No. 4: Gore vs. Bush

Editor's note: This story is part of a series titled "Top 10 News Events of Our Lives," published in December 2008. The stories were chosen and written by Daily staff writers. Our editors have shared some of their anecdotes on each event. We encourage you to leave your own memories in the Discussion section of each story.

The United States may be a different country today if the controversial 2000 Florida recount had ended in favor of the Democratic Party.

Many remember those nail-biting moments as Americans crowded around their televisions and radios, anxiously awaiting the announcement of who would be the next president of the United States of America on Nov. 4, 2000.

Exactly what the U.S. would be like today if Democratic nominee Al Gore had been victorious is anyone’s guess.

“It’s unknowable,” said James Hutter, associate professor of political science.

Although the United States may not have invaded Iraq, we might still have been in Afghanistan, Hutter said.

Samantha Clark, senior in political science and president of the ISU College Republicans, said she thinks Gore would still have made the decision to go into Afghanistan and may have still chosen to invade Iraq.

“Gore would be militarily aggressive and pushed a lot harder to go to war after 9/11,” Clark said. “Gore would have accepted Clinton’s goal to get rid of Saddam Hussein.”

Hamilton Cravens, professor of history, said he thinks Gore would not have even thought about going to war.

One issue that could be more prominent in the country had Gore been elected is the environment and global warming. Because Gore is such an advocate for the environment, there would have been more of a focus on renewable energy resources and different oil drilling practices if Gore had been elected, Hutter said.

“If Gore had been elected, we would not have had eight years of favoring polluters and not helping those that are for a cleaner environment and decreasing global warming,” Hutter said.

Cravens said the Republican Party seems to be more focused on dismantling the environment and has nothing against drilling oil in national parks.

Clark said in terms of cutting carbon emissions, Gore would have implemented a plan similar to the one in Germany — reduce carbon emissions by half by 2012.

“We would all be driving horses and buggies because of Gore’s ecofriendliness,” Clark said jokingly.

Paul Vidmar, junior in civil engineering and vice-chairman of the ISU College Republicans, said Gore’s environmental policies would have had negative effects.

“There would be shops closing up and going overseas because of the ‘go green’ policy,” Vidmar said.

Whether President-elect Barack Obama would still have been elected in this year’s election is yet another unknown fact.

Still, Cravens said, Gore was more in favor of supporting minority groups compared to the Republican Party, which he said is normally more interested in winning than gaining the support of minority voters.

“Gore is more sympathetic to the hopes and aspirations of minorities,” Cravens said.

As for the current economic situation, it seems no matter who was elected in the 2000 presidential election, the country would still be in a similar situation as what it is going through right now, Hutter said.

The United States has been in a recession since last December. Whether this recession would have lasted a year is questionable, Hutter said.

“The economic situation would not be strong no matter who is president,” Hutter said.

Clark said if Gore was president, the economy might still be in trouble.

“It always gets worse before it gets much better, no matter who is president,” Clark said of the current economic situation.

Cravens suggested relationships with foreign countries would be friendlier if Gore had been elected as president.

“The relations with European and Asian friends would be much better,” Cravens said.

He said when people in foreign countries see Americans, they will ask them what they think of the current president of the United States of America, and they seem to be more welcoming and friendly with you if you are not in support of Bush and his policies.

Vidmar said he believes no matter who was elected president during the 2000 presidential elections, people in foreign countries around the world would have the same feelings toward America as they do now.

“It would not have that big of an impact. They would still be anti-American,” Vidmar said.

He said this is because a lot of the information people read in foreign countries comes from sources such as The New York Times, which he said is biased in favor of the Democratic Party and does not favor Republicans.

Staff comments:

"When I first learned how bitterly and blindly divided the nation could become."

— Thomas Grundmeier, online editor

"Quite possibly the closest we’ve come to a Constitutional crisis since Nixon."

— Ryan Frederick, opinion editor

"This is when I was completely disappointed in a system that told us 'every vote counts.' Even though I wasn’t able to vote at the time, it was like we had already lost the game before we started playing."

— Amy Simmonds, designer