Get rid of the Electoral College? How about getting rid of elections?
Technically constitutional, sort of.
Technically constitutional, sort of.
Alternate Wikipedia Infoboxes VII (Do Not Post Current Politics or Political Figures Here)
- Thread starter BigVic
- Start date
I assume it is best if you don't ask about what their views are on certain events from 1931 until 1945, for starters.
A Martin Van Buren 1840 TL:
The 1840 United States presidential election was held across several weeks from October 30 to December 2, 1840. Incumbent Democratic President Martin Van Buren narrowly won reelection, winning 153 electoral votes to the 141 won by challenger William Henry Harrison. Despite narrowly winning the Electoral College vote, President Van Buren in fact lost the popular, winning 49% to Harrison 51%, marking the second time the winner of the popular vote did not win the election. Van Buren had not had a running mate in the election due to controversies surrounding incumbent Vice-President Richard M. Johnson's relationship with an enslaved woman he treated as his common law wife; most Democratic electors opted to vote for Vice-President Johnson, but enough refused to do so to deny Johnson a majority in the Electoral College; as such, for the second time in a row, the vice-president was decided by the Senate. While the Whigs had succeeded in capturing majorities in both houses of Congress, the vice-president was chosen by the outgoing Senate, which was majority-Democrat; as such, it was expected Johnson would be reelected. However, a cadre of southern Democratic Senators, led by South Carolina Senator (and former vice-president) John C. Calhoun rebelled against Democratic leadership and voted for Harrison's running mate John Tyler, a former Democrat who ultimately turned out to have in little in common with the Whigs, over Johnson. Along with the whole of the Whig caucus, they succeeded in electing Tyler as Vice-President, thus representing only the second time a president and vice-president of a different party were elected (though Tyler, after 1840, would largely associate himself with expansionist Democrats in opposition to both Van Buren and the Whigs).
The 1840 United States presidential election was held across several weeks from October 30 to December 2, 1840. Incumbent Democratic President Martin Van Buren narrowly won reelection, winning 153 electoral votes to the 141 won by challenger William Henry Harrison. Despite narrowly winning the Electoral College vote, President Van Buren in fact lost the popular, winning 49% to Harrison 51%, marking the second time the winner of the popular vote did not win the election. Van Buren had not had a running mate in the election due to controversies surrounding incumbent Vice-President Richard M. Johnson's relationship with an enslaved woman he treated as his common law wife; most Democratic electors opted to vote for Vice-President Johnson, but enough refused to do so to deny Johnson a majority in the Electoral College; as such, for the second time in a row, the vice-president was decided by the Senate. While the Whigs had succeeded in capturing majorities in both houses of Congress, the vice-president was chosen by the outgoing Senate, which was majority-Democrat; as such, it was expected Johnson would be reelected. However, a cadre of southern Democratic Senators, led by South Carolina Senator (and former vice-president) John C. Calhoun rebelled against Democratic leadership and voted for Harrison's running mate John Tyler, a former Democrat who ultimately turned out to have in little in common with the Whigs, over Johnson. Along with the whole of the Whig caucus, they succeeded in electing Tyler as Vice-President, thus representing only the second time a president and vice-president of a different party were elected (though Tyler, after 1840, would largely associate himself with expansionist Democrats in opposition to both Van Buren and the Whigs).
I wonder how George W. Bush was able to lose heavily Republican states like Utah and Idaho.
Dang. Well worth a try. Do I have to make a page on Wikipedia and PDF it?
Wait so what’s going on here? Are all of those seats vacant because there’s nobody in office with the power to fill them and vice versa?Get rid of the Electoral College? How about getting rid of elections?
Technically constitutional, sort of.
Yep. Be careful about images. They don't like you uploading things if it's not going to be used for an actual page.
Yep, in the rest of the states, self-sustaining chains didn't work out because of mandatory special elections, or non-staggered elections, or whatever. Anyway, it's somewhat better than the National Assembly of Haiti.
