Alternate Electoral Maps

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nanwe

The Spanish general election of 2015 under the same electoral model I employed to model the 2016 ones here.

The results are as follows:

Total Seats: 400 [350 OTL]

People's Party (centre-right): 120 seats [123 OTL]
Spanish Socialist Worker's Party (centre-left): 92 seats [90 OTL]
Podemos (left-wing populism): 87 seats [69 OTL]
Ciudadanos (liberal, centre): 58 seats [40 OTL]
Popular Unity (left-wing): 15 seats [2 OTL]
Republic Left of Catalonia (Catalan separatism, centre-left): 10 seats [9 OTL]
Democràcia i Llibertat (Catalan separatism, centre-right): 9 seats [8 OTL]
Basque Nationalist Party (Basque nationalism, centre-right): 6 seats [5 OTL]
EH Bildu (Basque separatism, far-left): 2 seats [2 OTL]
Canarian Coalition (Canarian regionalism, centre): 1 seat [1 OTL]

The main result derived from this more proportional allocation of seats is that the regionalist parties lose some power and that the left is generally strengthened. The sum of PSOE, Podemos and Popular Unity adds up to 194 seats out of the 201 required to invest a President of the Government. All it would take would be to add the seats of PNV and CC (generally considered parties that support whoever offers them the most money for their regions) and 201. I must note that this was not done on purpose, but it's the natural byproduct of a more proportional system. That being said, if Popular Unity had obtained 0.69 pp. less it would not have acquired any compensation seats (threshold: 3% of the vote), and only gotten the two constituency seats hence probably forcing a situation eerily similar to OTL's.


resultados%20elecciones%20generales%20de%202015.png
 

prime-minister

prime-minister said:
Bedtime For Bozo: 1988
Click to expand...

1992

The Kemp administration has widely gone down as one of the weakest of the 20th century. Kemp quickly pursued more stringent tax-cutting measures and aggressively vetoed Congress's 1990 budget, going as far as to encourage Congressional Republicans to cause a shutdown to shut out a budget he regarded as 'stymieing the economy for political ends'. This charge would come back to haunt him as the economy worsened over the coming years.

The most dramatic problem for Kemp, however, was to be international affairs. When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, he not only initiated the Gulf War to drive back the Iraqis from the Gulf, but escalated the conflict into Iraq itself, deposing Saddam and his regime. At first, the President's approval ratings soared, with the claim of having deposed a tyrant seen as a great boon to his credentials as a world leader, and enamoring him to the wing of the Republicans who still idolized Reagan. However, the political situation in Iraq quickly deteriorated into a power vacuum as it became apparent Kemp had not considered how to replace Saddam.

To make matters worse, the Republicans had lost considerable credibility at home as the economy deteriorated throughout the early 1990s and the party was seen to fidget badly on the culture wars, with Reagan admirers yearning for Kemp to push for immigration reform. While he was not primaried, the distaste for the President in the run up to the 1992 election was almost palpable.

The Democrats leaned towards trying to exemplify a modernizing approach, with two major figureheads arising: former California Governor Jerry Brown, whose radical programme included the adoption of a flat income tax and campaign finance reform, and Virginia Governor Douglas Wilder, whose law and order approach and support for the death penalty appealed to conservatives but who had a strongly moralistic perspective on racial tensions. Brown led the field convincingly until the Los Angeles riots in his home state embarrassed him badly, letting Wilder gain momentum, but it proved too little too late to defeat Brown. In his address to the Democratic convention in New York City, Brown declared that 'America must seek a new beginning with its people, a time undivided by class, by race and by age, but united by a common desire for something fairer and something better.' Brown's pick for Vice President was something of a surprise- Texas Governor Ann Richards, the first woman on a major party ticket and a more progressive choice than most had expected, but her skills as a memorable speaker and reinforcement of Brown presented a coherent alternative to the policies of President Kemp.

One of the main issues of the campaign, along with the economy, was the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Kemp was a vocal supporter of the deal, having made the preliminary stages to sign it into law with the Canadian Progressive Conservative government, and hoped in his second term to create a broader American Free Trade Agreement (AFTA), stretching as far as Chile and Argentina. Brown, however, opposed it on the grounds that it would benefit businesses more than ordinary Americans, as well as voicing the concern that it would lead to worse livelihoods for workers outsourced to poorer countries.

