come off to many as this 'great' president who had us on the road to victory until the Democrat messed it up.

The big missing ones are Reagan versus Carter and Humphrey v. Nixon. Carter wasn't perfect but I think that was the big wrong turn for the country.

Nixon was a big wrong turn for the country in many ways, but including the whole generation of disasters he gave the country in positions of power, as well as how badly he hurt the office, disgracing it. Lewis Powell was one he empowered, who is one of the fathers of the new, corrupt right-wing organizations and ideology that are our biggest problem (see the 'Powell Memo), and his appointment of Rehnquist cause many legal problems.

I voted Bush v. Gore for this list.

Second was Jennings v. McKinley. That was the first big effort in the country to elect a progressive over a right-wing laissez-faire candidate.

I think the OP is off-base again with his opposition to FDR, who brought perhaps more of the modern age's improvements than any other president.

Typical is his argument that the alternative would have magically avoided the Great Depression, because the economy was ok in his previous role.

That has nothing to do with the Great Depression issue.

5 right-wing nuts so far prefer Goldwater to LBJ. Goldwater would have brought us the Vietnam war, but without the peace effort nearly achieved but sabotaged by a treasonous Nixon IMO, and without all the good of the anti-poverty efforts that cut the poverty rate in the US to this day by a third, without the Freedom of Information Act that's been the single most important tool for the public and investigate reporters to hold the government accountable, without PBS, without beautification programs, civil rights and much more.

LBJ over Goldwater was one of our best elections, despite the mistake by both parties of Vietnam (which was largely a concession by LBJ to Republicans).

 

[Zebo]

Where is Obama Cain?


Seriously the last good president we had is carter and the power elites shut his ass down like they did Goldwater. Goldwater is my vote.

 

[Zebo]

5 right-wing nuts so far prefer Goldwater to LBJ

Craig is such a idiot nothing right wing about goldwater . Read his fucking bio at wiki. It's called a libertarian. He hated religion, anti abortion, anti drug, family values nuts. Individual freedom lover ^2.

 

[mizzou]

I'll pick the one that prevented us from having the worst president in american history

 

[CallMeJoe]

...Second was Jennings v. McKinley. That was the first big effort in the country to elect a progressive over a right-wing laissez-faire candidate...

Had McKinley not won the election, Theodore Roosevelt would never have become president.

 

[Munky]

Don't know enough about the others... but NOT Bush vs. Gore.

 

[Anarchist420]

Second was Jennings v. McKinley. That was the first big effort in the country to elect a progressive over a right-wing laissez-faire candidate.

5 right-wing nuts so far prefer Goldwater to LBJ. Goldwater would have brought us the Vietnam war, but without the peace effort nearly achieved but sabotaged by a treasonous Nixon IMO, and without all the good of the anti-poverty efforts that cut the poverty rate in the US to this day by a third, without the Freedom of Information Act that's been the single most important tool for the public and investigate reporters to hold the government accountable, without PBS, without beautification programs, civil rights and much more.

I like Jennings (Bryan) better than McKinley too, but McKinley was not laissez-faire. He supported a high-ass tarriff, and he was in bed with the banksters.

And the FICA was a joke passed by LBJ, as it didn't hold him accountable for executing a false-flag attack to build up support for the Vietnam War.