The 1844 United States presidential election was held across several weeks during November and December of 1844. William Henry Harrison, candidate of the opposition Whig Party, defeated Silas Wright, candidate of the incumbent Democratic Party.
Going into the election, the Democratic Party was in a weakened state. Hurt by 16 straight years of governance, the party was increasingly tired; while the recovery from the Panic of 1837 had made President Van Buren more popular than he had been in his narrow reelection in 1840, he also lacked a friendly congress, as the Whigs had captured both houses in 1840 and held them in 1842, causing frequent infighting with Congress. Van Buren was also increasingly challenged by southern sections of the party dissatisfied with him. They put up a stiff challenge at the 1844 Democratic National Convention to his chosen candidate, Senator Silas Wright of his native New York; they nearly denied Wright the nomination, first by an attempt to reinstate a rule requiring a 2/3 majority for presidential and vice-presidential nominations that would have doomed Wright, and then at the actual nomination battle, where Wright was just short of a majority. Support from Andrew Jackson, who despite being skeptical of the direction Van Buren was taking the party and believing the party should take a more aggressively expansionist position chose to aid Van Buren for the sake of party unity, ultimately pulled Wright over the finish line. William O. Butler, a former congressman from Kentucky, was chosen as vice-president to balance the ticket.
The Whigs entered the 1844 election in high spirits. They had won the popular vote in 1840, expanded their congressional majorities in the 1842 midterms, and were not hurt by partisan infighting. William Henry Harrison, the party's 1840 candidate, easily won the 1844 nomination despite a stiff challenge from Senator Henry Clay and an insignificant one from Vice-President John Tyler, and Willie Mangum, a southerner and Clay man, was chosen as his running mate. Tyler was displeased by his loss of the Whig nomination and, already out of step with the Whigs, as well as having spent much of his term feuding in the Senate with Henry Clay over the issue of Texas, made his own third party, the Annexation Party, which ran on the wedge issue of annexing Texas. Lacking publicity and major backing, Tyler's run received few votes, managing a little under 4% nationwide. It did, however, have several major effects. While domestic politics remained foremost, it did bring up Texas as a bigger, if not quite defining, issue in the election; it especially hurt the Democrats in the south due to Van Buren's stalwartly anti-annexation stance that Wright, who was closely associated with the president, failed to distance himself from. Tyler won about 10% of the southern vote, which was largely drawn from Democrats, and brought to the fore an issue in which Harrison was considered more annexationist than Wright; as such, he is credited with enabling the Whigs' near-sweep of the south.
Once the results were tabulated, Harrison came out clearly ahead, though perhaps by not as much as the Whigs had hoped. He won every slave state bar Missouri, Arkansas, which were theonly southern states to vote for Wright (and only by pluralities), and South Carolina, whose legislature selected electors that voted for Tyler (though, for vice-president, they voted for Lewis Cass, rather than Tyler's actual running mate of his 1841 vice-presidential rival and predecessor, Richard M. Johnson). In the north, he flipped New Jersey and held Ohio and Indiana, but Wright surprised many by losing the popular vote by just 2.4%, likely thanks to holding both of the populous states of New York and Pennsylvania, if only narrowly; to some, this indicated potential in a more northern strategy for the Democrats, though most still believed Wright had been done in by the loss of support in the south, attributed not to Tyler but to Van Buren himself, whose increasingly free-soil-aligned positions were anathema in the south. This would be critical in the continuing evolution of both the Democratic and Whig Parties.
Last edited:
This American Century-Part 1
The great realigning event that would define the 21st century may have technically began with the victory of John McCain in the 2000 election. McCain was something of a maverick among Republicans, having a more moderate set of beliefs than his main rival George W. Bush. McCain worked with Democrats on things like education and campaign finance reform and negotiated a tax bill focusing on cuts for the middle class while doing less for the wealthy. The moment that would define his presidency, however, came on September 11th, 2001. Terrorists attacked the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the White House with hijacked airplanes, killing around 3,000 people. Among the dead were First Lady Cindy McCain, Vice President Tommy Thompson and several cabinet members. McCain was enraged by this and vowed to hunt the ‘scum behind this atrocity to the ends of the earth.’ Thus marked the beginning of the War on Terror.
