You mean No Child Gets Ahead? I know of many people who voted for him twice and, even to this day, will still do the mental gymnastics needed to justify the Iraq War. And absolutely all of them were calling it "No Child Gets Ahead" while Bush was still in office. That's how much of a disaster it was.
Great video. I saw the Al Gore Futurama reference, and I just had to give a shout out to his daughter Kristin Gore, who was a writer for Futurama, and was a big reason why her dad personally lent his voice to several Futurama episodes.
No Iraq war, No Patriot Act, No No Child Left Behind Act, No miserable Katrina response, Early climate change action, More regulation on Wall Street, private equity, and real estate, a shorter and more successful outcome in Afghanistan.....
The assumption on Afghanistan is amusing. Iraq likely would’ve happened or some conflict in the region just differently. The patriot act definitely would’ve happened and yeah no child left behind likely wouldn’t have but gore would’ve pushed some asinine education reform regardless. Gore wouldn’t have stopped 2008 sorry.
Yeah......no. regulation of the economy, wall street or otherwise, would've accelerated the recession of 08. It's odd, everytime the left regulates the economy, it stagnates and we get a recession. Climate change isn't as big a deal as you eco-communists keep saying it is. Does it exist? Sure. Do we need to destroy the economy and convert every household to non-nuclear green energy and kill all the cows? No
@@kordellswoffer1520 Definitely would have stopped 2008 and likely 9/11 as well. 2008 was basically the result of Bush's "ownership society" policies and the glut of money looking for places to go after the ridiculous 2001 tax cuts. Also, we'd probably have little to no national debt.
@@stdesy little to no national debt. That’s such unserious commentary. The tax cuts were good. And 9/11 totally would’ve still happened as it wasn’t bush fault it did and 2008 was a build of not of government policy but bank behaviours and risk further harmed by the regulation cuts Clinton passed. The debt wouldbe substantial decreased but the surplus would’ve eventually have come to an end due to al gore shit policies.
No child left behind stopped me from getting into advanced math or skipping a grade to higher level math since I was basically the only students getting good test scores. Being "the smart kid" in a ghetto school made it necessary to keep me in the grade I was to boost test scores for my class. I had this explained to my parents who were pissed at the school as I was getting terrible behavior scores but basically aced every test given to me. I later found out I had ADHD and since I excelled in class, I was always causing trouble since I was bored out of my mind.
I was in a very similar boat. I had undiagnosed AHDH (we only figured this out when my mother was diagnosed, sparking us to look into it and realize literally all of us from my grandfather down has it) and constantly was a menace in classes that bored me. I'd openly confront my elementary math teacher about the shitty way they were teaching because of the shitty curriculum (everyday math for those who've suffered it too) and even going into middle school I was one of the most common sights in the principals office cause I would do shit for shits and giggles like making chatrooms on school computers and playing 20khz sounds at high volumes to annoy my classmates without teachers noticing. My mother repeatedly told the school I was bored but they never did anything cause I was a consistent ace on standardized tests and quite frankly most of my class besides my group were utter morons (the advanced math classes literally had 10 people in them in a large school)
I felt that No Child Left Behind rant to my bones. As someone who entered public school as it was just getting started, and had a mom who taught special education, that program was the bane of our existence. To this day American education has still yet to recover from all its students being turned into quantifiable commodities.
This because I was told the tests were important by my teachers, so, I had to do my best on them. By the time I was in high school, Core 40 took over... Core 40 math is not it. I'm good at math, not Core 40 math. I ended up failing Geometry because of it.... Graduated in 2019
I was set to go into teaching right when NCLB passed. My Education class read through it and half of us didn't even bother finishing our certificates. I went from being a languages teacher to working in a machine shop (and becoming a mechanical engineer).
@@Juan-hv9bi You're really doubting this? It turned education into who can get the best arbitrary test scores, I had to learn actual skills outside of school, because of this. Don't even get me started on Middle School where I learned almost literally nothing, making three years of "education" utterly pointless.
Meh I call BS. The patriot act was always an excuse to expand the surveillance state. ‘The climate crisis’ is being exploited right now under a similar guise...no reason why not to assume it wouldn't be.
I'll start worrying about Climate change the moment rich people from affluentn nations stop using private jets to travel the world to lecture us on climate change
Like you Westerners are going stop China India and the Developing World emissions anyway..... Only way to stop them is by war. Which I'm sure your elites will push for eventually.
This video is probably one of the best brief examples of how messed up the 2000s were, and how a couple of seemingly small decisions really have a huge impact on our daily lives
@@charlesshelton7989 the Boomers really screwed us. Seriously, they've held power for 30 years and counting and politicians average age just keeps rising since they won't release the reins and hand them off to the next generation. Seriously, it's kind of crazy that we'll likely have a boomer president in 2024 too and with the current leadership it's not unthinkable they may even get the 2028 presidency as well. Regardless they'll likely rule for 40 years, which is kind of crazy considering Clinton was nearly half the age of Biden when he got into office.
It's kinda weird being born in the 2000s because everyone talks about how impactful 9/11 is and it feels like it is some huge mystery event that everyone mentions how it changed everything and that's why everything sucks in the USA. I always wondered what it would be like if things were different.
I was very young when 9/11 happened, but even I have memories of things just seeming calmer/less tense and everyone seemingly liking America and being optimistic about the future, regardless of political party. Of course, I was a little kid, so take this with a grain of salt
I'm not American, and I was only 8 when it happened, so I didn't realize how important it was that the burning towers were on the TV. But yes, from reports it sounds like America was somewhat better beforehand (though don't get too golden about the 90s, they had plenty of garbage of their own). I like to think of the 90s as the brief period between the Cold War and the War On Terror. It was a brief moment when America had 'won', it had defeated its old enemy at last (nobody expected the USSR to fall except in the distant future), and it seemed possible that we would get a golden, democratic future. Then it fell down.
God, No Child Left Behind was a disaster. As a high school teacher's son, I've heard plenty of rants about the negative effect it had on education. I'm glad you decided to talk about it.
Hey kids, the majority of your History, Art, Science, and English classes will now be focused on cramming [Insert state standardized test name here] material so the school can make lots o' money off your test results.
Common Core too. Everyone at my school hated the curriculum, but especially in math classes. They tried to make standardized testing "better" but it's still useless.
I think you're missing one key detail Cody. Prior to the invasion of Iraq, we very nearly had Osama bin Laden; however, the resources taken to prep for the Iraq invasion meant that we lost the ability to take bin Laden.
@@asdfoifhvjbkaos The possibility that Gore would not only avoid Iraq, but conceivably be able to pull out of Afghanistan in 03/04 w/bin Laden dead just adds to the likelihood of him getting a second term.
As hackneyed as it was, there is that one scene from the movie W where George Jr has a dream about his father berating him for ruining the family name. “Generations of work-FOR JEB!!!@
Seeing as how bush and gore were both war hawk globalist beholdant to the same lobbyists. It would have been exactly the same except climate change instead of covid. Even now, they’re gonna blame food shortages on “climate change” and not the forced shut down of the world.
@@alexsiemers7898 that’s because you’re incapable of thinking (per virtue of you thinking all food requires fertilizer). Just one example I’ve seen is Tyson’s chicken stock. The feeder farms had no one to work the farm an take the chickens to Tyson. So they out grew the machines and had no where to go and became a resource drain. Per Tyson, they said “shut the power off and lock doors” a whole flock dead and wasted. Now that on a National level = food shortages and raised prices. Now compound that with the supply chains being disrupted due to the riots and the truckers basically going on strike because of unsafe conditions and vax mandates. Creates an even bigger problem, that compounds as you get further down the chain.
I feel like climate change is a neglected aspect of this. Having an international climate accord 15 years early would be huge, because climate would not have had the chance to become politicized the way it did. They certainly would not have taken the problem as seriously as we do now, but they would have done something, and that would have set a precedent to build off of later.
great point however the Iraq conflict was inevitable, and his entire 4 year terms would have revolved around it like Bush's. Maybe it gets him a 2nd term but honestly Gore seems like he would have been just a 1 term president which would have bought in John MCCAIN as the president in 2004 and we would have doubled down on the war possibly even pushing back the recssion of 2008 into 2011. He might have finsihed as a popular president but if he didn't then . in 2012 we get Obama and Climate talks begin to come about atlough it still exists it just isn't publicized and made political until obam era. Then 2020 election would have been Gerry Brown/Biden or Hillary vs Trump, and much of their term would revolved around the Panda mick. Trump wins because it came from John Cena but then once again does a 1 term. It doesn't really matter how you change the actors, it stil leads to the same outcome.
Yeah I agree this aspect is definitely overlooked. He wanted to do more on climate back then than most democrats. Definitely would’ve pushed the US ahead on fighting climate change by at least a few years of where we are now and most likely have pushed the world ahead on it as well. Even if he couldn’t pass many bills, there’s still many regulations he could have put in place through executive order
I liked that you didn’t go straight from Gore to Obama. I’m independent but what I was really thinking about was how incredibly rare it’s been for a party to be in the White House longer than 8 years. Here, even the 16 years of Clinton and Gore would have been unprecedented in recent history as even the 12 years of Reagan/Bush is an outlier.
The idea that party swings are normal is the real outlier. The only time there was a normal swing from from the '90s to 2016. Many other points have multiple same-party wins one after another.
@@Thespeedrap McCain really only lost support so drastically because he felt he needed to ally with the then far smaller far right wing nuts by having Sarah Palin as his running mate, despite the fact that he was already leading Obama. coming off of a dem presidency and without Obama's ability to capitalize on bush shenaniganery, McCain wouldn't have had the pressure to allow the wing nuts to have a say, and not only would he have won by not alienating moderates and independents, but he wouldn't have ever given the wing nuts the little legitimacy they needed to become a player in politics. McCain vs Obama was probably the only race since Carter vs Bush Sr to have not just one, but two genuinely good people as the options. However, as much as I think McCain was the very last of the high profile republicans to have a conscience, I also indirectly blame him for giving the MAGATs enough of a stage that they were able to take over the party. My grandfather was a lifelong republican up till 2016, and so was my mom, and so were most of my aunts and uncles. the radicalization of the republicans has pushed out anyone who doesn't agree leaving just the cesspool in charge.
@garrettbyrd7426 Uh, no? FDR's three full terms, followed by the term started by FDR and finished by Truman all happened in the thirties and forties, then Truman had full term from the late forties to early fifties. After that, the same party didn't hold the White House again until 3-4 decades later when had two terms in the eighties and then Bush Sr. had a single term in the late eighties and early nineties. Thus far, it hasn't happened again in the past 32 years. Party swings have been normal for ages and a single party keeping the White House for longer than 8 years is the outlier.
The Taliban offered surrender less than 12 months after the Afghanistan invasion, on pretty favorable terms (in retrospect), promising to deny future safe harbor to Al-Qaeda. It’s possible Gore would have accepted and pulled out in early 2002. However, the more I think about it, it would likely hinge on how confident our intelligence agencies were Bin Laden had permanently fled to Pakistan. One has to dream though..
I still think there's a chance the 9/11 attacks could have been prevented or at least delayed or severely limited in scope if Gore had been President. Fighting al-Qaeda had been a priority of the Clinton administration, and the USS Cole was attacked less than a year before 9/11. There had also been at least 2 attempts to blow up passenger airliners in 1996 and again in 2000 that were both foiled by the same administration. It is not unreasonable to suppose that Gore would have taken the warnings (as vague as they were at the time) more seriously than Bush, who had very little foreign policy experience and was more focused on his domestic agenda like NCLB.
@@icemachine79 It's also important to note that Osama bin Laden was put on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted list after the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa. Clinton responded to those attacks with Operation Infinite Reach (a series of cruise missile strikes against Sudan and Afghanistan, the latter of which was intended to kill bin Laden).
@@icemachine79 Blowing up random Afghan civilians and driving up AQ recruitment was a priority. Clinton also literally turned down SA's offer to hand him Bin Laden.
I wish you would have recorded the "boring" part and made it an unlisted video we could click the link to in the description and check out. I love nerdy stuff like that and would have loved to hear your reasoning.
his reasoning sounds pretty absurd. why would the Republican who won in 2008 lose re-election? thats nearly impossible in todays climate. even trump would have cruised to re election had the pandemic not hit.
@@godemperorofmankind3.091 Yeah I honestly think it would have been McCain 2008-2016, Obama 2016-2024. Obama was just way too solid of a political contender and inevitably would have won reelection upon taking the presidency, no matter what year he got there. Same thing with McCain. And he died in 2018 in our timeline (which probably would not have changed even with presidential medical care), so both would have made a full 2 terms. Maybe Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz in 2024? Also with Afghanistan being withdrawn in 2011 and Bin Laden being killed under McCain’s government, that totally would have won McCain reelection the following year with his spin, as the Republicans would have loved taking out America’s enemies, and the Democrats would have supported us withdrawing in general.
@@noahjackl2240 i dont think it would have been McCain. I think Bush or Cheney would have ran again. Reagan lost i think the first time he ran, but won the second time. so we still would have gotten President Bush Jr, IMO. it just got delayed for a while. also Obama ran at least partly because of the Iraq War and his criticisms of it. he campaigned on getting the US out of its wars. but if theres no Iraq War (since a delayed Bush presidency i dont think could have drummed up enough support for one) Obama wouldnt have had that outsider appeal against hillary in 2016.
@@godemperorofmankind3.091 McCain would probably turn the recession into a depression when he's in office or at least worsen the recession, this would probably give a dem the win in 2012
Gore would also paused the Clinton millitary cutbacks. He mentioned in the 2000 debate that he wanted to increase defense spending and manpower because morale was low as US troops at the time felt overworked because of the lack of manpower. Gore also mentioned in the 2000 debate that he voted for the Regan buildup back in the day.
So we had a middle of the road candidate politically and Florida fucked it up b/c they couldn't move into the 21st century and get digital voting booths
If anything I think Cody is being dishonest here. There was widespread paranoia post 9/11 and after 12 years of a Democratic administration, without finding the man responsible for the darkest day in American history. There is no Doubt a Republican would have been elected. (Wether it’s Another Bush, Giuliani or some other Republican is up for you) and would probably go after another country is his term. Wether it be Pakistan, Iraq, Sudan or Libya due to their links to Islamic terrorism or when North Korea acquires nuclear weapons. Further more having the Taliban retake power in the early 2010s after a U.S withdraw post Osama Bin Laden would probably know what happens to Afghanistan under the Taliban. If their government collapses into another civil war, then the war would be much more justified as it would have been seen as the Taliban would probably not hold power long anyways and the idea of removing rouge regimes would still be seen as valid. If the Taliban try to expand into Pakistan then it would Downfall of Kabul meets the rise of ISIS with nuclear weapons and that would be fun.
And that would have garnered a HUGE amount of helpful Republican votes for a win. Lord knows they live to DUCK over the average small guy American so they can massively over spend on military. Gore was smart!!! Too bad WE HAD THE ELECTION STOLLEN FROM US!!!
SNL did a hilarious sketch about this at the time. It basically had Gore acting as an exam proctor towards the entire country. I think he called out North Dakota for a wrong answer on question #7.
It was great. And they had one for Bush where D.C. behind him was on fire. He said something like, "I'm here for you 24/7. 24 hours a week, 7 months a year."
“I just wanted to complain about those stupid tests let’s talk about 9/11” sometimes quotes from videos strike me to my core and this do be one of them
ISIS was still in Syria tho, which the war there didn’t start by the US. Maybe ISIS wouldn’t be able to get into Syria in this timeline, or the protest in Syria wouldn’t escalate into a war, who knows?.