In the grand scheme of things, however, this was all white noise to many voters, who were just concerned with getting the economy going again, and Kemp's talk of international trade standards came off as ideological and distanced from the problems of ordinary Americans.

genusmap.php

Brown/Richards (Democratic): 436 EVs, 54.2%
Kemp/Thompson (Republican): 102 EVs, 45.1%

The election was the best Democratic performance since Lyndon Johnson's 1964 landslide, with Brown becoming the first Democrat to sweep the South since the end of the Second World War. His victory was put down to a vibrant populist campaign against the injustices and forgotten citizens the Bush and Kemp administrations had created, as well as a general distaste for the Republicans after 12 years of them holding the White House. While the end of the farm crisis had led to a recovery in most of the rural US for the Republicans (with the exception of Wyoming, which flipped to Brown in response to trade concerns), Brown's economic populist rhetoric played well with urban voters in densely-populated states, whilst Richards achieved the impressive feat of both keeping the South in the Democrats' court and enthusing liberal voters in a way the Gore ticket hadn't.

In his first State of the Union Address as President, Brown declared his tenure would 'see the rebirth of a Great Society in this country'. His words were bold, but tough times lay ahead for the nation.
 

glenn67

Turquoise Blue said:
Never Take Counsel Of Your Fears
genusmap.php

1992
George H. W. Bush/Dan Quayle (Republican): 529 EV
William Clinton/Al Gore (Democratic): 9 EV
Ralph Nader/Winona LaDuke (Green): 0 EV

genusmap.php

1996
Bob Dole/Donald Trump (Republican): 444 EV
Mario Cuomo/Zell Miller (Democratic): 94 EV

genusmap.php

2000
Bob Dole/Donald Trump (Republican): 535 EV
unpledged electors (Democratic): 3 EV

genusmap.php

2004
(went to House, which selected: Donald Trump/George W. Bush)
Jack Andrews/George W. Bush (Republican): 203 EV
Donald Trump/George W. Bush (Republican): 203 EV
Barack Obama/Jim Jeffords (Republican): 78 EV
Ron Paul/Gary Johnson (Republican): 54 EV

genusmap.php

2008
Jack Andrews/George W. Bush (People's): 460 EV
Donald Trump/Barack Obama (Progressive): 78 EV

genusmap.php

2012
Jack Andrews/Zephyr Teachout (People's): 343 EV
Barack Obama/Sarah Palin (Progressive): 184 EV
Rand Paul/Jesse Ventura (Nullifier): 8 EV
Bernie Sanders/various (Anti-Monopoly): 3 EV

genusmap.php

2016
Zephyr Teachout/Joe Manchin (People's): 341 EV
Colin Powell/Jason Kander (Progressive): 88 EV
Pat McCrory/Jason Kander (Progressive): 55 EV
Deval Patrick/Mike Michaud (Progressive): 46 EV
John Bel Edwards/Joaquin Castro (Progressive): 8 EV

genusmap.php

2020
Colin Powell/Jason Kander (Progressive): 482 EV
Zephyr Teachout/various (People's): 56 EV​
Click to expand...

George H.W. Bush as James Madison analogue (Colin Powell = Wiliam Henry Harrison)
 

Octosteel

Before Humphrey started campaigning against the war and not on Johnson's foreign policy, he was running around 30% in the polls in August and September. He quickly made his policy changes which turned a landslide into a nailbiter. So the question is what would the electoral map have looked like if Humphrey kept running on the Johnson Vietnam policy? Maybe he loses Connecticut, Maine, and New York?
 
Upvoteanthology

Upvoteanthology

Donor
Here's a small map I made, in a world with a much stronger Holy Roman Empire. Maybe it fits into my "Bohemian Rhapsody" MotF submission world? :p Anyway, here's a super-teeny blurb:

"On January 15th, 2017, incumbent Head-Minister of the Neuerömisch Republic Vinzenz Theismann lost the national election to Liberale Berndt Stengelin. Most historians attribute this to the dying sense of conservatism that had been slowly declining in Neuerom since its peak in the 1960's. Stengelin, the candidate closest following the "Interaktiv" ideology of his party since Josua Erhard in the 1972 election, managed to use it to his advantage, winning the populous (and normally-conservative) Roswithea Province, which gained him 21 electoral votes. Meanwhile, Cäcilie Geller of the Weizen Party won the provinces of Buchheim and Westenland, the first third-party candidate to win a province in over seventy years. She was also the first female candidate to win any provinces in Neuerömisch history. Truly, the 2017 election will go down in history as the day the Konservativ Party died once and for all."