McCain declared there was no room for the usual petty partisanship in the post-9/11 world. Now was the time for the country to unite. And unite it did. McCain boasted 91% approval in the immediate aftermath of the attacks and few in Congress objected when the McCain administration made its demands. First, McCain shocked many by announcing a ‘new National Union coalition’. He selected Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman as his new Vice President and appointed a number of Democrats to fill cabinet vacancies as a show of bringing America together. It wasn’t all just these overtures, of course. The National Union coalition in Congress passed sweeping expansion of government surveillance powers, gave McCain’s administration to detain suspected enemy combatants indefinitely (albeit with some protections against torture or other abuses) and empowered McCain to pursue the terrorists behind the attacks by almost any means necessary. McCain launched an invasion of Afghanistan in 2002. By 2003, the war had expanded to include Iraq and Libya. In 2004, an attack on a US naval vessel in the Persian Gulf led to the U.S. launching a war in Iran. The wars were not without critics, but the National Union coalition, while not fully formalized, helped stifle much dissent and were broadly supported going into 2004.
The 2004 election saw the new National Union truly formalized. McCain entered both the Democratic and Republican primaries with support from the vast majority of party leadership. Only a few candidates emerged to challenge McCain in the primaries. In the Republican field, McCain was challenged by right-wing commentator Pat Buchanan and businessman Herman Cain. In the end, the two failed to make much of a dent in his support on that side. In the Democratic field, meanwhile, McCain faced more organized opposition from Senator Paul Wellstone, who challenged McCain on foreign policy, civil liberties and economics. Wellstone managed to crack 20% and even won 5 states, but McCain still ended up the official nominee of both parties. Wellstone encouraged his supporters to vote their conscience, but this did not mean that McCain would go unchallenged.
Texas Representative Ron Paul was one of McCain’s only vocal critics among elected GOP officials. He had endorsed Buchanan’s challenge, but when it failed announced a bid for the Presidency as an independent. As his running mate, Paul selected fellow Representative Dennis Kucinich-a left-wing Democrat likewise disgruntled by the National Unionists. Ironically, the Paul/Kucinich ticket built a party coalition of their own-getting cross-endorsed by the Libertarian, Green, Constitution and Reform Parties alongside a few even more minor ones. The ticket had the support of 2000 Green nominee Ralph Nader, former Governor Jesse Ventura, San Francisco Mayor Matt Gonzalez and the majority of antiwar activists. This was not universal, however. More fundamentally leftist antiwar figures were completely unwilling to rally around the paleoconservative Paul and instead chose to rally around the Socialist Party nominee David Cobb (a failed Green Party candidate left disgruntled by what he claimed was Kucinich interfering in the nomination process).
As a result of this unprecedented development, the Commission on Presidential Debates originally announced the cancellation of any official debates with their replacement by a townhall-style event featuring McCain. However, amidst backlash from Paul and Cobb supporters as well as Paul cracking 15% in multiple polls, the CPD restored their original debate schedule, albeit only inviting Paul to debate against McCain. The first debate was a brutal one, with Paul attacking McCain as a warmongering tyrant and McCain at one point losing his temper and threatening to physically fight Paul. The second debate was a comparatively more muted affair, though generally agreed to have been a win for McCain. The Vice Presidential debate, however, was seen as going well for Kucinich compared to Lieberman, though topline numbers didn’t move very much. The third debate was canceled, however, following a civil disobedience action spearheaded by the Cobb campaign that disrupted logistics at the original planned debate site. The event led to Cobb’s arrest, which ultimately may have helped his popular vote total.