ISIS would still exist as the problems in Syria would still exist. The wouldn't have as much influence in the area as Suddam's government would try to contain them
As the child of a teacher, and someone who grew up during this (in Virginia, where we already have our own standardized testing), No Child Left Behind RUINED the education system in the US.
8:19 If Mccain would have win in 2008,succeeding Gore,WW3 would become a reality no later than late November 2010,so this timeline isn't so good,as you think!(P.S.I hate George W Bush's policy,but if Mccain's victory in 2008 would be a price for Gore's presidency in 2000's,then,George W Bush is best of the worst)
No Child Left Behind defined my entire school experience from Kindergarten to 12th grade. It completely ruined the school system, and I watched it crumble by seeing kids who were bad at testing, but otherwise great in school and smart, and kids who were great testers but not that smart succeeded and were rewarded and singled out, the former ended up loathing the staff and “learning” in general, and instead, it pushed them to skip, smoke weed/harder drugs, or drop out because of how they were treated - like failures/imbeciles - because they couldn’t test well. It was awful, and ruined a generation of children who would’ve otherwise
I've seen so many good test takers go into advanced classes and get over their head and develop mental health issues because they can't keep up. It really is sad.
While I’m both Canadian and too young to be a part of your generation, I can only imagine the effects that has had on the US. Standardized testing is absolutely terrible, and I’m glad it’s falling by the wayside in much of the world.
if you couldn't test well, you hadn't retained the info. ergo, you've identified those bound to fail because they didn't learn. aka the stupid ones. oh, and just noticed the projection. didn't mean you call YOU stupid...
@@declanfeeney7004 I meant it was made that way since a big government would be able to share the power among the people but too inefficient to become authoritarian or abuse its power.
@@chimera9818 point is, a number of mossad agents have been arrested on that day, 3 confirmed, 40 speculated, plus the Israeli prime Minister said himself the attack benefitted Israel, you can look all this up
The political consequences of that election were massive not only here in the US but in the UK as well. Without the Iraq War, Blair likely would have remained a very popular PM and certainly would not have stepped down in 2007. Infact, it is likely that the Labour government would have lasted about as long as the preceding Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher and John Major. Post-2010 survival of Labour in government may have meant the UK would have averted both the austerity measures implemented by the Cameron government, as well as Brexit. Scottish independence likely would not have risen in popularity as it has in recent years, and without Brexit, Unionist parties would have been able to keep a stronger grip in Northern Ireland. Without the Iraq War, the civil wars in Syria and Libya may not have occurred either, and US-Iranian relations probably would be much better right now.
Unfortunately, the civil wars would have happened no matter what, the Arab populace were simply squeezed too hard while living in ever worsening conditions, like electricity only being on for 3 hours at a time and then off for the same amount of time in Syria and that situation continuing for 8 years without any solutions, despite the country’s oil and gas reserves being tapped by the government in addition to ever increasing water rationing, rising unemployment and ever increasing prices.
@@yazanmowed All 100% agreeable as having been the pressures which largely drove the events of the Arab Spring, these economic pressures combined with government abuse were after all what motivated Mohammed Bouazizi to immolate himself after all. But it’s hard to say whether or not these economic pressures would have been as severe as they were 2011-2012 were it not for the consequences of Iraq’s destabilization and how Saddam’s removal seems to have kicked the balance of power in the Arab world well into the hands of the monarchies rather than the republics. Note that Saleh, Assad, Gaddafi, Ben Ali, and Mubarak were all Republican leaders while none of the monarchies fell, even in Bahrain where something like 20-30% of the people were involved in demonstrations. Additionally, the turmoil in Iraq can definitely be said to have enabled the growth and development of number of groups which later would play a role in these civil wars; especially in the Syrian context.
@@LultasticFilms It is actually quite likely that a Gore presidency and the drive to divorce the global economy from fossil fuel dependence would have had an even more profound constricting effect on Middle Eastern economies. But without the same degree of strategic significance to the US and her allies, it is also conceivable that the result of those internal pressures would have been positive as despotic governments would be unable to contain revolutions calling for change.
I'm not so certain about austerity though. Blair would have let brown govern eventually and deficit hysteria would have impacted him. His own chancellor's did proclaim he'd cut deeper than Thatcher and Labour's 2010 manifesto promised many a cut. Still the austerity would have been less harsh than anything the Cameron would introduced.
No Child Left Behind is a huge part of why we kept our daughter out of public school and put her in Montessori and International schools. You hit the nail on the head with that one.
I'm surprised that you didn't mention it, but speaking as a Floridian I can attest to EXACTLY what the trigger point was that changed everything for the 2000 Election: Elián González. "I have little doubt that if Clinton hadn't sent Elian Gonzalez back, enough additional Cuban-Americans in Florida would have voted for Gore to send him to the White House despite the voting irregularities." -- Bob Shrum, political consultant for Al Gore, commenting on the 2000 election. For anyone who doesn't know about this, a little context: the Elián Gonzalez standoff was a custodial dispute between the United States and Cuba in 2000 over the five year old Elian. He had fled with his mother the year before but she died on the journey to Florida, he was one of the only survivors on the raft. Elián's Miami relatives insisted that he stay in the United States and gain the new life his mother had wanted for him, while Castro and the boy's family in Cuba stood behind Elian's father Juan Miguel González, who wanted his son back. Elian quickly became a symbol of the long-running feud between the community of Cuban exiles living in the United States (particularly in Florida) and the Cuban leader Fidel Castro. After months of legal squabbling, ultimately the U.S Government ordered that Elián's relatives in Miami surrender him to U.S. Department of Justice custody. When they refused, federal agents, armed with submachine guns, forced their way into the Miami home of Lazáro González and seized a terrified Elián, returning him to Cuba. So, basically Clinton pissed off the entire Cuban community just seven months before Election Day and as a result thousands of Floridian Cuban voters voted red instead of blue, which caused the results to be so narrow. So, this essentially is the trigger point. No Elian means no custodial standoff and therefore no controversy, meaning that there likely wouldn't have been a close election, leading to a Blue Florida and a Gore victory. And as Alt mentioned, there wouldn't have been months of legal delays, possibly leading to the prevention of 9/11. So, it all comes back to this: one little five-year-old boy. I can't help but note the sheer irony: Elián's mother wanted her son to have a better life in a democracy, but her choice to flee Cuba indirectly changed the entire world, led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, and the restriction and decay of the freedoms she wanted for her son.
Even if Elián González hadn't been deported, I don't think Cuban-Americans would have voted for Gore. Most Cuban-Americans are either descendants of, or are themselves, people who fled Cuba after Castro rose to power in 1959. Because of that, most Cuban-Americans are staunch Republicans.
@@a_can_of_soda Very few these days were even born when Batista was in power. Some of the refugees actually fought against his regime and then were unjustly persecuted by Castro and his thugs.
I like your takes on almost every point here, except primarily the Patriot Act. It was easy for Gore to be against it in our time line as he was no longer in the government or interested in getting elected back in. But the DNC in our time line was overwhelming for it, if Gore wanted to get re-elected in the theoretical time line he would have 100% supported it(publicly) in the same blind pro safer America energy almost everyone else in the government did at the time.
Disagree. Politicians (especially presidents) who have private reservations against a popular act tend to remove a few of the worst teeth before signing so as to keep that "supportive" attitude, but also to eliminate the worst parts of an act.
I think it's telling that at the time with the Patriot Act, it passed overwhelmingly. Very few sitting politicians in Congress opposed it. McCain was one of them as I recall, and a very small minority at that. I don't think anyone else in the big chair as it were would have changed it. It was a freakin' 98-1 vote in the Senate for the Patriot Act, after all. And 357-66 in the House.
I think that invading Iraq and destabilizing the middle east also led to the immigration crisis facing Europe contributing to the international rise of populism as well. So even though no lines on the map are redrawn, Al Gore winning still has major international ramifications that ironically, would make most people on the right quite happy.
@@rolandsquire6555 exactly. The FN had been a feature of French political life for decades and Le Pen making it to the second round in 2002 was one of the most important events in 2000s politics and it happened before any refugee crisis. Germany might be a harder one to call, the AfD was allowed to be normalized as a direct result of the refugee crisis but there had been many attempts at creating a successful right wing party in Germany for decades. Brexit and Trump are the two major events that I just can’t see happening this timeline.
Yes it did. ISIS rebellion and later short lived caliphate in Syria and Iraq spurred the first major waves of refugees seeking a better life in the West, away from their war-torn homelands. It's amazing to watch rightwing movements in Europe yearn for American style rightwing leadership because of the migrant crises when it is America who caused it in the first place.
We all know how that ended. At this point, U.S. citizens are statistically the least educated in the developed world. And it shows as soon as most of us (who aren't engineers) try to use the metric system.
@@GlidingZephyr That last part makes me laugh a little cause engineers are more likely to use imperial than any other STEM profession. They probably wouldn't be much better then the general population when it came to metric tbh.
@@perpecedecelequex I don't know about you, but they teach every engineering student in my school to use both. I prefer the metric system, but still understand that employers might use imperial.
Missed the fact that Rudy Giuliani would have run in 2004 as "America's Governor" and would be an extremely close race in 2004. I don't think the 2004 election would be as much of a blow out as you think. Rudy was leading the GOP ticket in 2008 and only brought down from scandals that were brought to light in 2008 and happened in 2006.
Honestly, considering the fact that we would have had the Democratic Party in the oval office for three terms, I think Rudy could've actually won in that hypothetical scenario
No. Rudy failed in '08 because his campaign was a total joke. He skipped campaigning in the early primaries and bet all on the Florida primary. And, when his entire strategy was to get things going with a win in Florida, he didn't get the right endorsements and got crushed. By that point, the shape of the race had already been decided and any lane that Giuliani might have didn't exist. The various wings of the party had their candidates in McCain, Mitt Romney (yup, he also ran in '08), and Mike Huckabee (the Christian conservative lane).
Since you've recently covered North American politics around this time period. I would be interested to see you make a video hypothesizing what would happen if Quebec succeeded in separating from Canada following the 1995 succession referendum and the ramifications it would have on North American society.
@@robertgronewold3326 I mean, Canada doesn't do a lot on the world stage when viewed by Americans, but maybe from other perspectives they have a bigger impact. Either way it'll be fun to see that in a video.
The rest of Canada would have taken an arguably justified official stance of “fuck Quebec” and completely crushed them with anti Quebec trade policy and political discrimination, eventually pushing the new country into turmoil which would prolly see them reabsorbed into Canada as a whole much later, but without nearly as much autonomy So prolly a worst case scenario for Quebec
The question is, would Saddam's Iraq survived the Arab Spring (which certainly may still happened in this timeline)? And what would be the consequences for the stability of the Middle East whether if Iraq was not invaded in this timeline, but the Arab Spring might still became a thing?
Arab Spring still happens. Saddam, being Saddam, does his thing with rebellions. He'll grow old and passes the throne to Qusay. Kurds still rise up, but no ISIL...?
It’s really unknown. It could go either way. Sadam definitely wasn’t no where as near as powerful on the world stage by the turn of the 21st century. So there is the possibilities he either; loses the Arab spring, wins it, Iraq becomes a failed state, gets split up between its ethnic groups, gobbled up by its neighbours, etc…
@@blackpowderuser373 i doubt saddam would hold as much power until 2011. Shias and Kurds would certainly revolt and with the help of Iran Shis would most likely take over after saddam.
the Arab Spring came to fruition as a result of democratic ideas that were introduced to the region by the new Iraq. Political commentary shows on TV and radio that had never been allowed before gave voice to a young generation for the first time. If the invasion of Iraq hadn't happened the Arab Spring would not have happened, which means the revolution in Syria would never have happened, nor the refugee crisis nor Isis.
No Child Left Behind is probably the reason I can’t do long division or multiplication as an adult. As low as I scored on the math portions of the tests, I never got proper help. I just got put into a “lower level” math program that felt more like a dumping ground for bad kids where we never actually did anything. It turned out that I had dyscalculia and stealth dyslexia, but we didn’t know that until I was in high school, years after No Child Left Behind ended. It wasn’t actually meant to help kids, it was just cutting the cost of education.
The main flaw in the standardized tests created by no child left behind is that they distributed money exactly opposite to the way they should have. A school that scored high on the tests was rewarded with extra funding but a school that scored below average had their usually already insufficient funding slashed even further.
How many time does our country have to throw billions of dollars at a problem just to make the problem worse.... Shitty schools have way deeper problems then funding. My highschool was majority Mexican and black and between freshman and graduation nearly 80%of the kids dropped out. Most of the teachers who taught were just their for a paycheck and most of the students. couldn't have cared less about their education. Could have spent 100k per student and it wouldn't have mattered. The only teachers who cared were the ones who taught ap and expected their student to do well.
they were also schools that were underfunded to begin with (hence the low scores). Also tended to be schools that had large minority populations so theres THAT can of worms. (I dont necessarily think George W. Bush was racist against african americans/mexican but he was definitely racially insensitive)
@@kodystennett5414 I think its to stop people spreading disinformation about things like 9/11, the Holocaust, etc. But the algorithm can't tell the difference between people genuinely just giving correct information and educating people and those spreading misinformation, so everything that touches on those topics gets demonetised and censored.
@@theunreadyone I agree. I think Google just don’t want to shell out for human moderators though, so it’s an all-or-nothing type thing with an algorithm.
I was born in 2000 and now feel like the number of alternative timelines from that point will be huge now (one where 9/11 doesn’t happen, another where George Bush is killed sometime in 2005, others where Osama Bin Laden is captured under different circumstances, and others where Donald Trump isn’t president of the USA)
I was in HS when 9/11 happened. It seems surreal that it was 20 years ago. At the same time, it's also weird to realize how suddenly and dramatically the political discourse got ugly.
I just retired from the military after 20 years in June 2001. Never saw any type of combat, just staring down the USSR and Warsaw Pact and North Korea. Then, 2.5 months later after retirement, all doo-doo breaks out. Hard to believe 20 years have passed since that retirement.
Could you make a video about if the World Trade Center bombings in 1993 actually went according to plan? It would be like an earlier (and probably worse) 9/11.
@@nade7242 that's still the better timeline, none of my family would've suffered since not even neither of my parents were born during the Cuban missile crisis. And the world would be healing instead of imperialist nations
You got this suggested all the time in 2014. Same with what if the Chinese civil war was won by the nationalist and what if Ethiopia was a superpower. This is even like what if the USA never invaded Iraq video. You should bring back what if Rome survived next if you’re doing older suggestions. You have improved so much from even then. I’m nostalgic for your older videos. There was the one guy who just did PowerPoint slides and it always ended with some alternative country going to the moon and you. You paved the way for alternative history on TH-cam. I miss the old intro with the globe, and white back ground. And the alternative fan countries. Pure nostalgia for like 12-13 year old me. Crazy how far you have come.
There's actually a really big piece that's missed here: Supreme Court nominations. The senate would likely remain swayed in Democrats control into the 109th congress with Gore's election and subsequent reelection (9/11 if handled well may have even resulted in a Democrat trifecta), 2005-2007, when justice Sandra Day O'Connor resigned and Chief Justice William Rehnquist died in office. Al Gore and a Democratic senate would be in a position to appoint two liberal justices, one to be the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. As of right now, both justices appointed by Dubya are still serving on the Supreme Court. At least, the court would be a 5-4 liberal majority today. If all the elections you predict following Gore were correct, Obama would have the opportunity to appoint three justices to McCain's two, leaving the court at a 6-3 liberal majority. This difference is massive regarding domestic affairs, especially as it pertains to landmark cases regarding gun rights, abortion access, and LGBT+ civil rights/voting rights between 2005-2020.
