In Curtis Sittenfeld's AH novel Rodham, the POD is in 1971 when Hillary turns down Bill's proposition. This makes little difference for the next two decades, but in 1992 Bill Clinton fails to overcome the scandal of his womanizing and loses the primary to Paul Tsongas. George H. W. Bush wins his reelection.
So the presidential list up to the 2016 election goes thus:
1992: George H.W. Bush and Dan Quayle
1996: Jerry Brown and Bob Kerrey
2000: John McCain and Sam Brownback
2004: John McCain and Sam Brownback
2008: Barack Obama and Joe Biden
2012: Barack Obama and Joe Biden
Personally, without having looked at the details, it doesn't seem all that plausible to me. What do you chaps think?
Fact-checking the alternate history and politics of Curtis Sittenfeld’s Rodham
So the presidential list up to the 2016 election goes thus:
1992: George H.W. Bush and Dan Quayle
1996: Jerry Brown and Bob Kerrey
2000: John McCain and Sam Brownback
2004: John McCain and Sam Brownback
2008: Barack Obama and Joe Biden
2012: Barack Obama and Joe Biden
Personally, without having looked at the details, it doesn't seem all that plausible to me. What do you chaps think?
Fact-checking the alternate history and politics of Curtis Sittenfeld’s Rodham
This book is enchanted that by the idea of tweaking one thing in the recent past, you can fundamentally alter the present. You can save brilliant, ambitious Hillary Rodham from her marriage to Bill Clinton; you can unleash all that frustrated potential on the world and then sit back and watch what happens next. And that idea is, especially to those who appreciate Hillary Clinton’s fierce and undeniable ambition as an attractive quality in and of itself, a heady one. But because Rodham is so narrowly focused on Hillary herself, it is never able to examine all of the other possibilities for the world it’s created.