In the end, the election’s final results were never truly in doubt. While Paul managed to animate a decently sized antiwar coalition and achieved a better electoral performance than Ross Perot in 1992, his 21% of the popular vote was nowhere close to McCain’s 76%. While Paul did win the states of Idaho, Wyoming and Vermont and was within Cobb’s margin in Hawaii, West Virginia, Alabama and Minnesota, McCain still won over 500 electoral college votes. Paul did not win a majority of any demographic, with the closest being winning 46% of white men aged 18-29. Cobb’s 2.5% was respectable for a third party as well, but still quite weak overall. In the aftermath of the 2004 election, the National Union Party’s dominance seemed quite stable. Paul and Kucinich both narrowly lost re-election against National Union-backed rivals. And yet, a small hint of what was to come could be seen with the formation of the Coalition for the Constitution bloc in Congress by those Democrats and Republicans who rejected the National Union Party and the McCain administration.
The great realigning event that would define the 21st century may have technically began with the victory of John McCain in the 2000 election. McCain was something of a maverick among Republicans, having a more moderate set of beliefs than his main rival George W. Bush. McCain worked with Democrats on things like education and campaign finance reform and negotiated a tax bill focusing on cuts for the middle class while doing less for the wealthy. The moment that would define his presidency, however, came on September 11th, 2001. Terrorists attacked the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the White House with hijacked airplanes, killing around 3,000 people. Among the dead were First Lady Cindy McCain, Vice President Tommy Thompson and several cabinet members. McCain was enraged by this and vowed to hunt the ‘scum behind this atrocity to the ends of the earth.’ Thus marked the beginning of the War on Terror.
McCain declared there was no room for the usual petty partisanship in the post-9/11 world. Now was the time for the country to unite. And unite it did. McCain boasted 91% approval in the immediate aftermath of the attacks and few in Congress objected when the McCain administration made its demands. First, McCain shocked many by announcing a ‘new National Union coalition’. He selected Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman as his new Vice President and appointed a number of Democrats to fill cabinet vacancies as a show of bringing America together. It wasn’t all just these overtures, of course. The National Union coalition in Congress passed sweeping expansion of government surveillance powers, gave McCain’s administration to detain suspected enemy combatants indefinitely (albeit with some protections against torture or other abuses) and empowered McCain to pursue the terrorists behind the attacks by almost any means necessary. McCain launched an invasion of Afghanistan in 2002. By 2003, the war had expanded to include Iraq and Libya. In 2004, an attack on a US naval vessel in the Persian Gulf led to the U.S. launching a war in Iran. The wars were not without critics, but the National Union coalition, while not fully formalized, helped stifle much dissent and were broadly supported going into 2004.
The 2004 election saw the new National Union truly formalized. McCain entered both the Democratic and Republican primaries with support from the vast majority of party leadership. Only a few candidates emerged to challenge McCain in the primaries. In the Republican field, McCain was challenged by right-wing commentator Pat Buchanan and businessman Herman Cain. In the end, the two failed to make much of a dent in his support on that side. In the Democratic field, meanwhile, McCain faced more organized opposition from Senator Paul Wellstone, who challenged McCain on foreign policy, civil liberties and economics. Wellstone managed to crack 20% and even won 5 states, but McCain still ended up the official nominee of both parties. Wellstone encouraged his supporters to vote their conscience, but this did not mean that McCain would go unchallenged.
Texas Representative Ron Paul was one of McCain’s only vocal critics among elected GOP officials. He had endorsed Buchanan’s challenge, but when it failed announced a bid for the Presidency as an independent. As his running mate, Paul selected fellow Representative Dennis Kucinich-a left-wing Democrat likewise disgruntled by the National Unionists. Ironically, the Paul/Kucinich ticket built a party coalition of their own-getting cross-endorsed by the Libertarian, Green, Constitution and Reform Parties alongside a few even more minor ones. The ticket had the support of 2000 Green nominee Ralph Nader, former Governor Jesse Ventura, San Francisco Mayor Matt Gonzalez and the majority of antiwar activists. This was not universal, however. More fundamentally leftist antiwar figures were completely unwilling to rally around the paleoconservative Paul and instead chose to rally around the Socialist Party nominee David Cobb (a failed Green Party candidate left disgruntled by what he claimed was Kucinich interfering in the nomination process).