While Chief Justice Rehnquist would have died no matter who was president, I would think that O'Connor would have waited to see the results of the '08 presidential contest before retiring in the Gore timeline. Yes, she was a moderate but she was a Republican nonetheless. I agree with the rest of your well-thought-out analysis. What a different country this would be without Roberts and possibly no Alito.
This all hinges upon whether Gore won re-election in 2004. If, say, John McCain or another Republican won in 2004, he'd have two Supreme Court picks. Maybe we'd have gotten someone less worse than Alito, though. If Gore did win in 2004, then he'd replace Rehnquist's seat, but O'Connor probably would have waited to retire until after 2008.
And he'd most likely be dead wrong, because there'd be no reason to assume that the election was as close as in OTL. And once he talks about an Iraqi invasion in his second term (because Alternate Cody would definitely see this as a second term policy) things would really diverge.
I think what-if scenarios and alt history are incredibly important bc they teach you about not only history, but about the world we live in today. It makes history feel alive; what if this big incredibly important seismic shift in our world just...didn't happen? What would have been necessary for it not to happen? What is the butterfly effect of all this? Because one butterfly flapping its wings differently doesn't change the bird's course; but it could, if the bird was chasing the butterfly.
You talking on "No Child Left Behind" speaks well on your politics. Standardized testing has haunted me sense I was in elementary school, hell it caused me to be held back a year because of how poor my test scores were. High school as well with the ACT (now SAT) which determined what college would even accept me it has significantly impacted my educational career. Luckily I did excellent in college but the process to get there colors the incompetence of arbitrary testing to determine intelligence or even understanding of a subject. Memorization does not equal knowledge, that's my soap box for the day.
Standardized testing is the only way to determine if someone knows something/has the skills they say they have. The way the US designed the system was bad but look at the International Baccalaureate. It has standardized tests for entire time zones and is very successful at producing high scoring and successful university students (who eventually are high earners too)
The whole idea (of the left) is to make it so if kids can't succeed on their own they turn to government (taxpayers). That's not how it's supposed to be. And, memorization is the key to pretty much everything. The main difference in IQ is the ability to recall something, pretty much at a moments notice.
@@zappafan1176 Wtf? IQ isn't about memorization, it's about problem solving skills and deduction. Memorization has very little to do with IQ. And even so, IQ scores have long proven to be an outdated way to measure intelligence anyways.
@@nbewarwe My bad... not so much memorization... those with normal functioning brains remember everything they hear, see, smell and touch. RECALL is what sets people apart, and that depends on how well you're able to think of things you remember. This isn't rocket science.... kids in the mid to late 1800's received a better education than kids of the past 40 years. Since then they don't teach kids how to think, they're taught WHAT to think.
Dude, if you thought the ACT or SAT were about memorization, you were doing it wrong. Or they were mangled in however many years passed between when we each took those tests, which wouldn't surprise me.
I’m a Republican college student and I can say with confidence that in hindsight, I would have much rather had Al Gore win in 2000 if this was the result we got.
Plus, this scenario might have lead to a long term republican congress, a complete flip of the prior half century. The American people quite liked having both a democratic president and a republican congress in the late 90s: The republican congress could prevent the democrats from spending recklessly, and the democratic president could prevent the republicans from cutting costs too much. This would likely continue through the Gore presidency, and if whoever wins in 2008 (McCain, Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee, Paul, etc) could perform well in the aftermath of the recession, the GOP might be able to hold congress for decades to come, even if that means democrats are more likely to win the presidency. Evan Bayh would probably be elected in 2016.
@@charlesevanshughes3638 “Preventing Democrats from Spending Recklessly.” Because republicans never spend recklessly? All those tax cuts for the rich just scream, spending wisely? Are you serious? Social Funding, is the most important thing America could invest in. Both Bush and Trumps Administration’s were grand theft. The splitting up of Iraq’s oil fields, Cheny’s War Profiteering, Attempts to “privatize Social Security”, so wall street can gamble with the Social Security fund.
Agreed. The fact-centered presentation focuses on how a president with a different personality than GW Bush might have reacted to these likely historically inevitable events. I believe the outcomes would have been less impactful if not for that fake Iraq war and Rove toxicity--both indelibly Bush-imprinted actions that led to our present political disasters.
well the election for lincoln's second term could be considered crazier considering it ended with the end of the civil war and the assassination of lincoln himself
1860 was a pretty clear W for Lincoln tho, 2000 was so damn close it’s still too close to call (unlike 2020, which requires the rejection of reality to believe it was anywhere to being close in the final tallies)
@@warlordofbritannia the 2020 election was pretty close all things considered, just not close enough to think it would've gone the other way. biden only won by ~12,000 votes in georgia, ~20,000 in wisconsin, ~11,000 in arizona, which are all razor-thin margins within a percentage point. but they're still wide enough to say he won those states legitimately.
@@actanonverba3041 Right, but that’s what I mean by “rejection of reality”-you’d have to create some conspiracy theories for discrepancies that tangible
2 things: 1. As someone who was a kid in the Clinton era, there is absolutely no comparison between the calm, respectful politics of the 90s and the...different...political climate we have today. One can argue that social media also had an effect on this by effectively isolating people with different viewpoints, so that individuals radicalized more easily, but 9/11 and its aftermath definitely, 100% changed this A LOT. I remember conservatives in the 90s saying they disliked Clinton, or making jokes about HRC, but it wasn't as outright vicious as both sides got after 2001. Suddenly, it wasn't just "liberals are against the war;" it was "liberals hate America." It wasn't just "conservatives are out of touch with the new needs of society;" it was "conservatives are evil." 2. NCLB ruined so much. Even for people like me, who were in college. See, you had to get enough of an education to meet the new standards for "highly qualified," which meant that if you wanted to be, say, a math teacher, you had to take 13 courses in undergrad, some of which were normally graduate-level math courses. If you wanted to be a science teacher? You had to specialize. Chemistry, biology, or physics: pick ONE and take 13 courses. Plus, standardized tests are largely BS, and I say that as a teacher. The only thing that they test is how good kids are at taking multiple-choice standardized tests. They can't measure understanding or how well a kid is at applying knowledge to new situations. Multiple-choice tests simply do not work that way and cannot work that way.
1. Huh? The sitting president was under indictment from congress for lying under oath and was bombing countries in Europe routinely as well as starving over 1 mill Iraqis to death surf sanctions. What the hell Is this calm Political climate you are talking about? That’s an embarrassing take.
I agree: the Presidential debates between Bush and Gore were gentle by comparison! I'll add that the level of unity and heartfelt patriotism in America between 9/11 and 2003 was remarkable. I miss that. I wish we were better at remembering.
I agree that there was a change in attitudes, but I don't remember the 90s as a calm and respectful era of politics. Calmer and more respectful than the 2000s, sure, but things were starting to heat up then. What I remember was a conservative line pushed that liberals weren't really Americans at all, but traitors to freedom and so forth. Liberals didn't push back against this, which is probably why conservatives got so much mileage out of it. Liberals didn't come up with an equivalent of the Hastert Rule, after all. Yes, Hastert didn't become Speaker until 1999, but before it was named, Newt Gingrich was practicing it. Neoconservatism is indeed dead, replaced by far-right populism, but the "liberals hate America" nonsense continues. But conservatives today are just as eager to eschew compromise as they were in the Gingrich era, in the 90s. Before then, there was certainly disagreement, and things got acrimonious a lot, but the two sides were more inclined to work together. I wouldn't hang this toxicity on Bush Jr., but more on Gingrich.
@@Sinaeb OK so I'd love for you to explain why the climate was warmer roughly 1000 years ago when the Vikings were growing crops on Greenland and fig trees on Labrador.
@@DeusSalis Oh wow. You've debunked the thousands and thousands of scientists that all agree based on hard evidence that man-made climate change exists. Time to call it off and double down on coal.
It's pretty sad to see that we can no longer have pictures of a widely known and influential tragedy in our history in videos because of the powers that be and their nonsensical demonetization policies. We live in a society.
I was hitting my late teens in 2000 and even though I am British, I remember following this election closely and watching this, it brings back so many memories of what happened after. Such a strange time.
@@skatingfreak1670 In the 2000 election, all the states had voted and it had been confirmed. All except Florida, which ended up voting for Bush.(maybe)
I tell foreigners that Florida is literally where all your American stereotypes come from, but worse. They only think the US is California, New York, and Texas, but no, it's actually Florida.
The impact this would have had on politics in the UK would have been interesting. Iraq ruined Blair and the Labour parties reputation and without it Brown may have had more of a chance in 2010. With a Brown govenment we likely wouldn't have seen austerity or brexit. However, it could be argued that Brown's lack of personality and the 2008 crash would still have seen him lose.
Well considering how close the 2010 election was I think you’d see a Brown win. That being said, without Iraq I think Blair would’ve stayed on as Labour leader till at least the middle of the 2010s as I don’t see his popularity collapsing after 2005 as it did in our timeline.
This video leaves out an extremely important detail, that the Bush administration declared wallstreet regulators and oversaw significant deregulation in the finance sector. Its theoretically possible that the US housing bubble might not have happened. The most likely outcome, though, would be a much smaller recession that the US quickly gets away from thanks to the democrats spending our way out of it. The also probably means that there is no significant global downturn. The smaller scope of the war on terror would also contribute to stabilizing the global economy. Overall this would lead to a world that is significantly more stable and prosperous than our own. I suspect that historians of the future will look back on Bush's win as the cause for a period of American decline and as well as a general worsening of conditions around the world. We really are in the worse timeline.
@@volodymyrboitchouk ... much like the collapse of the North American video game industry in 1983 - and it taking down Atari Inc and most of its domestic competitors - set back tech innovation a good decade plus because venture capital shrank and Silicon Valley's actual manufacturing was pulverized [like with the collapse of Synertek as an example]. Our time line does suck.
@@volodymyrboitchouk The housing bubble would have only been prevented if the government prevented subprime lending, which no politician was going to touch let alone a democrat. Fiscal spending rarely prevents economic downturn especially considering all the bailouts that started under bush (including checks to adults) and continued under obama.
@@volodymyrboitchouk The "Key Deregulation" that happened was in the 90s. And done legislatively, not executively. Plus uh. Gutting the entire energy sector without going nuclear would have put us somewhere much, MUCH worse than the 2008 recession.
Another interesting video, Cody, but being a middle aged history teacher who lived through all of this as an adult, already teaching history, I would make a few points: First, I think you were being sarcastic about NCLB, but as an educator I can tell you it's impact was far more catastrophic than kids having to suffer through some tests. For a 5th of a century it distorted our educational system to such an extent that our societal elite has now larger been selected based on their ability to do well on multiple choice tests and curricula de-emphasized critical thinking in favor of something more like trivial pursuit. This left us with a society that is much less resistant to the lure of, well, you know... In fact, this could be a good topic for you to research for a future video, since school is something most of your audience can presumably relate to. Also, I disagree that the only thing that would have changed in Afghanistan is we would have left much sooner (probably true) and the Taliban would have taken over again (probably not true). No Bush, no Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense, and most likely a very different strategy. Militarily, we almost certainly would have accepted the terms of surrender the remnants of the Taliban offered in 2002, rather than insisting on continuing in the hopes of totally destroying them and thus creating generations of anti-Americanism. Politically, rather than foisting on the Afghans our corrupt boy Hamid Karzai and his unpopular regime, which spent 20 years looting the country rather than trying to govern it, Gore and his foreign policy team would have been much more likely to have allowed the Afghans to establish the decentralized constitutional monarchy that they tried to do in 2002. We would have allowed them to bring back the deposed King Zahir Shah, who the elders insisted was the one person who could unify the country. As for being too soon to tell the impact of the Iraq war, I think it is clearly not. Also, it is not just the impact on domestic politics that is most important. Not only the unprovoked invasion of Iraq without UN authorization or support of most of our traditional allies, but other violations of international norms by the Bush administration, such as the incarceration of prisoners without treating them as POWs at Guantanamo and the torture of prisoners, both in violation of the Geneva Conventions which the US had championed since the end of World War II, and the recognition of Kosovo in violation of the UN Charter, dramatically undermined the rules-based international order of which the US was the leader. This empowered Russia and China to take similar actions and undercut US leadership. Obama continued this move away from traditional US respect for the rules-based international order (regime change in Libya, drone strikes), and lay the groundwork for the total dismantling of the strategy of leading a rules-based multilateral order practiced, at least in theory, by every US president from FDR to Obama by President Trump.
Considering his wife (FLOTUS are a very influential figure) and his VP Joe Liberman were and an hard stance against video games I wander how video games controversies of the 2000's (let alone GTA) ended up in that timeline.
I feel like the rise of the FPS genre would cause a more regulated video game market. In Clinton's presidency, the ESRB was established to be a label about content in games. So it wouldn't be a stretch for Gore to go one step further when the FPS controversy starts happening. The ramifications of this on gaming culture would be crazy. I wonder if video games would become mainstream like it is today had it been more regulated and had a large social stigma in the 2000s. Honestly, the most interesting outcomes of this would be the indie game industry and TH-cam. Minecraft was the game that put indie games on the map. It did so by being a popular game on TH-cam. Would Minecraft be as popular without gaming being a popular genre on TH-cam? Would TH-cam be the behemoth it is today without TH-cam gaming? And if Minecraft was the gateway for indie games, would people have heard of Undertale? Would the Shovel Knight kickstarter have been funded? Would any indie games have the same explosion like it did in the 2010s? I think video games would become mainstream, but just much later. As Silent Gen and Boomers die off, so does the stigma against video games. Gen X would probably have more concerns about newer games, but not nearly as much stigma as older generations. Once that stigma wears off in the 2020s and 2030s, we will see video games be more mainstream.
@@lukedetering4490 If it would be just labels placed on a game saying “this game is bad, do not play it”, I can see how it might dissuade some parents from buying them for kids. On the flip side, I can see more labels place by an out of touch government being ignored and/or creating a Streisand effect.
Ironically, this makes this timeline even better, I fucking hate the state of gaming and gamers in our generation, and the 2 people who don't like this timeline would probably be better people because of it
No child left behind was really reslly dumb, my sister who missed a lot of school because she had to go to the hospital and didnt learn the major things for each grade level was constantly pushed to the next grade level despite her and my mom asking the school to hold her back so that she could actually learn whst she needed for grade level.
I forgot who, but somebody who hated Donald Rumsfield was sad he died. When asked why, the response was “He should have been rotting away in an Iraqi prison” or something like that. I cannot disagree with that sentiment.
I think the big change politically would be centered on the lack of Carl Rove in 2004. His blueprint radically changed the electoral campaigns. What for generations had been about convincing the moderates in the middle to vote for your guy, now, due to Rove's Moneyball like calculus, became about motivating your own base to outperform the other guy's base. The evolution of this idea has given rise to a hyper-partisanism and a complete demonization of the political adversaries--after all the easiest way to get people to the polls is to scare the hell out of them. Without this change in electioneering, both parties have to be more moderate as they are appealing to those in the middle and not those on the extreme wings. This would hopefully affect the entire tenor of our political discourse.
Agreed 100. Politics has always been a divisive topic, so no illusions about it all being wine and roses. But I definitely believe our political divisions would not be as toxic as they are now if it had not been for Rove’s influence
Also the existential terror of the War on Terror really allowed Rove’s tactics of fear-mongering to fester. A quicker, calmer war, would lead to a less hyper-polarized political landscape.
