America's Funniest President: Mo Udall Presidency & Beyond
- Thread starter CountDVB
- Start date
So, you still have Gorbachev as Soviet leader, nice. May have ideas for ones after him, should your version of the USSSR survive, that is.
on a similar note, I wonder who's eyeing the Oval Office in 1988 on their side. Bush, Kemp, Dole?
Sergeant Foley
Banned
Obviously Bush, Sr., but wasn't he retained as CIA Director by Reagan in this timeline?
That’s a pretty big assumption to make, especially given the state of the GOP right here
Is the GOP united enough to actually coalesce a backlash? Like they have absolutely no direction of where they are going at all. At this point it seems like they are just existing lmao
The GOP are in a awful situation because there isn't a Nelson Rockefeller to pick up the torch of the liberal republicans. The Nixon conservatives are discredited and the Regan/goldwater conservatives are never having a hope of taking the party over again. The liberal republicans don't seem to have anyone noteworthy enough to put them at the forefront. I wouldn’t have been surprised if in this timeline Rockefeller before his death in 1979 publicly dissavowed the republican party and joined the democratic party
Last edited:
They have some semblance of unity, but they’re at the point where any big problems or disagreements would solidify the major gaps.
They don’t have direction because they lack leadership, sorta like the Dems problems back in OTL. However, it’s worse here because the original up and comers, the Neocons, turned out to be a dead end to say the least
They have a few noteworthy people like John B Anderson and Charles Mathias, but they’re liberal republicans from the old guard, meaning retirement is pretty evident on the horizon.
As such, they had to focus on expanding the liberal Republicans once in the party and have been making some progress, but leadership of the overall GOP is still divided and there’s still little fresh new blood.
if Tom Kean still becomes NJ governor ITTL, maybe he could try to pick up the torch of the liberal Republicans
I just don't see the republicans loosening the grip of the democrats till maybe the late 90s and by then it may be an Eisenhower like situation where they don't really reverse any of the democrats policy but rather just try and not expand it too much.
They have a shot, but it's unlikely because leadership is disorganized and the voters are in a state of flux. We'll see whether or not they will make it.
1985: Nuclear Power Lines
1985- Nuclear Power Line
The revelations from the United States vs. Exxon shook up the nation and the world. The idea of man being able to change the climate on a global scale had been considered, but not taken as much of a threat. However, the ozone hole along with the case changed all of that. That the evidence was there. Not just that, but to where fossil fuel companies concluded that if people knew, there would be a demand to fossil fuels and that they’d be held responsible, leading them to conspire to obfuscate the truth. With their attempts having backfired, the world now knows and must come to decide what they must do now. The initial good news was that having been found early, they were at the stage where they could do certain plans to counteract it and fund more research endeavors. Moreover, they had obvious goals and objectives; limit the use of coal, petrol and natural gas to eventually phase them out.
However, the devil was in the details logistics-wise. Despite this, the Udall administration would sit down and overview the situation along with coming up with plans. Despite petroleum being the starting factor behind the entire ordeal, they started with coal in terms of figuring problem solving. Coal’s usage was primary in power generation, rail transportation and the creation of steel. While the first one could be resolved with more investment and construction in nuclear power, the second and third required more thought. The third one would be addressed by breaking down each step and figuring out what can Ben done, such as using renewable- energy based hydrogen, other sources of carbon and so on. This left the rails.
Interestingly enough, a plan came when looking over Europe’s developments, notably France’s cutting edge electrified rail TGV system of high speed rail along with France’s increase in the usage of nuclear power. Said plan would be to electrify the US rail network. With its growth years prior, the US government had been purchasing every large rail line within the nation to expand the capabilities of Conrail and Amtrak, with plans to reform it into a large system. Lines like Union Pacific and Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad were purchased by the government with plans on connecting the rail system, having been done as a way to increase government revenue. As such, by electrifying the network, they could increase speed and reduce fossil fuel usage. In fact, this proposal and speculation was used to convince for the purchase of Norfolk Southern. With it, passengers could go everywhere and the bigger boom in electric public transport would cut down petrol usage in cars and in certain airlines.
