Alternative History
During the convention, I read or heard someone say that Bill Clinton would have easily been elected a third time if we didn't limit presidents to 2 terms. I started thinking about that a little. If we didn't have the 22nd Amendment, and if we didn't have a broad consensus against 3 or more terms, what might have happened?

It's virtually certain Ronald Reagan would have been elected to a third term. I think that this might have changed history very little; the Berlin wall would have fallen, Iraq probably would have invaded Kuwait and we probably would have led a coalition against Iraq. And the Iran-Contra investigation would have continued until 1992. By 1992, it probably would have been difficult to disguise the effect Alzheimer's disease was starting to have on Ronald Reagan, and the country would have been ready for a change - particularly if the economy wasn't doing well.

Enter a revitalized Democratic party led by a rising young star named Bill Clinton. It's unlikely Clinton's policies would have been much different - balanced budget, failed health care plan, etc., etc. - and equally unlikely that he wouldn't have been dogged by scandal. Nevertheless, 8 years of peace and prosperity would have led to his election for a third term.

And there's little doubt that third term would have been interesting, starting with a recession followed by a wave of corporate scandals. But that would have been quickly overshadowed by other events. Richard Clarke's book indicates that the Clinton White House knew who Osama Bin Laden was and what his intentions were. Would they have been as diligent in the summer of 2001 as they were in December 1999? Would Al-Quaeda have reformulated their plans and found some other way to effectively attack the US?

I'm guessing the answer to both is yes, and that we would have found ourselves in a war on terror, and probably would joined with the Northern Alliance to throw the Taliban out of Afghanistan. Beyond that, only wild speculation is possible. But the big picture, I think, would look remarkably similar. I do think Clinton's economic policies would have served the nation better than Bush's, but we'd still be recovering from a recession.

And this election? Would Clinton run a fourth time? Or would he step aside in favor of, say, his Vice President? And after the defeat of John McCain in 2000, who would the Republicans run? Perhaps the brightest hope of the Republican Party, the three-term Governer of Texas, son of Ronald Reagan's Vice President, George W. Bush?

Would it be Bush and Gore in 2004?