@@Eibarwoman absolutely. In fact you can't assume the republicans roll over and play dead in 2004 with Gore as president: Rove would have emerged as the leader of a dirty trick campaign to beat Gore in 2004. Probably blame 911 on him. But then, the Republican president 2004-2008 would still drop taxes, keep interest rates artificially low, invade Iraq, and then get the blame for the banking crisis, meaning we go back to our timeline and Obama winning in 2008.
I do believe that year 2000 election had more historical significance than many people realize and thank you for covering it. Had Gore been elected, I have no doubt the entire war on terror , the GFC, occupy wall street would never have happened and certainty not the election of radical presidents, on both the left and right.
@@iamhungey12345 I'm already imagining a random youtube video using that Simpsons clip of Al Gore to show that The Simpsons predicted Al Gore did 9/11.
One important aspect of the victory of Al Gore is that Spain don't try to participe in the Iraq invasion the principal reason of the terrorist attack of Atocha station
@theLundLs Just a neat look on how a change in American Presidents would inadvertently prevent a major terrorist attack in another continent. That’s half of the fun in looking at alt-history. Butterfly effect
You failed to mention that in all likelihood the Arab Spring would not have happened, as the Arab Spring was in direct response to the democracy being introduced to Iraq. No Arab Spring means no war in Syria. No refugee crisis.
"For of all sad words of tongue or pen, The saddest are these: 'It might have been!'" We see JFK getting killed in Dallas, and we all think that if he hadn't died in Dallas the world might have been better off for it. The truth of the matter is he might have slowed down the entire process of getting America to where it is today. Watching Kennedy die lit a fire and everyone to do all the things that he believed in, such as civil rights, women's rights, and trying to make a peace treaty with Vietnam. Admittedly, the United States of America may never have fought the Vietnam War in the 1st place, but war would have happened anyway! Eventually!Likewise, we assume that Al Gore could have turned America into a carbon neutral utopia from all the best technologies well ahead of its time. Al Gore was just a man, no better or worse than George Bush. He could have done a lot of good things for America, but what did we learn from Donald Trump? What should we have learned from Donald Trump? No one person can make America great? The real America is the people that live there, following the American dream. America is more than just the sum of its presidents, and it's high time we all remembered that.
I feel like there would be major changes in the Middle East if Iraq didn’t get invaded. Even though it declined in power Iraq could still act as a buffer between Saudi Arabia and Iran. There wouldn’t be a power vacuum in the region like what happened after Iraq descended into war, and Arab approval of the United States would be considerably higher. Maybe this leads to groups like Hezbollah and the Houthis not gaining nearly as much popular support as they have now.
I had a conversation I had with a colleague years ago. He argued that Saddam was contained. Which he was by exercising the no fly zone and later the no drive zone. As for WMD, we should have let him use them again and only then... lower the boom. (Saddam was hard headed, he'd have screwed up again anyway) Containment worked with the Soviets for nearly 50yrs. Containment would have been cheaper and more effective than trashing the country and trying to rebuild it from scratch (that's a separate bitch session and would make a great video in itself) Anther colleague in another conversation years later argued for "rehabilitating Saddam" (Not without precedent, COL Qaddafi in Libya, The Axis Powers after WWII, Syria was on our good side for awhile). Saddam was our fair haired boy when he was killing Iranians. We knew he was a SOB, the problem was he stopped being OUR SOB and started free-lancing. As we saw he wasn't too bright. He was our proxy against Iran, Bush the elder would never have let him go down had he not invaded Kuwait. (nor would the Saudis for that matter,Saudi Arabia and Iran have been in a de-facto Cold War since the Iranian Revolution)
While in the short term, Iraq would be very different than it was in our timeline. They would be under Saddam Hussein for another 10 or so years. Then there's Arab Spring that saw a bunch of revolts in the middle east against regimes that were similar to Hussein's Iraq. While Hussein would probably hold out longer, I think he would eventually be disposed. Destabilizing Iraq and effectively putting Iraq in a similar position as it is now.
While the invasion of Iraq was unjustifiable, so was Saddam’s ethnic cleansing. The same actions later applied in Libya should have been used on him instead of sending in ground troops to overthrow the government. Hopefully he would get the message and calm down. If killed by his own people, either the region would be fine with international support, or spiral out of control again, like Iraq and/or Libya in our timeline.
@@lukedetering4490 Keeping Saddam in power would've meant Udai would've replaced him. And had that guy lived *and* acquired nuclear weapons, our world would today be seriously screwed.
@@waynemccormick4773 Glad someone mentioned the no-fly zone. Quite frequently in the decade prior to '03, the US was involved in what amounted to a low intensity war with Iraq. That involvement kept a sizeable US military presence in Saudi, and that presence was resented by a lot of Saudis, which is why many backed bin Laden's attack. That war and that presence couldn't continue indefinitely without some crisis, maybe even a direct attack by Saudi rebels on US installations in that country.
I think another reason why it feels like relatively little would change is because its still in all honesty, not that long ago. When you look at historical events, the further back you start, the bigger the ripple becomes and you can see so much of what was effected. We're still, relatively speaking, in the small part of that Bush ripple, so predicting huge massive changes is...hard.
I mean, technically he did. It wasn’t long after the Bush II presidency began in earnest that it became pretty clear that Gore won Florida, but George’s brother, the state’s governor, and a conservative heavy Supreme Court stacked it.
I really wish we had Al Gore in 2000 because while I'm sure we wouldn't have fully resolved the climate change problem now, at the very least the us would have actually for once taken some very serious steps towards cleaner energy.
Pointless. The rise of china and india nullify domestic efforts. What finally got the US to reduce carbon emissions was natural gas not taxes on output.
Adding a European perspective to this, I would argue that without the invasion of Iraq and its subsequent destabilisation there would not have been a civil war in Syria, either. Thus, Europe would not have seen the huge wave of refugees from Syria, Iraq and other mainly Middle Eastern countries in 2015/16. And in my view, this 'refugee crisis' still has an impact in European societies and politics to this day. It strengthened or even created far-right/anti-immigrant sentiment in much of Central and Eastern Europe. The divide between Hungary and Poland and other EU would probably not be as deep as it is today. In addition, I do not believe Germany would have a far-right party, such as the 'Alternative for Germany' in its parliament. All because of a few hundred votes in Florida in 2000.
Adding to this as well I think Britain would most likely still be in the EU if Gore won. As the Iraq war was a huge blow to the Blair/Brown Labour government and saw them drop big in polling, and so in 2010 which was a very narrow election I reckon if Iraq didn't happen then Labour would probably win denying the Tories. Which among many things probably means that heading into 2015 no major party would be advocating for Brexit because yeah no refugee crisis or at least not as large in our timeline, and a more stable government that is friendlier to the EU probably yeah means Britain stays in the union and the nation is less of a shitshow than it is today.
One thing I like about the past is that when the rebels overthrown the government, the neighbors mainly didn't care about what happened there at all and simply accept that it has the new ruling government now. But in nowadays, everybody makes a fuss about everything. At least, on the political landscapes.
Uh historically neighbouring nations very much did intervene if rebels overthrew a government or erupted in civil war. E.g. Russian revolution and civil war (late 1910s - early 1920s) Revolutions of 1848 (Russians intervene to help the Austrian Habsburgs) French revolutions and subsequent Coalition Wars (French republicans vs everyone)
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 88 | คู่เอก "ป้อมเพชร vs อัสลามจอน"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/1ZqTVVbMgbo/mqdefault.jpg)
I’m so glad you ranted about No Child Left Behind. Standardized education ruined America in so many ways.
*insert angelic ascending organ chords*
ITS DONE MIRACLES TO NO ONE
It further made “getting the correct answer” the dominant pedagogy of the American education system rather than process and critical thinking
What if they didn't?
So not everything should be adopted directly from Europe, eh? ;)
You mean No Child Gets Ahead? I know of many people who voted for him twice and, even to this day, will still do the mental gymnastics needed to justify the Iraq War. And absolutely all of them were calling it "No Child Gets Ahead" while Bush was still in office. That's how much of a disaster it was.
Great video. I saw the Al Gore Futurama reference, and I just had to give a shout out to his daughter Kristin Gore, who was a writer for Futurama, and was a big reason why her dad personally lent his voice to several Futurama episodes.
I like pizza
Your videos are awesome and are part of the reason I’m pursuing History as a career
I didn't expect you to be here Mr beat
Wait so was that actually Al Gore saying "I have ridden the moon worm"? Thats so cool!
@@MasterMogable Every time he appeared, even in a self-deprecating role such as an inept Prius taxi driver, that was really him.
I love how Cody flirts with the TH-cam demonetization algorithm in almost every video. Like playing chicken in a way
TBF they muck about with that thing so often, and the standards are so purposefully vague, that it's kinda hard not to and be interesting.
No he doesn’t. He toes the party line exactly.
You mean the Al gore ithm
@@Giantsfan1736 _slow clap_
@Aurelia it’s funny you people think those are things TH-cam cares about.
No Iraq war, No Patriot Act, No No Child Left Behind Act, No miserable Katrina response, Early climate change action, More regulation on Wall Street, private equity, and real estate, a shorter and more successful outcome in Afghanistan.....
The assumption on Afghanistan is amusing. Iraq likely would’ve happened or some conflict in the region just differently. The patriot act definitely would’ve happened and yeah no child left behind likely wouldn’t have but gore would’ve pushed some asinine education reform regardless. Gore wouldn’t have stopped 2008 sorry.
Yeah......no. regulation of the economy, wall street or otherwise, would've accelerated the recession of 08. It's odd, everytime the left regulates the economy, it stagnates and we get a recession.
Climate change isn't as big a deal as you eco-communists keep saying it is. Does it exist? Sure. Do we need to destroy the economy and convert every household to non-nuclear green energy and kill all the cows? No
@@kordellswoffer1520 Definitely would have stopped 2008 and likely 9/11 as well. 2008 was basically the result of Bush's "ownership society" policies and the glut of money looking for places to go after the ridiculous 2001 tax cuts. Also, we'd probably have little to no national debt.
@@stdesy little to no national debt. That’s such unserious commentary. The tax cuts were good. And 9/11 totally would’ve still happened as it wasn’t bush fault it did and 2008 was a build of not of government policy but bank behaviours and risk further harmed by the regulation cuts Clinton passed. The debt wouldbe substantial decreased but the surplus would’ve eventually have come to an end due to al gore shit policies.
@@stdesyexactly
No child left behind stopped me from getting into advanced math or skipping a grade to higher level math since I was basically the only students getting good test scores. Being "the smart kid" in a ghetto school made it necessary to keep me in the grade I was to boost test scores for my class. I had this explained to my parents who were pissed at the school as I was getting terrible behavior scores but basically aced every test given to me. I later found out I had ADHD and since I excelled in class, I was always causing trouble since I was bored out of my mind.
That’s so shitty, kids deserve better than being used as a money making machines
I am sorry, this education policy really made things a mess.
Wow I'm really sorry that happened to you.
I hope you're doing well now. I'm sorry you had to go through that.
I was in a very similar boat. I had undiagnosed AHDH (we only figured this out when my mother was diagnosed, sparking us to look into it and realize literally all of us from my grandfather down has it) and constantly was a menace in classes that bored me. I'd openly confront my elementary math teacher about the shitty way they were teaching because of the shitty curriculum (everyday math for those who've suffered it too) and even going into middle school I was one of the most common sights in the principals office cause I would do shit for shits and giggles like making chatrooms on school computers and playing 20khz sounds at high volumes to annoy my classmates without teachers noticing. My mother repeatedly told the school I was bored but they never did anything cause I was a consistent ace on standardized tests and quite frankly most of my class besides my group were utter morons (the advanced math classes literally had 10 people in them in a large school)
I felt that No Child Left Behind rant to my bones. As someone who entered public school as it was just getting started, and had a mom who taught special education, that program was the bane of our existence. To this day American education has still yet to recover from all its students being turned into quantifiable commodities.
What happened?
This because I was told the tests were important by my teachers, so, I had to do my best on them. By the time I was in high school, Core 40 took over... Core 40 math is not it. I'm good at math, not Core 40 math. I ended up failing Geometry because of it.... Graduated in 2019
I was set to go into teaching right when NCLB passed. My Education class read through it and half of us didn't even bother finishing our certificates. I went from being a languages teacher to working in a machine shop (and becoming a mechanical engineer).
@@Juan-hv9bi Yes
@@Juan-hv9bi You're really doubting this?
It turned education into who can get the best arbitrary test scores, I had to learn actual skills outside of school, because of this.
Don't even get me started on Middle School where I learned almost literally nothing, making three years of "education" utterly pointless.
A world with no Patriot Act... that alone is an enviable timeline
I member the days before. They were glorious.
@@katieandkevinsears7724I don’t. I wasn’t alive
Even if Al Gore was president a similar thing would've been passed because why would the government pass up an opportunity to infringe on your privacy
Meh I call BS. The patriot act was always an excuse to expand the surveillance state. ‘The climate crisis’ is being exploited right now under a similar guise...no reason why not to assume it wouldn't be.
The Patriot act would have happened regardless, remember it was passed by both parties and neither party has worked to sunset it.
tbh he sounds like a good president, wouldn't start a war for no reason, tries to help with climate change, wouldn't make school hell for everyone
LOL. Maybe step into the real world kiddo
@@charlisantini3403 Bait
Authors of alternate history have a tendency to romanticize the other guy
I'll start worrying about Climate change the moment rich people from affluentn nations stop using private jets to travel the world to lecture us on climate change
Like you Westerners are going stop China India and the Developing World emissions anyway..... Only way to stop them is by war. Which I'm sure your elites will push for eventually.
This video is probably one of the best brief examples of how messed up the 2000s were, and how a couple of seemingly small decisions really have a huge impact on our daily lives
Us zoomers don't deal the cards. We just play them.
yes
@@charlesshelton7989 the Boomers really screwed us. Seriously, they've held power for 30 years and counting and politicians average age just keeps rising since they won't release the reins and hand them off to the next generation. Seriously, it's kind of crazy that we'll likely have a boomer president in 2024 too and with the current leadership it's not unthinkable they may even get the 2028 presidency as well. Regardless they'll likely rule for 40 years, which is kind of crazy considering Clinton was nearly half the age of Biden when he got into office.
Butterfly effect be crazy.
Well that's all of life and human history really
It's kinda weird being born in the 2000s because everyone talks about how impactful 9/11 is and it feels like it is some huge mystery event that everyone mentions how it changed everything and that's why everything sucks in the USA. I always wondered what it would be like if things were different.
Think about the kids born in 2020 and how they'll never experience a pre covid world
As someone who was around before 9/11 (though I was a kid) it was a totally different vibe in almost every respect, things felt a lot more "chill"
I was very young when 9/11 happened, but even I have memories of things just seeming calmer/less tense and everyone seemingly liking America and being optimistic about the future, regardless of political party. Of course, I was a little kid, so take this with a grain of salt
I'm not American, and I was only 8 when it happened, so I didn't realize how important it was that the burning towers were on the TV. But yes, from reports it sounds like America was somewhat better beforehand (though don't get too golden about the 90s, they had plenty of garbage of their own). I like to think of the 90s as the brief period between the Cold War and the War On Terror. It was a brief moment when America had 'won', it had defeated its old enemy at last (nobody expected the USSR to fall except in the distant future), and it seemed possible that we would get a golden, democratic future. Then it fell down.