As a result of this unprecedented development, the Commission on Presidential Debates originally announced the cancellation of any official debates with their replacement by a townhall-style event featuring McCain. However, amidst backlash from Paul and Cobb supporters as well as Paul cracking 15% in multiple polls, the CPD restored their original debate schedule, albeit only inviting Paul to debate against McCain. The first debate was a brutal one, with Paul attacking McCain as a warmongering tyrant and McCain at one point losing his temper and threatening to physically fight Paul. The second debate was a comparatively more muted affair, though generally agreed to have been a win for McCain. The Vice Presidential debate, however, was seen as going well for Kucinich compared to Lieberman, though topline numbers didn’t move very much. The third debate was canceled, however, following a civil disobedience action spearheaded by the Cobb campaign that disrupted logistics at the original planned debate site. The event led to Cobb’s arrest, which ultimately may have helped his popular vote total.
In the end, the election’s final results were never truly in doubt. While Paul managed to animate a decently sized antiwar coalition and achieved a better electoral performance than Ross Perot in 1992, his 21% of the popular vote was nowhere close to McCain’s 76%. While Paul did win the states of Idaho, Wyoming and Vermont and was within Cobb’s margin in Hawaii, West Virginia, Alabama and Minnesota, McCain still won over 500 electoral college votes. Paul did not win a majority of any demographic, with the closest being winning 46% of white men aged 18-29. Cobb’s 2.5% was respectable for a third party as well, but still quite weak overall. In the aftermath of the 2004 election, the National Union Party’s dominance seemed quite stable. Paul and Kucinich both narrowly lost re-election against National Union-backed rivals. And yet, a small hint of what was to come could be seen with the formation of the Coalition for the Constitution bloc in Congress by those Democrats and Republicans who rejected the National Union Party and the McCain administration.
Little Europe is a region on the eastern seaboard of Laurentia. It is comprised of six nations: New Sweeden, United Laurentian Nations, Smeerenburg, Colombia, New Hannover, and New Orleans. Manhattan is the largest city in region, closely followed by St. Louis in New Orleans. It is bordered to the west by a variety of independent indigenous states. To the north it is bordered by the Commonwealth of New England.
In 1566, French explorers established a fort in what is now St. Louis. Twenty years later, Spanish explorers established a small fort outside what is now San Juan, capital of Colombia. Gradually, various other colonies were established across the eastern seaboard of Laurentia during the late 16th century and across the 17th century.
By the mid-18th century, a constellation of different colonies spanned from modern New Orleans to New Sweeden. In 1766, the Treaty of Paris ended the 20 years war formally establishing the borders of what would become the modern nations of Little Europe and limiting future expansion for all colonies in the region. By the late 18th century, liberal-nationalist sentiment rose in the region and a series of revolutions and wars of independence broke out. The United Laurentian Nations was established in 1793 after the unification of several former English colonies, German colonies, and Indigenous states, becoming the first independent Republic in the New World. Subsequently, the Laurentian Revolutionary Wars would rage, resulting in the independence of all colonies on the eastern seaboard and the abolition of slavery across modern Little Europe.
Today, Little Europe is the premier center of commerce, industry, and education in the New World. The nations are known for their strong liberal democratic political traditions and are world-leaders in protections for civil and political rights. Little European nations are members of international organizations such as the League of Free Nations, World Federation, and the United States of America.
How close were the states of Idaho, Wyoming, and Vermont percentage wise?
What about the rest of OTL US and Canada?
Are those native countries or deeply mixed to the point where the east coast countries have a distinct European touch?
is this realistic? no. is this very well thought out? also no. but i spent making this because of a one off comment and spent like... 10+ hours thunking and getting help. shoutout to CTTeller for extra insperation
Why was 2020 so close?
is this realistic? no. is this very well thought out? also no. but i spent making this because of a one off comment and spent like... 10+ hours thunking and getting help. shoutout to CTTeller for extra insperation