Cäcilie Geller (Wiezen Party) - 10 EV
Vinzenz Theismann (Konservativ Party) - 60 EV
Berndt Stengelin (Liberale Party) - 79 EV

TBbzfx1.png
 

Osk

1940

Robert A. Taft (R-OH)/Benjamin Muse (R-VA) 418 EV
Franklin D. Roosevelt (D-NY)/Happy Chandler (D-KY) 113 EV

Screen Shot 2017-01-22 at 3.34.36 PM.png


1944

Sam Rayburn (D-TX)/Joseph F. Duffey (D-PA) 420
John M. Robison (R-KY)/Walter E. Edge (R-NJ) 111

Screen Shot 2017-01-22 at 3.59.53 PM.png


1948

Dwight D. Eisenhower (R-TX)/Hamilton Fish III (R-NY) 295
Louis C. Rabaut (D-MI)/Alben W. Barkley (D-KY) 236

Screen Shot 2017-01-22 at 9.32.42 PM.png
 

prime-minister

prime-minister said:
Bedtime For Bozo: 1992
Click to expand...

1996

Perhaps predictably, given he was the first Democrat in the White House in 12 years, Brown was an ardent reformer, using his two year term to fix as many of the problems he saw with the previous Republican administrations as possible. He helped set up a democratic government in Iraq and pushed (unsuccessfully) for the withdrawal of troops, narrowly passed an act killing NAFTA, and began to increase tax on the rich to try to fund social welfare programmes. The most problematic of these was his universal healthcare plan, which proved a major problem in Congress and is cited as a key reason the Democrats lost much ground in both the House and Senate in 1994, losing control of the latter.

By the time Brown's re-election came around, concerns were turning to the increasing debate over improving standards of living or reducing the deficit. A distinct amount of the Republican momentum was damaged when Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich developed a reputation for leading a hardline Congress, instigating a government shutdown over the 1995 budget terms and becoming an extremely divisive figure in the process. He tried to position himself as trying to create 'the shining city on the hill' that Reagan had dreamed of, but the excuse was beginning to wear thin on Americans.

In the Republican primaries, Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander started as a moderate favorite, but he was seen not to be sufficiently hardline on social issues by the right, who already felt ignored by Kemp in the previous election. As a result, paleoconservative firebrand Pat Buchanan took to the stump and performed well among the Republican base, whilst rumblings about free trade from Senate Majority Whip Alan K. Simpson stirred under the surface. Ultimately, Buchanan narrowly won the nomination, but his rhetoric was taken to be abrasive and exclusionary by Republicans and Democrats alike. He refused to even pay lip service to moderates and picked Senator Larry Craig of Idaho as his running mate.

Republican moderates responded with an uproar. They felt Buchanan's priorities were more about authoritarian restrictions than efficient government, and Simpson led a walkout from the convention. The fact that Reagan probably would have united the Republicans on the whole affair was long forgotten.
Simpson, whose profile within his party had been raised by his support for NAFTA and defence of deficit reduction during the Kemp administration, formed the Reform Party, pledging to make for more efficient government spending to cut the deficit and to reopen negotiations for a new free trade agreement to boost American business. Simpson's running mate was founder and president of Americans for Tax Reform, Grover Nordquist.
Perhaps inevitably, the whole scenario was parodied in the famous 'Citizen Kang' Halloween short on The Simpsons, which depicted President Brown being abducted by aliens with visuals mocking Independence Day and deflecting the 'take us to your leader' question onto 'Buchanan, or Simpson', which led to Homer being abducted and coming face-to-face with 'alien life! Oh, and green space thingies'.

Needless to say, the Republicans (and Reformists for that matter) did not capitalise on Brown's shortcomings.


genusmap.php


Brown/Richards (Democratic): 378 EVs, 46.3%
Buchanan/Craig (Republican): 86 EVs, 25.8%
Simpson/Nordquist (Reform): 74 EVs, 25.1%

Ironically, splitting the ticket into two almost equal parts cost the Republicans what could have been an easy victory; Americans were dissatisfied with Brown's policies and many felt he had failed to secure the move towards a fairer society that he had promised. The election did helpfully highlight the divide between the two kinds of Republican, however; Buchanan's firebrand techniques had won over considerably more Southern voters than expected (Simpson only broke 15% in Florida and Virginia), whilst the Pacific and Mountain states and the Eastern seaboard gave a good amount of support to Simpson.

While the Reform Party itself didn't have much support as an entity, it was clear a future Republican ticket would have to unite free trade and minimal state concerns with social conservatism. The first step, however, would be finding a way to put the rogue Senate Whip and the paleoconservative with anti-Semite tendencies behind them.

(I can think of a million things in this post people on this site will probably want to kill me for, and I blame them for none of it.)
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top