I was in 4th grade and i still did t care lol
God, No Child Left Behind was a disaster. As a high school teacher's son, I've heard plenty of rants about the negative effect it had on education. I'm glad you decided to talk about it.
Hey kids, the majority of your History, Art, Science, and English classes will now be focused on cramming [Insert state standardized test name here] material so the school can make lots o' money off your test results.
Common Core too. Everyone at my school hated the curriculum, but especially in math classes. They tried to make standardized testing "better" but it's still useless.
12 years of public school and all I learned how to do was guess on a big stupid test every year.
It beats Common Crap by an order of magnitude.
I think you're missing one key detail Cody. Prior to the invasion of Iraq, we very nearly had Osama bin Laden; however, the resources taken to prep for the Iraq invasion meant that we lost the ability to take bin Laden.
I remember when this came out-you are right!
so it would've just been a few years in afghanistan instead of the shitshow we got
what a terrible fucking president bush was
@@asdfoifhvjbkaos The possibility that Gore would not only avoid Iraq, but conceivably be able to pull out of Afghanistan in 03/04 w/bin Laden dead just adds to the likelihood of him getting a second term.
That doesn’t even make sense.
Cody, we all know what Republican wins the 2020 election in this timeline:
JEB!
He seems too timid for US public politics.
I mistakingly read Jeb as JrEg, and got confused
Please clap
@@RAS_Squints I still use that bushism.
As hackneyed as it was, there is that one scene from the movie W where George Jr has a dream about his father berating him for ruining the family name. “Generations of work-FOR JEB!!!@
The Butterfly Effect in action:
*The more recent the change, the more similar our world looks.*
Seeing as how bush and gore were both war hawk globalist beholdant to the same lobbyists. It would have been exactly the same except climate change instead of covid. Even now, they’re gonna blame food shortages on “climate change” and not the forced shut down of the world.
@@Sakattack2023 unless lockdown completely stopped the shipping of fertilizer or something, I don’t see how it would cause food shortages.
@@alexsiemers7898 that’s because you’re incapable of thinking (per virtue of you thinking all food requires fertilizer). Just one example I’ve seen is Tyson’s chicken stock. The feeder farms had no one to work the farm an take the chickens to Tyson. So they out grew the machines and had no where to go and became a resource drain. Per Tyson, they said “shut the power off and lock doors” a whole flock dead and wasted. Now that on a National level = food shortages and raised prices. Now compound that with the supply chains being disrupted due to the riots and the truckers basically going on strike because of unsafe conditions and vax mandates. Creates an even bigger problem, that compounds as you get further down the chain.
but yet there are still differences: much less hostility and no propulism (or trumpsim)
@@ecurewitz in a dilusional hypothetical made by a partisan hack on TH-cam desperate for nostalgic dopamine hits. Shut up.
I feel like climate change is a neglected aspect of this. Having an international climate accord 15 years early would be huge, because climate would not have had the chance to become politicized the way it did. They certainly would not have taken the problem as seriously as we do now, but they would have done something, and that would have set a precedent to build off of later.
Climate change was politicized even back then. Bush pulled US out of a major climate treaty.
@@selfishcapitalist3523 That’s true but in this alternate universe, climate change won’t be as politicized as in our universe
I don't think Gore could have had much impact, could not have gotten Kyoto ratified, the Senate had already rejected it overwhelmingly.
great point however the Iraq conflict was inevitable, and his entire 4 year terms would have revolved around it like Bush's. Maybe it gets him a 2nd term but honestly Gore seems like he would have been just a 1 term president which would have bought in John MCCAIN as the president in 2004 and we would have doubled down on the war possibly even pushing back the recssion of 2008 into 2011. He might have finsihed as a popular president but if he didn't then . in 2012 we get Obama and Climate talks begin to come about atlough it still exists it just isn't publicized and made political until obam era.
Then 2020 election would have been Gerry Brown/Biden or Hillary vs Trump, and much of their term would revolved around the Panda mick. Trump wins because it came from John Cena but then once again does a 1 term.
It doesn't really matter how you change the actors, it stil leads to the same outcome.
Yeah I agree this aspect is definitely overlooked. He wanted to do more on climate back then than most democrats. Definitely would’ve pushed the US ahead on fighting climate change by at least a few years of where we are now and most likely have pushed the world ahead on it as well. Even if he couldn’t pass many bills, there’s still many regulations he could have put in place through executive order
I liked that you didn’t go straight from Gore to Obama. I’m independent but what I was really thinking about was how incredibly rare it’s been for a party to be in the White House longer than 8 years. Here, even the 16 years of Clinton and Gore would have been unprecedented in recent history as even the 12 years of Reagan/Bush is an outlier.
The idea that party swings are normal is the real outlier. The only time there was a normal swing from from the '90s to 2016. Many other points have multiple same-party wins one after another.
I bet McCain might had won 2008 and then Obama 2012 and 2016 no Donald Trump YES.😅
After FDR no democrat was elected to more than 1 term until Bill Clinton (granted, JFK would have absolutely won a second term had he not been shot).
@@Thespeedrap McCain really only lost support so drastically because he felt he needed to ally with the then far smaller far right wing nuts by having Sarah Palin as his running mate, despite the fact that he was already leading Obama. coming off of a dem presidency and without Obama's ability to capitalize on bush shenaniganery, McCain wouldn't have had the pressure to allow the wing nuts to have a say, and not only would he have won by not alienating moderates and independents, but he wouldn't have ever given the wing nuts the little legitimacy they needed to become a player in politics. McCain vs Obama was probably the only race since Carter vs Bush Sr to have not just one, but two genuinely good people as the options. However, as much as I think McCain was the very last of the high profile republicans to have a conscience, I also indirectly blame him for giving the MAGATs enough of a stage that they were able to take over the party. My grandfather was a lifelong republican up till 2016, and so was my mom, and so were most of my aunts and uncles. the radicalization of the republicans has pushed out anyone who doesn't agree leaving just the cesspool in charge.
@garrettbyrd7426 Uh, no? FDR's three full terms, followed by the term started by FDR and finished by Truman all happened in the thirties and forties, then Truman had full term from the late forties to early fifties.
After that, the same party didn't hold the White House again until 3-4 decades later when had two terms in the eighties and then Bush Sr. had a single term in the late eighties and early nineties.
Thus far, it hasn't happened again in the past 32 years. Party swings have been normal for ages and a single party keeping the White House for longer than 8 years is the outlier.
The Taliban offered surrender less than 12 months after the Afghanistan invasion, on pretty favorable terms (in retrospect), promising to deny future safe harbor to Al-Qaeda.
It’s possible Gore would have accepted and pulled out in early 2002. However, the more I think about it, it would likely hinge on how confident our intelligence agencies were Bin Laden had permanently fled to Pakistan.
One has to dream though..
I still think there's a chance the 9/11 attacks could have been prevented or at least delayed or severely limited in scope if Gore had been President. Fighting al-Qaeda had been a priority of the Clinton administration, and the USS Cole was attacked less than a year before 9/11. There had also been at least 2 attempts to blow up passenger airliners in 1996 and again in 2000 that were both foiled by the same administration. It is not unreasonable to suppose that Gore would have taken the warnings (as vague as they were at the time) more seriously than Bush, who had very little foreign policy experience and was more focused on his domestic agenda like NCLB.
@@icemachine79 It's also important to note that Osama bin Laden was put on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted list after the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa.
Clinton responded to those attacks with Operation Infinite Reach (a series of cruise missile strikes against Sudan and Afghanistan, the latter of which was intended to kill bin Laden).
Was the perfect s***-storm of opportunists and incompetency.
Taliban actually accepted to deliver ben lden under the condition that he would be judged in a neutral country , but the usa refused
@@icemachine79 Blowing up random Afghan civilians and driving up AQ recruitment was a priority. Clinton also literally turned down SA's offer to hand him Bin Laden.
Today’s current political discourse:
“SCREEEEEE!!!!”
Political discourse today if Gore won:
“Screeee!”
I think manbearpig made Gore hard to hate.
@@Edax_Royeaux Specially after climate change was taken seriously and South Park apologized to him
This is actually sad
you forgot today’s is in bold
@@Noredlac_ IDK was it? It seemed more like yes, he was correct, but you don't have to be a smug douche about it.
I wish you would have recorded the "boring" part and made it an unlisted video we could click the link to in the description and check out. I love nerdy stuff like that and would have loved to hear your reasoning.
The boring parts of history usually end up making the biggest difference in the long run
his reasoning sounds pretty absurd. why would the Republican who won in 2008 lose re-election? thats nearly impossible in todays climate. even trump would have cruised to re election had the pandemic not hit.
@@godemperorofmankind3.091 Yeah I honestly think it would have been McCain 2008-2016, Obama 2016-2024. Obama was just way too solid of a political contender and inevitably would have won reelection upon taking the presidency, no matter what year he got there. Same thing with McCain. And he died in 2018 in our timeline (which probably would not have changed even with presidential medical care), so both would have made a full 2 terms. Maybe Jeb Bush or Ted Cruz in 2024?
Also with Afghanistan being withdrawn in 2011 and Bin Laden being killed under McCain’s government, that totally would have won McCain reelection the following year with his spin, as the Republicans would have loved taking out America’s enemies, and the Democrats would have supported us withdrawing in general.
@@noahjackl2240 i dont think it would have been McCain. I think Bush or Cheney would have ran again. Reagan lost i think the first time he ran, but won the second time. so we still would have gotten President Bush Jr, IMO. it just got delayed for a while.
also Obama ran at least partly because of the Iraq War and his criticisms of it. he campaigned on getting the US out of its wars. but if theres no Iraq War (since a delayed Bush presidency i dont think could have drummed up enough support for one) Obama wouldnt have had that outsider appeal against hillary in 2016.
@@godemperorofmankind3.091 McCain would probably turn the recession into a depression when he's in office or at least worsen the recession, this would probably give a dem the win in 2012
The future we deserved, but was stolen from us. We live in the ashes of that possibility.
Coming here after the 2024 election, this rings so goddamn true
Gore would also paused the Clinton millitary cutbacks. He mentioned in the 2000 debate that he wanted to increase defense spending and manpower because morale was low as US troops at the time felt overworked because of the lack of manpower. Gore also mentioned in the 2000 debate that he voted for the Regan buildup back in the day.
So we had a middle of the road candidate politically and Florida fucked it up b/c they couldn't move into the 21st century and get digital voting booths
If anything I think Cody is being dishonest here. There was widespread paranoia post 9/11 and after 12 years of a Democratic administration, without finding the man responsible for the darkest day in American history. There is no Doubt a Republican would have been elected. (Wether it’s Another Bush, Giuliani or some other Republican is up for you) and would probably go after another country is his term. Wether it be Pakistan, Iraq, Sudan or Libya due to their links to Islamic terrorism or when North Korea acquires nuclear weapons.
Further more having the Taliban retake power in the early 2010s after a U.S withdraw post Osama Bin Laden would probably know what happens to Afghanistan under the Taliban. If their government collapses into another civil war, then the war would be much more justified as it would have been seen as the Taliban would probably not hold power long anyways and the idea of removing rouge regimes would still be seen as valid. If the Taliban try to expand into Pakistan then it would Downfall of Kabul meets the rise of ISIS with nuclear weapons and that would be fun.
And that would have garnered a HUGE amount of helpful Republican votes for a win. Lord knows they live to DUCK over the average small guy American so they can massively over spend on military. Gore was smart!!! Too bad WE HAD THE ELECTION STOLLEN FROM US!!!
I always think I can't like the guy more and I keep getting proven wrong
@@milantoth6246 wdym?
Hearing Cody's voice shift from his normal monotone, informational voice to his natural voice is so cool
when the heck did that happen? I didn't hear it
SNL did a hilarious sketch about this at the time. It basically had Gore acting as an exam proctor towards the entire country. I think he called out North Dakota for a wrong answer on question #7.
Could you post the link please
@@tomassanz2003 I'll try to find it.
It was great. And they had one for Bush where D.C. behind him was on fire. He said something like, "I'm here for you 24/7. 24 hours a week, 7 months a year."
@@taylorlibby7642 thanks
@@tomassanz2003 I honestly can't find a TH-cam link. Looking elsewhere....
“I just wanted to complain about those stupid tests let’s talk about 9/11” sometimes quotes from videos strike me to my core and this do be one of them
No Iraqi invasion means no ISIS (not as big as they were in our timeline), that is actually fairly huge.
ISIS was still in Syria tho, which the war there didn’t start by the US.
Maybe ISIS wouldn’t be able to get into Syria in this timeline, or the protest in Syria wouldn’t escalate into a war, who knows?.
ISIS would still exist as the problems in Syria would still exist. The wouldn't have as much influence in the area as Suddam's government would try to contain them
Saddam would’ve contained them
@@belkYT he would've obliterated them.
@@patrickkirby6580 saddam would behead every isis there
“I just wanted to complain about those stupid tests, anyway let’s talk about 9-11” this is iconic and hilarious!
Me in history class.
As the child of a teacher, and someone who grew up during this (in Virginia, where we already have our own standardized testing), No Child Left Behind RUINED the education system in the US.
we need to repeal that
@@ecurewitz it was mostly repealed in 2015.
@@matthewpalevsky6080 thank you for clarifying that for me
@@matthewpalevsky6080
lmao
haha SOLs go brrrrrrrrrrrr
[I'm so happy I moved to missouri during high school, I didnt want to retake the 5 SOLs I failed in elementary]
Damn, I want to live in this timeline. Seems way better than our current one.
just remove the dems and we’ll be fine :)
Same
8:19 If Mccain would have win in 2008,succeeding Gore,WW3 would become a reality no later than late November 2010,so this timeline isn't so good,as you think!(P.S.I hate George W Bush's policy,but if Mccain's victory in 2008 would be a price for Gore's presidency in 2000's,then,George W Bush is best of the worst)
@@KhabarovskUserwhy would mcain be worse than bush....and I am sorry Obama was just way too charismatic to not win 2008 election
@@leaveme3559 Three words:World War Three!
No Child Left Behind defined my entire school experience from Kindergarten to 12th grade. It completely ruined the school system, and I watched it crumble by seeing kids who were bad at testing, but otherwise great in school and smart, and kids who were great testers but not that smart succeeded and were rewarded and singled out, the former ended up loathing the staff and “learning” in general, and instead, it pushed them to skip, smoke weed/harder drugs, or drop out because of how they were treated - like failures/imbeciles - because they couldn’t test well.
It was awful, and ruined a generation of children who would’ve otherwise
I've seen so many good test takers go into advanced classes and get over their head and develop mental health issues because they can't keep up. It really is sad.
While I’m both Canadian and too young to be a part of your generation, I can only imagine the effects that has had on the US. Standardized testing is absolutely terrible, and I’m glad it’s falling by the wayside in much of the world.
if you couldn't test well, you hadn't retained the info. ergo, you've identified those bound to fail because they didn't learn. aka the stupid ones. oh, and just noticed the projection. didn't mean you call YOU stupid...
I remember crying and stressing about potentially failing the 3rd grade over our standardized test. It sucked.
@@goku8621And this was in the 3rd grade? Yikes...
"As the Federal Goverment was too disorganized to do anything."
Why does this sound so familiar?
This was a true trend setter. Today the federal government is basically dysfunctional at all times
@@declanfeeney7004 I meant it was made that way since a big government would be able to share the power among the people but too inefficient to become authoritarian or abuse its power.