With the US rail network having become a virtual monopoly under primary ownership of the US government, electrifying the rails would be an ambitious political plan and some were more than concerned about it. That said, a lot of the positives were noted on it and additional positives would be listed: with the car market having taking a hit the previous year from the debacle over the chicken tax incident along with the previous years of economic strife, public transportation was gaining ground once more. Examining the numbers and comparisons, it became evident that a more solid public transportation system, one that ran on renewable energy no less, it would be a large benefit to people. The Udall administration pushed hard on this and the tidal wave of support for this helped for it. Providing new and better paying jobs was one big appeal.
Of course, there was plenty of controversy, which was addressed one aspect at a time. Accusations of government size were surprisingly low, if mainly because that side was taken seriously due to association with the Reaganites. Concerns over cost were addressed with plans along with some tax reforms that would be beneficial to the people along with the rhetoric of it being an investment to help the average American, much like healthcare had before. It would be a plan done in pieces and over the course of many years, but it would be worth it. Other issues laid in the growing usage of nuclear power, but the Ozone hole discovery and the Exxon case brought a sense of urgency, and with it, the pragmatic confession that nuclear was the viable option as solar and wind have not reached their full potential though others like tidal and geothermal, would be considered in some aspects. Biofuel was briefly mentioned, but the logistics that came with corn-based products and so on meant it wasn’t taken seriously for this discussion. However, the usage of biogas would gain further traction since it would be utilizing waste product and thus considered “carbon neutral”. Purified and examined, it could help also deal with natural gas.
Despite these long term plans, more immediate actions were taken. Fossil fuel subsidies would be removed, being invested as a tax break for the Americans and transferred for the future projects along with potential discussions for a petrol tax as well. There was a rush of excitement for the people at the ambitious plans, touted with the American optimism channeled by Udall and his supporters.
They saved the world from the Nazis.
They went to the moon.
This rail project... this surge into renewable technology, they just saw it as the next crusade for America, the next great challenger to conquer...
—————————————————————
Yup... we’re doing this. Crazy? Yes. Unreasonable? I don’t think so.
The groundwork has been laid out. The time is right. And the fire of hope isn’t leading the engines of progress...
This. Is. Happening.
Feel free to comment, politely critique and suggest for this
Last edited:
Very interesting. Hmm, wonder what ideas you may ahve for these authors. Tom Clancy. John Grisham, if he does become an author. Stephen King. If not an author, I'd see John Grisham either being a congressman, or other role in Arkansas politics.
Gotta check on the others, but King’s been writing since 1974. So he’s still writing!
Cool!. If John Grisham doesn't become an author, he could play a role in Arkansas politics, as I believe he did for a time. You can read up on it to double check that.
I will express my skepticism, that wind and solar will overtake nuclear because of their intermittency, though that is not to downplay the contribution they can make. Hopefully, the Udall or future administrations will address some of the problems with with these sources. A cursory google showed me that solar panels contain elements like cadmium and arsenic, which would be challenging to deal with once they come to the end of their useful lives. Similarly, wind turbine blades are non-recyclable in present day OTL so that is another challenge. Again, not saying that they shouldn't.
In regards to nuclear energy, I mentioned molten salt reactors as an alternative. The US might want to look into thorium, which can be (theoretically) be used to "breed" uranium-233. An isotope that is slightly more fissile than uranium-235 and the sources I looked at stated that the waste products have shorter half-lives. Will the Udall Administration be looking into more funding for nuclear fusion research? The problem with fusion is that it the reactions produce on Earth take in more energy than they give out, and we still haven't reached the ignition point. It's likely that TTL wouldn't see any quick results...
...oh crap, I just remembered Chernobyl. Methinks we can't avoid that because of the shoddy design.
In regards to nuclear energy, I mentioned molten salt reactors as an alternative. The US might want to look into thorium, which can be (theoretically) be used to "breed" uranium-233. An isotope that is slightly more fissile than uranium-235 and the sources I looked at stated that the waste products have shorter half-lives. Will the Udall Administration be looking into more funding for nuclear fusion research? The problem with fusion is that it the reactions produce on Earth take in more energy than they give out, and we still haven't reached the ignition point. It's likely that TTL wouldn't see any quick results...
...oh crap, I just remembered Chernobyl.
Methinks we can't avoid that because of the shoddy design.