@@declanfeeney7004 True, a bumbling force for servile morbid mediocrity.
oh no not agai-
always has been
Cody finally saying “Bush did 9/11.” Even if he doesn’t mean it, gives me life and I can die happy now.
In this alternate time line it's just be gore did 9/11 because we all know it's the 3 letter agencies who have the real control over the country
No joke, mossad did 9/11
@@aintankha6617 no it didn’t
@@chimera9818 of course you'd say that, zionist
@@chimera9818 point is, a number of mossad agents have been arrested on that day, 3 confirmed, 40 speculated, plus the Israeli prime Minister said himself the attack benefitted Israel, you can look all this up
No Iraq War, no DHS, no Patriot Act, meaningful climate change legislation and less deregulation of banks & housing!
Plus we would’ve gotten internet 2, presented by the inventor of the internet Al Gore.
The political consequences of that election were massive not only here in the US but in the UK as well. Without the Iraq War, Blair likely would have remained a very popular PM and certainly would not have stepped down in 2007. Infact, it is likely that the Labour government would have lasted about as long as the preceding Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher and John Major. Post-2010 survival of Labour in government may have meant the UK would have averted both the austerity measures implemented by the Cameron government, as well as Brexit. Scottish independence likely would not have risen in popularity as it has in recent years, and without Brexit, Unionist parties would have been able to keep a stronger grip in Northern Ireland. Without the Iraq War, the civil wars in Syria and Libya may not have occurred either, and US-Iranian relations probably would be much better right now.
Unfortunately, the civil wars would have happened no matter what, the Arab populace were simply squeezed too hard while living in ever worsening conditions, like electricity only being on for 3 hours at a time and then off for the same amount of time in Syria and that situation continuing for 8 years without any solutions, despite the country’s oil and gas reserves being tapped by the government in addition to ever increasing water rationing, rising unemployment and ever increasing prices.
@@yazanmowed All 100% agreeable as having been the pressures which largely drove the events of the Arab Spring, these economic pressures combined with government abuse were after all what motivated Mohammed Bouazizi to immolate himself after all. But it’s hard to say whether or not these economic pressures would have been as severe as they were 2011-2012 were it not for the consequences of Iraq’s destabilization and how Saddam’s removal seems to have kicked the balance of power in the Arab world well into the hands of the monarchies rather than the republics. Note that Saleh, Assad, Gaddafi, Ben Ali, and Mubarak were all Republican leaders while none of the monarchies fell, even in Bahrain where something like 20-30% of the people were involved in demonstrations. Additionally, the turmoil in Iraq can definitely be said to have enabled the growth and development of number of groups which later would play a role in these civil wars; especially in the Syrian context.
@@LultasticFilms It is actually quite likely that a Gore presidency and the drive to divorce the global economy from fossil fuel dependence would have had an even more profound constricting effect on Middle Eastern economies. But without the same degree of strategic significance to the US and her allies, it is also conceivable that the result of those internal pressures would have been positive as despotic governments would be unable to contain revolutions calling for change.
I believe Brexit still would’ve happened despite Gore being elected.
I'm not so certain about austerity though. Blair would have let brown govern eventually and deficit hysteria would have impacted him. His own chancellor's did proclaim he'd cut deeper than Thatcher and Labour's 2010 manifesto promised many a cut.
Still the austerity would have been less harsh than anything the Cameron would introduced.
No Child Left Behind is a huge part of why we kept our daughter out of public school and put her in Montessori and International schools. You hit the nail on the head with that one.
Good parenting
@@loganbuckley2010 x1000000
I'm surprised that you didn't mention it, but speaking as a Floridian I can attest to EXACTLY what the trigger point was that changed everything for the 2000 Election: Elián González.
"I have little doubt that if Clinton hadn't sent Elian Gonzalez back, enough additional Cuban-Americans in Florida would have voted for Gore to send him to the White House despite the voting irregularities."
-- Bob Shrum, political consultant for Al Gore, commenting on the 2000 election.
For anyone who doesn't know about this, a little context: the Elián Gonzalez standoff was a custodial dispute between the United States and Cuba in 2000 over the five year old Elian. He had fled with his mother the year before but she died on the journey to Florida, he was one of the only survivors on the raft.
Elián's Miami relatives insisted that he stay in the United States and gain the new life his mother had wanted for him, while Castro and the boy's family in Cuba stood behind Elian's father Juan Miguel González, who wanted his son back. Elian quickly became a symbol of the long-running feud between the community of Cuban exiles living in the United States (particularly in Florida) and the Cuban leader Fidel Castro. After months of legal squabbling, ultimately the U.S Government ordered that Elián's relatives in Miami surrender him to U.S. Department of Justice custody. When they refused, federal agents, armed with submachine guns, forced their way into the Miami home of Lazáro González and seized a terrified Elián, returning him to Cuba.
So, basically Clinton pissed off the entire Cuban community just seven months before Election Day and as a result thousands of Floridian Cuban voters voted red instead of blue, which caused the results to be so narrow. So, this essentially is the trigger point. No Elian means no custodial standoff and therefore no controversy, meaning that there likely wouldn't have been a close election, leading to a Blue Florida and a Gore victory. And as Alt mentioned, there wouldn't have been months of legal delays, possibly leading to the prevention of 9/11. So, it all comes back to this: one little five-year-old boy.
I can't help but note the sheer irony: Elián's mother wanted her son to have a better life in a democracy, but her choice to flee Cuba indirectly changed the entire world, led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, and the restriction and decay of the freedoms she wanted for her son.
talk about butterfly affect.
There's too many "possiblys" for this comment to have as much impact as was intended.
Even if Elián González hadn't been deported, I don't think Cuban-Americans would have voted for Gore.
Most Cuban-Americans are either descendants of, or are themselves, people who fled Cuba after Castro rose to power in 1959. Because of that, most Cuban-Americans are staunch Republicans.
@@a_can_of_soda Very few these days were even born when Batista was in power. Some of the refugees actually fought against his regime and then were unjustly persecuted by Castro and his thugs.
this is even more wild than the no outkast no TH-cam butterfly effect
The election in 2000 shows why we need rank choice voting in the US
No
@@sosuapimp8449why?? That would make the people vote the president instead of the electoral college.
I like your takes on almost every point here, except primarily the Patriot Act. It was easy for Gore to be against it in our time line as he was no longer in the government or interested in getting elected back in. But the DNC in our time line was overwhelming for it, if Gore wanted to get re-elected in the theoretical time line he would have 100% supported it(publicly) in the same blind pro safer America energy almost everyone else in the government did at the time.
Disagree. Politicians (especially presidents) who have private reservations against a popular act tend to remove a few of the worst teeth before signing so as to keep that "supportive" attitude, but also to eliminate the worst parts of an act.
@@skittybug6937 So basically it was a 50/50
I think it's telling that at the time with the Patriot Act, it passed overwhelmingly. Very few sitting politicians in Congress opposed it. McCain was one of them as I recall, and a very small minority at that. I don't think anyone else in the big chair as it were would have changed it. It was a freakin' 98-1 vote in the Senate for the Patriot Act, after all. And 357-66 in the House.
Just like how Biden keeps invoking our "safety" as a reason to unilaterally push through unconstitutional mandates.
@@bgbrthrswtchngu2012 It's not unconstitutional.
Seriously you people don't even think about what the words you are saying mean.
I think that invading Iraq and destabilizing the middle east also led to the immigration crisis facing Europe contributing to the international rise of populism as well. So even though no lines on the map are redrawn, Al Gore winning still has major international ramifications that ironically, would make most people on the right quite happy.
bush and his skull of bones stuf
this is why your opinion is invalid, stay home murica
The rise of populism in Europe pre-dated the refugee crisis, and if anything it was most successfull countries that weren't affected by the crisis.
@@rolandsquire6555 exactly. The FN had been a feature of French political life for decades and Le Pen making it to the second round in 2002 was one of the most important events in 2000s politics and it happened before any refugee crisis. Germany might be a harder one to call, the AfD was allowed to be normalized as a direct result of the refugee crisis but there had been many attempts at creating a successful right wing party in Germany for decades.
Brexit and Trump are the two major events that I just can’t see happening this timeline.
Yes it did. ISIS rebellion and later short lived caliphate in Syria and Iraq spurred the first major waves of refugees seeking a better life in the West, away from their war-torn homelands. It's amazing to watch rightwing movements in Europe yearn for American style rightwing leadership because of the migrant crises when it is America who caused it in the first place.
No Child Left Behind turned into let's not teach our students anything that isn't on the test.
We all know how that ended. At this point, U.S. citizens are statistically the least educated in the developed world. And it shows as soon as most of us (who aren't engineers) try to use the metric system.
@@GlidingZephyr That last part makes me laugh a little cause engineers are more likely to use imperial than any other STEM profession. They probably wouldn't be much better then the general population when it came to metric tbh.
@@GlidingZephyr If God wanted us to use the metric system there would have been 10 apostles!
@@perpecedecelequex
I don't know about you, but they teach every engineering student in my school to use both. I prefer the metric system, but still understand that employers might use imperial.
@@folofus4815 nice
He actually did win. He lost in the Supreme Court.
Him and bush would’ve done the same thing listen to testify by ram
Missed the fact that Rudy Giuliani would have run in 2004 as "America's Governor" and would be an extremely close race in 2004. I don't think the 2004 election would be as much of a blow out as you think. Rudy was leading the GOP ticket in 2008 and only brought down from scandals that were brought to light in 2008 and happened in 2006.
Underrated comment
Honestly, considering the fact that we would have had the Democratic Party in the oval office for three terms, I think Rudy could've actually won in that hypothetical scenario
@@DeltaFRFX war time presidents never lose
@@DeltaFRFX And Gore going full "I'm going to destroy all US industry other than my pets that don't actually make enough power"
No. Rudy failed in '08 because his campaign was a total joke. He skipped campaigning in the early primaries and bet all on the Florida primary. And, when his entire strategy was to get things going with a win in Florida, he didn't get the right endorsements and got crushed. By that point, the shape of the race had already been decided and any lane that Giuliani might have didn't exist. The various wings of the party had their candidates in McCain, Mitt Romney (yup, he also ran in '08), and Mike Huckabee (the Christian conservative lane).
Since you've recently covered North American politics around this time period. I would be interested to see you make a video hypothesizing what would happen if Quebec succeeded in separating from Canada following the 1995 succession referendum and the ramifications it would have on North American society.
Seeing how most people here in America can't find Quebec on a map, probably very little outside of Canada.
@@robertgronewold3326 I mean, Canada doesn't do a lot on the world stage when viewed by Americans, but maybe from other perspectives they have a bigger impact. Either way it'll be fun to see that in a video.
The rest of Canada would have taken an arguably justified official stance of “fuck Quebec” and completely crushed them with anti Quebec trade policy and political discrimination, eventually pushing the new country into turmoil which would prolly see them reabsorbed into Canada as a whole much later, but without nearly as much autonomy
So prolly a worst case scenario for Quebec
@@liamearle5966 Makes sense. Canada has a reputation for being nice, but they can be just as hostile as anyone else.
I did a shitty scenario on this where it causes a chain reaction and British Columbia and Newfoundland secede. As I said not very good
The question is, would Saddam's Iraq survived the Arab Spring (which certainly may still happened in this timeline)? And what would be the consequences for the stability of the Middle East whether if Iraq was not invaded in this timeline, but the Arab Spring might still became a thing?
Arab Spring still happens. Saddam, being Saddam, does his thing with rebellions. He'll grow old and passes the throne to Qusay. Kurds still rise up, but no ISIL...?
It’s really unknown. It could go either way. Sadam definitely wasn’t no where as near as powerful on the world stage by the turn of the 21st century. So there is the possibilities he either; loses the Arab spring, wins it, Iraq becomes a failed state, gets split up between its ethnic groups, gobbled up by its neighbours, etc…
@@blackpowderuser373 i doubt saddam would hold as much power until 2011. Shias and Kurds would certainly revolt and with the help of Iran Shis would most likely take over after saddam.
the Arab Spring came to fruition as a result of democratic ideas that were introduced to the region by the new Iraq. Political commentary shows on TV and radio that had never been allowed before gave voice to a young generation for the first time. If the invasion of Iraq hadn't happened the Arab Spring would not have happened, which means the revolution in Syria would never have happened, nor the refugee crisis nor Isis.
No Child Left Behind is probably the reason I can’t do long division or multiplication as an adult. As low as I scored on the math portions of the tests, I never got proper help. I just got put into a “lower level” math program that felt more like a dumping ground for bad kids where we never actually did anything. It turned out that I had dyscalculia and stealth dyslexia, but we didn’t know that until I was in high school, years after No Child Left Behind ended. It wasn’t actually meant to help kids, it was just cutting the cost of education.
Even without it, you still wouldn’t be able to do long divisions or multiplications as an adult.
The main flaw in the standardized tests created by no child left behind is that they distributed money exactly opposite to the way they should have. A school that scored high on the tests was rewarded with extra funding but a school that scored below average had their usually already insufficient funding slashed even further.
Wait what? Not American so just assumed they'd spend on the ones with worse results. Holy shit. I should have seen this coming but I just didn't.
what ? That's ridiculous ! The video didn't explicit that so I thought it meant giving some funds to underperforming schools :(
Except throwing money at ghetto inner cities doesn’t solve the problem even slightly.
How many time does our country have to throw billions of dollars at a problem just to make the problem worse.... Shitty schools have way deeper problems then funding. My highschool was majority Mexican and black and between freshman and graduation nearly 80%of the kids dropped out. Most of the teachers who taught were just their for a paycheck and most of the students. couldn't have cared less about their education. Could have spent 100k per student and it wouldn't have mattered. The only teachers who cared were the ones who taught ap and expected their student to do well.
they were also schools that were underfunded to begin with (hence the low scores). Also tended to be schools that had large minority populations so theres THAT can of worms. (I dont necessarily think George W. Bush was racist against african americans/mexican but he was definitely racially insensitive)
Bad events in history that should never be forgotten: **Exist**
TH-cam: *C E N S O R E D*
Why?
@@kodystennett5414 I think its to stop people spreading disinformation about things like 9/11, the Holocaust, etc. But the algorithm can't tell the difference between people genuinely just giving correct information and educating people and those spreading misinformation, so everything that touches on those topics gets demonetised and censored.
@@luketonkinson5440 I think TH-cam needs a new algorithm that's better than the one that TH-cam has.
@@luketonkinson5440 they should just encourage people to report misinformation. I don't see why censorship is necessary
@@theunreadyone I agree. I think Google just don’t want to shell out for human moderators though, so it’s an all-or-nothing type thing with an algorithm.
It's incredible that the turn of the century was such a long time ago, that we can now make alternate history scenarios of it.
I was born in 2000 and now feel like the number of alternative timelines from that point will be huge now (one where 9/11 doesn’t happen, another where George Bush is killed sometime in 2005, others where Osama Bin Laden is captured under different circumstances, and others where Donald Trump isn’t president of the USA)
I was in HS when 9/11 happened. It seems surreal that it was 20 years ago.
At the same time, it's also weird to realize how suddenly and dramatically the political discourse got ugly.
I just retired from the military after 20 years in June 2001. Never saw any type of combat, just staring down the USSR and Warsaw Pact and North Korea. Then, 2.5 months later after retirement, all doo-doo breaks out. Hard to believe 20 years have passed since that retirement.
Could you make a video about if the World Trade Center bombings in 1993 actually went according to plan? It would be like an earlier (and probably worse) 9/11.
Might want to comment on a more recent video
@@scoopidywhoop7484 doesnt really matter assuming AHH uses YT studio to read comments, since that sorts comments by timestamp not video
Every time I watch one of your videos I'm steadily more convinced that we are living in the worst timeline.
i think the worst timeline is the one where the nato and the ussr went to war
@@nade7242 that's still the better timeline, none of my family would've suffered since not even neither of my parents were born during the Cuban missile crisis. And the world would be healing instead of imperialist nations
@@avokka they would not have been born everyone would die
@@avokkaThe world wouldn’t be healing lmao, it would still be in nuclear winter
I came to the same conclusion after watching his “What if Theodore Roosevelt won the WWI election instead of Wilson.”
You got this suggested all the time in 2014. Same with what if the Chinese civil war was won by the nationalist and what if Ethiopia was a superpower. This is even like what if the USA never invaded Iraq video. You should bring back what if Rome survived next if you’re doing older suggestions. You have improved so much from even then.
I’m nostalgic for your older videos. There was the one guy who just did PowerPoint slides and it always ended with some alternative country going to the moon and you. You paved the way for alternative history on TH-cam. I miss the old intro with the globe, and white back ground. And the alternative fan countries. Pure nostalgia for like 12-13 year old me. Crazy how far you have come.
America is better no matter what
Don't talk to me! I am famous! Don't dislike my good good GOOD videos! Don't talk to me, dear alf
Rome? So like, what if it lasted past the mid 1400's? I thought he did that already?
@@maxmazza2987 they said they wanted Cody to REDO the rome videos
@Aurelia I know, I’m saying he should redo it.
Everyone who grew up in the 2000's knows intrinsically how crap no child left behind was.
our education was brutalized.
I didnt go to public school and I did not know what it is
Fr learning how to take a test rather than actual learning
Didn't they make a "revision" of it in 2015? which changed nothing?
I grew up in Palestine, our education system was shit to begin with.
Then after bush we got Michaels stupid “healthy food” stuff which ruined the public school food.
Flashing the Lego Joker as you said "societal" was a fun touch
I wondered what that was.
There's actually a really big piece that's missed here: Supreme Court nominations. The senate would likely remain swayed in Democrats control into the 109th congress with Gore's election and subsequent reelection (9/11 if handled well may have even resulted in a Democrat trifecta), 2005-2007, when justice Sandra Day O'Connor resigned and Chief Justice William Rehnquist died in office. Al Gore and a Democratic senate would be in a position to appoint two liberal justices, one to be the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. As of right now, both justices appointed by Dubya are still serving on the Supreme Court. At least, the court would be a 5-4 liberal majority today. If all the elections you predict following Gore were correct, Obama would have the opportunity to appoint three justices to McCain's two, leaving the court at a 6-3 liberal majority. This difference is massive regarding domestic affairs, especially as it pertains to landmark cases regarding gun rights, abortion access, and LGBT+ civil rights/voting rights between 2005-2020.
While Chief Justice Rehnquist would have died no matter who was president, I would think that O'Connor would have waited to see the results of the '08 presidential contest before retiring in the Gore timeline. Yes, she was a moderate but she was a Republican nonetheless. I agree with the rest of your well-thought-out analysis. What a different country this would be without Roberts and possibly no Alito.
In otherwords the SCOTUS is trash here
This all hinges upon whether Gore won re-election in 2004. If, say, John McCain or another Republican won in 2004, he'd have two Supreme Court picks. Maybe we'd have gotten someone less worse than Alito, though. If Gore did win in 2004, then he'd replace Rehnquist's seat, but O'Connor probably would have waited to retire until after 2008.
@@harm864 I’d take McCain picks any day over Bush’s
In that alternate timeline Cody would be talking about "What if Bush Jr won the 2000 election?"
And he'd most likely be dead wrong, because there'd be no reason to assume that the election was as close as in OTL.
And once he talks about an Iraqi invasion in his second term (because Alternate Cody would definitely see this as a second term policy) things would really diverge.
@@skittybug6937 also nobody could have predicted that the bush admin would fuck things up that badly.
Finally an alt history scenario where I could actually exist.
I think what-if scenarios and alt history are incredibly important bc they teach you about not only history, but about the world we live in today. It makes history feel alive; what if this big incredibly important seismic shift in our world just...didn't happen? What would have been necessary for it not to happen? What is the butterfly effect of all this? Because one butterfly flapping its wings differently doesn't change the bird's course; but it could, if the bird was chasing the butterfly.
“No matter who you vote for, you get John McCain.” -Tom Woods
You talking on "No Child Left Behind" speaks well on your politics. Standardized testing has haunted me sense I was in elementary school, hell it caused me to be held back a year because of how poor my test scores were. High school as well with the ACT (now SAT) which determined what college would even accept me it has significantly impacted my educational career.
Luckily I did excellent in college but the process to get there colors the incompetence of arbitrary testing to determine intelligence or even understanding of a subject.
Memorization does not equal knowledge, that's my soap box for the day.
Standardized testing is the only way to determine if someone knows something/has the skills they say they have. The way the US designed the system was bad but look at the International Baccalaureate. It has standardized tests for entire time zones and is very successful at producing high scoring and successful university students (who eventually are high earners too)
The whole idea (of the left) is to make it so if kids can't succeed on their own they turn to government (taxpayers). That's not how it's supposed to be. And, memorization is the key to pretty much everything. The main difference in IQ is the ability to recall something, pretty much at a moments notice.
@@zappafan1176 Wtf? IQ isn't about memorization, it's about problem solving skills and deduction. Memorization has very little to do with IQ. And even so, IQ scores have long proven to be an outdated way to measure intelligence anyways.
@@nbewarwe My bad... not so much memorization... those with normal functioning brains remember everything they hear, see, smell and touch. RECALL is what sets people apart, and that depends on how well you're able to think of things you remember. This isn't rocket science.... kids in the mid to late 1800's received a better education than kids of the past 40 years. Since then they don't teach kids how to think, they're taught WHAT to think.
Dude, if you thought the ACT or SAT were about memorization, you were doing it wrong.
Or they were mangled in however many years passed between when we each took those tests, which wouldn't surprise me.
So if Bush lost in 2000, it would have led to almost as much of a positive change as the Bush winning in 2016 scenario. Neat.
I have a $1,000 cashapp for anyone who can provide footage of a commercial airliner flying into the pentagon...
@@TheProtagonistDies th-cam.com/video/0SL2PzzOiF8/w-d-xo.html
Hand it over
@@autumn64fromdeltarunechapter3 hold on a minute
@@TheProtagonistDies oh yeah, and i have th-cam.com/video/WbE8J6cx2aE/w-d-xo.html as some proof it wasnt a missle or something.
@@TheProtagonistDies Welp someone did a exactly what you wanted
What do you mean "what if?" He DID win.
I’m a Republican college student and I can say with confidence that in hindsight, I would have much rather had Al Gore win in 2000 if this was the result we got.
Plus, this scenario might have lead to a long term republican congress, a complete flip of the prior half century. The American people quite liked having both a democratic president and a republican congress in the late 90s: The republican congress could prevent the democrats from spending recklessly, and the democratic president could prevent the republicans from cutting costs too much. This would likely continue through the Gore presidency, and if whoever wins in 2008 (McCain, Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee, Paul, etc) could perform well in the aftermath of the recession, the GOP might be able to hold congress for decades to come, even if that means democrats are more likely to win the presidency. Evan Bayh would probably be elected in 2016.
@@charlesevanshughes3638 “Preventing Democrats from Spending Recklessly.” Because republicans never spend recklessly? All those tax cuts for the rich just scream, spending wisely?
Are you serious? Social Funding, is the most important thing America could invest in. Both Bush and Trumps Administration’s were grand theft. The splitting up of Iraq’s oil fields, Cheny’s War Profiteering, Attempts to “privatize Social Security”, so wall street can gamble with the Social Security fund.
Well done, this is far more level-headed and fact based than I could have ever forced myself to be
Agreed. The fact-centered presentation focuses on how a president with a different personality than GW Bush might have reacted to these likely historically inevitable events. I believe the outcomes would have been less impactful if not for that fake Iraq war and Rove toxicity--both indelibly Bush-imprinted actions that led to our present political disasters.
Misuse of a comma.
AHH: "...the craziest finale to an election season America has ever seen up until- you know"
The election of 1860: "am I a joke to you?"
well the election for lincoln's second term could be considered crazier considering it ended with the end of the civil war and the assassination of lincoln himself
@@sovietunion7643 well I mean the 1860 one started the civil war in the first place
1860 was a pretty clear W for Lincoln tho, 2000 was so damn close it’s still too close to call (unlike 2020, which requires the rejection of reality to believe it was anywhere to being close in the final tallies)
@@warlordofbritannia the 2020 election was pretty close all things considered, just not close enough to think it would've gone the other way. biden only won by ~12,000 votes in georgia, ~20,000 in wisconsin, ~11,000 in arizona, which are all razor-thin margins within a percentage point. but they're still wide enough to say he won those states legitimately.
@@actanonverba3041
Right, but that’s what I mean by “rejection of reality”-you’d have to create some conspiracy theories for discrepancies that tangible
If Al gore was president he could’ve protected us from Manbearpig
2 things:
1. As someone who was a kid in the Clinton era, there is absolutely no comparison between the calm, respectful politics of the 90s and the...different...political climate we have today. One can argue that social media also had an effect on this by effectively isolating people with different viewpoints, so that individuals radicalized more easily, but 9/11 and its aftermath definitely, 100% changed this A LOT. I remember conservatives in the 90s saying they disliked Clinton, or making jokes about HRC, but it wasn't as outright vicious as both sides got after 2001. Suddenly, it wasn't just "liberals are against the war;" it was "liberals hate America." It wasn't just "conservatives are out of touch with the new needs of society;" it was "conservatives are evil."
2. NCLB ruined so much. Even for people like me, who were in college. See, you had to get enough of an education to meet the new standards for "highly qualified," which meant that if you wanted to be, say, a math teacher, you had to take 13 courses in undergrad, some of which were normally graduate-level math courses. If you wanted to be a science teacher? You had to specialize. Chemistry, biology, or physics: pick ONE and take 13 courses. Plus, standardized tests are largely BS, and I say that as a teacher. The only thing that they test is how good kids are at taking multiple-choice standardized tests. They can't measure understanding or how well a kid is at applying knowledge to new situations. Multiple-choice tests simply do not work that way and cannot work that way.
1. Huh? The sitting president was under indictment from congress for lying under oath and was bombing countries in Europe routinely as well as starving over 1 mill Iraqis to death surf sanctions.
What the hell
Is this calm
Political climate you are talking about? That’s an embarrassing take.
What'd you put down for the essay question on the back? 😏
I agree: the Presidential debates between Bush and Gore were gentle by comparison! I'll add that the level of unity and heartfelt patriotism in America between 9/11 and 2003 was remarkable. I miss that. I wish we were better at remembering.
I agree that there was a change in attitudes, but I don't remember the 90s as a calm and respectful era of politics. Calmer and more respectful than the 2000s, sure, but things were starting to heat up then. What I remember was a conservative line pushed that liberals weren't really Americans at all, but traitors to freedom and so forth. Liberals didn't push back against this, which is probably why conservatives got so much mileage out of it. Liberals didn't come up with an equivalent of the Hastert Rule, after all. Yes, Hastert didn't become Speaker until 1999, but before it was named, Newt Gingrich was practicing it.
Neoconservatism is indeed dead, replaced by far-right populism, but the "liberals hate America" nonsense continues. But conservatives today are just as eager to eschew compromise as they were in the Gingrich era, in the 90s. Before then, there was certainly disagreement, and things got acrimonious a lot, but the two sides were more inclined to work together. I wouldn't hang this toxicity on Bush Jr., but more on Gingrich.
I hope this isn't an actual joke because this alternative timeline really interests me.
Oh great it's legit, how nice.
Human made climate change BS would have been pushed even harder and USA would be paying carbon taxes even quicker than the Canadians.
@@DeusSalis It's not because you don't like our reality that it's BS.
@@Sinaeb OK so I'd love for you to explain why the climate was warmer roughly 1000 years ago when the Vikings were growing crops on Greenland and fig trees on Labrador.
@@DeusSalis Maybe you should stop looking at the same right wing echo chambers ...
@@DeusSalis Oh wow. You've debunked the thousands and thousands of scientists that all agree based on hard evidence that man-made climate change exists. Time to call it off and double down on coal.
It's pretty sad to see that we can no longer have pictures of a widely known and influential tragedy in our history in videos because of the powers that be and their nonsensical demonetization policies. We live in a society.
a susciety (Suspiciously Societal)
I'm liking the background music in this video. GREAT choice!
I was hitting my late teens in 2000 and even though I am British, I remember following this election closely and watching this, it brings back so many memories of what happened after. Such a strange time.
So, basically, the Simpsons were right when Lisa dressed as Florida says "I'm not a state, I'm a monster".
I don't get it
@@skatingfreak1670 In the 2000 election, all the states had voted and it had been confirmed. All except Florida, which ended up voting for Bush.(maybe)
The South Park episode with Cartman's Trapper-Keeper lampooned the 2000 Election great.
Florida is a monster because of cocaine not because boring politics
I tell foreigners that Florida is literally where all your American stereotypes come from, but worse. They only think the US is California, New York, and Texas, but no, it's actually Florida.
The impact this would have had on politics in the UK would have been interesting. Iraq ruined Blair and the Labour parties reputation and without it Brown may have had more of a chance in 2010. With a Brown govenment we likely wouldn't have seen austerity or brexit. However, it could be argued that Brown's lack of personality and the 2008 crash would still have seen him lose.
Well considering how close the 2010 election was I think you’d see a Brown win. That being said, without Iraq I think Blair would’ve stayed on as Labour leader till at least the middle of the 2010s as I don’t see his popularity collapsing after 2005 as it did in our timeline.
This video leaves out an extremely important detail, that the Bush administration declared wallstreet regulators and oversaw significant deregulation in the finance sector. Its theoretically possible that the US housing bubble might not have happened. The most likely outcome, though, would be a much smaller recession that the US quickly gets away from thanks to the democrats spending our way out of it. The also probably means that there is no significant global downturn. The smaller scope of the war on terror would also contribute to stabilizing the global economy. Overall this would lead to a world that is significantly more stable and prosperous than our own. I suspect that historians of the future will look back on Bush's win as the cause for a period of American decline and as well as a general worsening of conditions around the world. We really are in the worse timeline.
@@volodymyrboitchouk ... much like the collapse of the North American video game industry in 1983 - and it taking down Atari Inc and most of its domestic competitors - set back tech innovation a good decade plus because venture capital shrank and Silicon Valley's actual manufacturing was pulverized [like with the collapse of Synertek as an example]. Our time line does suck.
@@volodymyrboitchouk The housing bubble would have only been prevented if the government prevented subprime lending, which no politician was going to touch let alone a democrat. Fiscal spending rarely prevents economic downturn especially considering all the bailouts that started under bush (including checks to adults) and continued under obama.
@@volodymyrboitchouk The "Key Deregulation" that happened was in the 90s. And done legislatively, not executively. Plus uh. Gutting the entire energy sector without going nuclear would have put us somewhere much, MUCH worse than the 2008 recession.
If he campaigned with Bill instead of distancing from him, he would've won fairly and big like around 315 pvs
Another interesting video, Cody, but being a middle aged history teacher who lived through all of this as an adult, already teaching history, I would make a few points: First, I think you were being sarcastic about NCLB, but as an educator I can tell you it's impact was far more catastrophic than kids having to suffer through some tests. For a 5th of a century it distorted our educational system to such an extent that our societal elite has now larger been selected based on their ability to do well on multiple choice tests and curricula de-emphasized critical thinking in favor of something more like trivial pursuit. This left us with a society that is much less resistant to the lure of, well, you know... In fact, this could be a good topic for you to research for a future video, since school is something most of your audience can presumably relate to.
Also, I disagree that the only thing that would have changed in Afghanistan is we would have left much sooner (probably true) and the Taliban would have taken over again (probably not true). No Bush, no Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense, and most likely a very different strategy. Militarily, we almost certainly would have accepted the terms of surrender the remnants of the Taliban offered in 2002, rather than insisting on continuing in the hopes of totally destroying them and thus creating generations of anti-Americanism. Politically, rather than foisting on the Afghans our corrupt boy Hamid Karzai and his unpopular regime, which spent 20 years looting the country rather than trying to govern it, Gore and his foreign policy team would have been much more likely to have allowed the Afghans to establish the decentralized constitutional monarchy that they tried to do in 2002. We would have allowed them to bring back the deposed King Zahir Shah, who the elders insisted was the one person who could unify the country.
As for being too soon to tell the impact of the Iraq war, I think it is clearly not. Also, it is not just the impact on domestic politics that is most important. Not only the unprovoked invasion of Iraq without UN authorization or support of most of our traditional allies, but other violations of international norms by the Bush administration, such as the incarceration of prisoners without treating them as POWs at Guantanamo and the torture of prisoners, both in violation of the Geneva Conventions which the US had championed since the end of World War II, and the recognition of Kosovo in violation of the UN Charter, dramatically undermined the rules-based international order of which the US was the leader. This empowered Russia and China to take similar actions and undercut US leadership. Obama continued this move away from traditional US respect for the rules-based international order (regime change in Libya, drone strikes), and lay the groundwork for the total dismantling of the strategy of leading a rules-based multilateral order practiced, at least in theory, by every US president from FDR to Obama by President Trump.
Spittin
Very interesting thougts
Why do so many people keep perpetuating this lie that attacking Iraq was "unprovoked?" Saddam WAS causing bloodshed in the Middle East.
Considering his wife (FLOTUS are a very influential figure) and his VP Joe Liberman were and an hard stance against video games I wander how video games controversies of the 2000's (let alone GTA) ended up in that timeline.
I feel like the rise of the FPS genre would cause a more regulated video game market. In Clinton's presidency, the ESRB was established to be a label about content in games. So it wouldn't be a stretch for Gore to go one step further when the FPS controversy starts happening.
The ramifications of this on gaming culture would be crazy. I wonder if video games would become mainstream like it is today had it been more regulated and had a large social stigma in the 2000s.
Honestly, the most interesting outcomes of this would be the indie game industry and TH-cam. Minecraft was the game that put indie games on the map. It did so by being a popular game on TH-cam. Would Minecraft be as popular without gaming being a popular genre on TH-cam? Would TH-cam be the behemoth it is today without TH-cam gaming? And if Minecraft was the gateway for indie games, would people have heard of Undertale? Would the Shovel Knight kickstarter have been funded? Would any indie games have the same explosion like it did in the 2010s?
I think video games would become mainstream, but just much later. As Silent Gen and Boomers die off, so does the stigma against video games. Gen X would probably have more concerns about newer games, but not nearly as much stigma as older generations. Once that stigma wears off in the 2020s and 2030s, we will see video games be more mainstream.
@@lukedetering4490
If it would be just labels placed on a game saying “this game is bad, do not play it”, I can see how it might dissuade some parents from buying them for kids. On the flip side, I can see more labels place by an out of touch government being ignored and/or creating a Streisand effect.
This makes me happier than ever that Bush won
@@DeltaFRFX Lol. American society is a mess rn but atleast I got my fps videogames.....
Ironically, this makes this timeline even better, I fucking hate the state of gaming and gamers in our generation, and the 2 people who don't like this timeline would probably be better people because of it
No child left behind was really reslly dumb, my sister who missed a lot of school because she had to go to the hospital and didnt learn the major things for each grade level was constantly pushed to the next grade level despite her and my mom asking the school to hold her back so that she could actually learn whst she needed for grade level.
I read this as Artificial Intelligence Gore
An alternate 2000s without the influence of Rumsfeld is OK by me.
I forgot who, but somebody who hated Donald Rumsfield was sad he died. When asked why, the response was “He should have been rotting away in an Iraqi prison” or something like that. I cannot disagree with that sentiment.
@@alexanderrobins7497 I hope hell exist
A person who helped liberate 20+ million people?
@@zappafan1176 Liberate? Is that what we did? 🤣
@@preoximerianas Did I post in French?
"I dunno, toasters aren't really good for browsing the internet"
People do it anyway, look at Chromebooks.
name checks out
The damn thing can barely run cookie clicker, and *bloons tds 2*
as a Chromebook user you are absolutely correct
As a student who went from a district that had 2008 MacBooks (in elementary school) to a district that had modern chrome books,
Yes.
I think the big change politically would be centered on the lack of Carl Rove in 2004. His blueprint radically changed the electoral campaigns. What for generations had been about convincing the moderates in the middle to vote for your guy, now, due to Rove's Moneyball like calculus, became about motivating your own base to outperform the other guy's base. The evolution of this idea has given rise to a hyper-partisanism and a complete demonization of the political adversaries--after all the easiest way to get people to the polls is to scare the hell out of them. Without this change in electioneering, both parties have to be more moderate as they are appealing to those in the middle and not those on the extreme wings. This would hopefully affect the entire tenor of our political discourse.
Agreed 100. Politics has always been a divisive topic, so no illusions about it all being wine and roses. But I definitely believe our political divisions would not be as toxic as they are now if it had not been for Rove’s influence
Also the existential terror of the War on Terror really allowed Rove’s tactics of fear-mongering to fester. A quicker, calmer war, would lead to a less hyper-polarized political landscape.
I reckon Carl Rove would have still emerged at some point, just on a delayed timeline.
No one person is every singularly responsible for an invention. Someone else would’ve come up with the same strategy even if at a slightly later date
@@Eibarwoman absolutely. In fact you can't assume the republicans roll over and play dead in 2004 with Gore as president: Rove would have emerged as the leader of a dirty trick campaign to beat Gore in 2004. Probably blame 911 on him. But then, the Republican president 2004-2008 would still drop taxes, keep interest rates artificially low, invade Iraq, and then get the blame for the banking crisis, meaning we go back to our timeline and Obama winning in 2008.
I do believe that year 2000 election had more historical significance than many people realize and thank you for covering it. Had Gore been elected, I have no doubt the entire war on terror , the GFC, occupy wall street would never have happened and certainty not the election of radical presidents, on both the left and right.
Although to be fair, the right had been turning radical starting with Nixon.
@@RyanFeatherston Agreed, yet, for them to open up trade with china, the second largest communist nation, how far right were they though really?
"Bush did 9/11" Ah the classic.
I can imagine we could have gotten "Gore did 9/11!"
@@iamhungey12345 I'm already imagining a random youtube video using that Simpsons clip of Al Gore to show that The Simpsons predicted Al Gore did 9/11.
Careful, the theorists will be hear any minute now
One important aspect of the victory of Al Gore is that Spain don't try to participe in the Iraq invasion the principal reason of the terrorist attack of Atocha station
@theLundLs Just a neat look on how a change in American Presidents would inadvertently prevent a major terrorist attack in another continent. That’s half of the fun in looking at alt-history. Butterfly effect
For the longest time I’d never heard anyone utter the name Al Gore, so I thought it was pronounced A.I Gore
You failed to mention that in all likelihood the Arab Spring would not have happened, as the Arab Spring was in direct response to the democracy being introduced to Iraq. No Arab Spring means no war in Syria. No refugee crisis.
I was hoping this would be another "What if Jeb Bush won" video
Somehow more satisfied than if it had been
Or if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016 election.
"For of all sad words of tongue or pen, The saddest are these: 'It might have been!'" We see JFK getting killed in Dallas, and we all think that if he hadn't died in Dallas the world might have been better off for it. The truth of the matter is he might have slowed down the entire process of getting America to where it is today. Watching Kennedy die lit a fire and everyone to do all the things that he believed in, such as civil rights, women's rights, and trying to make a peace treaty with Vietnam. Admittedly, the United States of America may never have fought the Vietnam War in the 1st place, but war would have happened anyway! Eventually!Likewise, we assume that Al Gore could have turned America into a carbon neutral utopia from all the best technologies well ahead of its time. Al Gore was just a man, no better or worse than George Bush. He could have done a lot of good things for America, but what did we learn from Donald Trump? What should we have learned from Donald Trump? No one person can make America great? The real America is the people that live there, following the American dream. America is more than just the sum of its presidents, and it's high time we all remembered that.
@@wazzup233 Easy answer, prolonging Afghanistan and probably invading Syria.
I’ve been waiting for this!!
Me too!
You people are sad.
I feel like there would be major changes in the Middle East if Iraq didn’t get invaded. Even though it declined in power Iraq could still act as a buffer between Saudi Arabia and Iran. There wouldn’t be a power vacuum in the region like what happened after Iraq descended into war, and Arab approval of the United States would be considerably higher. Maybe this leads to groups like Hezbollah and the Houthis not gaining nearly as much popular support as they have now.
I had a conversation I had with a colleague years ago. He argued that Saddam was contained. Which he was by exercising the no fly zone and later the no drive zone. As for WMD, we should have let him use them again and only then... lower the boom. (Saddam was hard headed, he'd have screwed up again anyway) Containment worked with the Soviets for nearly 50yrs. Containment would have been cheaper and more effective than trashing the country and trying to rebuild it from scratch (that's a separate bitch session and would make a great video in itself)
Anther colleague in another conversation years later argued for "rehabilitating Saddam" (Not without precedent, COL Qaddafi in Libya, The Axis Powers after WWII, Syria was on our good side for awhile). Saddam was our fair haired boy when he was killing Iranians. We knew he was a SOB, the problem was he stopped being OUR SOB and started free-lancing. As we saw he wasn't too bright. He was our proxy against Iran, Bush the elder would never have let him go down had he not invaded Kuwait. (nor would the Saudis for that matter,Saudi Arabia and Iran have been in a de-facto Cold War since the Iranian Revolution)
While in the short term, Iraq would be very different than it was in our timeline. They would be under Saddam Hussein for another 10 or so years. Then there's Arab Spring that saw a bunch of revolts in the middle east against regimes that were similar to Hussein's Iraq. While Hussein would probably hold out longer, I think he would eventually be disposed. Destabilizing Iraq and effectively putting Iraq in a similar position as it is now.
While the invasion of Iraq was unjustifiable, so was Saddam’s ethnic cleansing. The same actions later applied in Libya should have been used on him instead of sending in ground troops to overthrow the government. Hopefully he would get the message and calm down. If killed by his own people, either the region would be fine with international support, or spiral out of control again, like Iraq and/or Libya in our timeline.
@@lukedetering4490 Keeping Saddam in power would've meant Udai would've replaced him. And had that guy lived *and* acquired nuclear weapons, our world would today be seriously screwed.
@@waynemccormick4773 Glad someone mentioned the no-fly zone. Quite frequently in the decade prior to '03, the US was involved in what amounted to a low intensity war with Iraq. That involvement kept a sizeable US military presence in Saudi, and that presence was resented by a lot of Saudis, which is why many backed bin Laden's attack. That war and that presence couldn't continue indefinitely without some crisis, maybe even a direct attack by Saudi rebels on US installations in that country.
So are you saying that Al gore would’ve made the US much less of a shithole?
Stop using this language
I think another reason why it feels like relatively little would change is because its still in all honesty, not that long ago. When you look at historical events, the further back you start, the bigger the ripple becomes and you can see so much of what was effected. We're still, relatively speaking, in the small part of that Bush ripple, so predicting huge massive changes is...hard.
8:59 You nailed the "We live in a society" reference with a Lego Joker
0:41 Jib Jab. I miss their satire soooo much.
Sometimes a brain can...
... come in quite handy
You can't say nuclear, that really scares me...
They came back to do a year and review for 2020
@@SofaKingGasPriceSpike But it won’t help you…
BECAUSE I WON THREE PURPLE HEARTS!
I was in middle school when NCLB started, so I have memories of school before and after. School went down the crapper after that.
I mean, technically he did. It wasn’t long after the Bush II presidency began in earnest that it became pretty clear that Gore won Florida, but George’s brother, the state’s governor, and a conservative heavy Supreme Court stacked it.
No Bush got 500+ more votes...
I really wish we had Al Gore in 2000 because while I'm sure we wouldn't have fully resolved the climate change problem now, at the very least the us would have actually for once taken some very serious steps towards cleaner energy.
More likely a quarter-step and a top-down impeachment... 😒
How would he be impeached?
@@captainjakemerica4579 attempted actual progress while Blue
Government motors (GM) had an EV in 1999, the EV-1. They recalled it and crushed them all
Pointless. The rise of china and india nullify domestic efforts. What finally got the US to reduce carbon emissions was natural gas not taxes on output.
Adding a European perspective to this, I would argue that without the invasion of Iraq and its subsequent destabilisation there would not have been a civil war in Syria, either. Thus, Europe would not have seen the huge wave of refugees from Syria, Iraq and other mainly Middle Eastern countries in 2015/16. And in my view, this 'refugee crisis' still has an impact in European societies and politics to this day. It strengthened or even created far-right/anti-immigrant sentiment in much of Central and Eastern Europe. The divide between Hungary and Poland and other EU would probably not be as deep as it is today. In addition, I do not believe Germany would have a far-right party, such as the 'Alternative for Germany' in its parliament. All because of a few hundred votes in Florida in 2000.
Its very likely Brexit would have lost the referendum.
Adding to this as well I think Britain would most likely still be in the EU if Gore won. As the Iraq war was a huge blow to the Blair/Brown Labour government and saw them drop big in polling, and so in 2010 which was a very narrow election I reckon if Iraq didn't happen then Labour would probably win denying the Tories. Which among many things probably means that heading into 2015 no major party would be advocating for Brexit because yeah no refugee crisis or at least not as large in our timeline, and a more stable government that is friendlier to the EU probably yeah means Britain stays in the union and the nation is less of a shitshow than it is today.
@@00chla50 That or the referendum never occurs in the first place...or it doesn't happen till now due to covid pressure (idk)
Doubtful. The only thing I think would have changed is that Brexit wouldn't have happened.
thanks bush
We avoided a stabler timeline so narrowly 😔
2000, even if it is more than 20 years ago, is still fairly recent.
We'll see a better scope in 50 years
Suggesting Gore would encourage conservation primarily through tax incentives rather than tax penalties is a bit of a fantasy IMO.
Aren’t Carbon Taxes a tax penalty?
One thing I like about the past is that when the rebels overthrown the government, the neighbors mainly didn't care about what happened there at all and simply accept that it has the new ruling government now. But in nowadays, everybody makes a fuss about everything. At least, on the political landscapes.
lol the French would like a word with you.
@@squifftopher and the Russians
Uh historically neighbouring nations very much did intervene if rebels overthrew a government or erupted in civil war.
E.g. Russian revolution and civil war (late 1910s - early 1920s)
Revolutions of 1848 (Russians intervene to help the Austrian Habsburgs)
French revolutions and subsequent Coalition Wars (French republicans vs everyone)
I'm pretty sure Europe didn't really appreciate the French Revolutions
Now You have described that I’m just thinking of how much better things could have been and could possibly be now .