Bulldoggus
Banned
So, I enjoyed TL191, as a whole, but I just found some of the political stuff shoddy. So, I'd like to endeavor to fix some of it up and build a complete history. Should be fun.
TL 191: A Political History
- Thread starter Bulldoggus
- Start date
Bulldoggus
Banned
So, a quick overview of pre-2nd Mexican War presidents.
Horatio Seymour (D-NY)/Frank Blair, Jr. (D-MO) 1865-1873
Def. Abraham Lincoln (R-IL)/Hannibal Hamlin (R-ME)
William Seward (R-NY)/John Fremont (R-CA)
Benjamin Butler (D-MA)/Peter W. Strader (D-OH) 1873-1877
Def. Schuyler Colfax (W-IN)/Reuben E. Fenton (W-NY)
Samuel Tilden (D-NY)/Thomas A. Hendricks (D-IN) 1877-1881
Def. Benjamin Bristow (W-IN)/William Wheeler (W-NY)
James G. Blaine (W-ME)/James A. Garfield (W-OH) 1881-1885
Def. Samuel Tilden/Thomas A. Hendricks
In the 18 years between the War of Succession and the Second Mexican War, the Democrats largely dominated politics. After Seymour's terms, Butler, a reformer, was elected in 1872, only to be kicked out at his own party's convention four years later after angering Democrat bosses one too many times. The 1876 convention is thought by many political scholars to be the moment that the Democrats became fully defined by conservatism. That same year, the Whigs (which the Republicans had rebranded themselves as so their name didn't remind people of the disastrous Lincoln Administration) became the party of liberal reform by choosing Ben Bristow, a reformer originally from Kentucky who had lived in Indiana the last several years. The other notable trend of the era was the weakening of the Senate. Many politicians, after the War, felt that the Senate only promoted regionalism and would thus just lead to more secession and internal turmoil. Thus, the senate began to wither from the chamber where the greatest minds in politics debated to the rubber-stamp entity it is today.
Horatio Seymour (D-NY)/Frank Blair, Jr. (D-MO) 1865-1873
Def. Abraham Lincoln (R-IL)/Hannibal Hamlin (R-ME)
William Seward (R-NY)/John Fremont (R-CA)
Benjamin Butler (D-MA)/Peter W. Strader (D-OH) 1873-1877
Def. Schuyler Colfax (W-IN)/Reuben E. Fenton (W-NY)
Samuel Tilden (D-NY)/Thomas A. Hendricks (D-IN) 1877-1881
Def. Benjamin Bristow (W-IN)/William Wheeler (W-NY)
James G. Blaine (W-ME)/James A. Garfield (W-OH) 1881-1885
Def. Samuel Tilden/Thomas A. Hendricks
In the 18 years between the War of Succession and the Second Mexican War, the Democrats largely dominated politics. After Seymour's terms, Butler, a reformer, was elected in 1872, only to be kicked out at his own party's convention four years later after angering Democrat bosses one too many times. The 1876 convention is thought by many political scholars to be the moment that the Democrats became fully defined by conservatism. That same year, the Whigs (which the Republicans had rebranded themselves as so their name didn't remind people of the disastrous Lincoln Administration) became the party of liberal reform by choosing Ben Bristow, a reformer originally from Kentucky who had lived in Indiana the last several years. The other notable trend of the era was the weakening of the Senate. Many politicians, after the War, felt that the Senate only promoted regionalism and would thus just lead to more secession and internal turmoil. Thus, the senate began to wither from the chamber where the greatest minds in politics debated to the rubber-stamp entity it is today.
Last edited:
Bulldoggus
Banned
Well, the fact is, Turtledove, for all his considerable talents, seems to think the institutions of our Democracy would be largely unchanged had the south won (in reality, they'd be drastically shifted, as you'll soon see). Also, some of his political alliances were mind-bogglingly stupid (for example: FDR was an aristocrat. He wouldn't be a Socialist, even if he sympathized with them. Similarly, TR wouldn't be a right-winger or a socialist). Part of it will just be me ironing out my personal bugbears (so no fictional characters, none whatsoever). A lot of it will be big shifts in institutions. For instance, the USA would have a much more parliamentary system (the big reason it doesn't the South, being gone). I'll also change up party names and the like. If you have more specific questions, feel free to ask.I look forward to seeing more of your work on this subject Bulldoggus; might one please ask if you have any specific points you specifically intend to address in this thread? (as a means of getting a sneak peak at forthcoming attractions!).
Bulldoggus
Banned
I will, although I'm doing by best to avoid it for the era that takes place in FtG. Want to keep it originalI certainly shall; feel free to drop by FILLING THE GAPS and share your suggestions for possible additions to that version of Timeline-191 or your suggestions for improvements to my articles.
Being Honest Turtledove have a golden chance to write one of hell political story with Timeline 191(sans pararelism but even then those pararelism teach more about story and people would never learn about and broad my mind spectrum) and fumbled it with a mediocre war saga(sans How Few Remains, lets say every book post the great war was a missed oportunity, even if the great war would have wrote better too), the issue is all is too short and too spread out to figured details, we have congressman characthers and barely congress session, civilans characther that feels like newsreporter, solider who feels like civilian(but this one make sense).
Showing how USA evolved into a defacto one party state(as Socialist and Republicans-Whigs were too damn weak for a long time) to a two party state to maybe a three big ones and other lesser post war would have been incredible, but a missed chance, but that is what fans exist.
Showing how USA evolved into a defacto one party state(as Socialist and Republicans-Whigs were too damn weak for a long time) to a two party state to maybe a three big ones and other lesser post war would have been incredible, but a missed chance, but that is what fans exist.
I'm definitely interested in seeing who/whom you are assuming the Presidents are in you opinion compared to Filling in the Gaps..
16: Abraham Lincoln
17: Horatio Seymour
18: Benjamin Butler
19: Samuel Tilden
20: James G Blaine
According to the wiki, by the looks of things you have kept it rather similar. I know that Filling in the Gaps added in an extra President keeping them all one-term, but you have Horatio Seymour at two terms. Surprised you renamed the Republicans "whigs" though
I will, although I'm doing by best to avoid it for the era that takes place in FtG. Want to keep it original
A very fair precaution - Good Ideas are hard to discard, as I have had reason to know myself.
Bulldoggus
Banned
Logical move, IMHO. TTL, the GOP is a new party, and its one president has been a disaster. So, to disassociate with that, they renamed themselves (with the name most of them had once been under anyway).
Bulldoggus
Banned
Yep, I agree. I mean, the mechanics of the Great War were idiotic anyway (no way you could have a trench line from Virginia to Tennessee). Also, yeah the characters are poorly sketched (since he tried to have 30 and show literally everything going on- for christ's sake, he had two Canadian farmers). Turtledove had a very interesting premise that was undercut by (frankly) his own mediocrity.
I would belive in the 'Eastern Seaboard' a trench line(as the rivers and proximity would make Meuse-Belgium looks like a picnic) but the rest of the country with their openess would be as insane as civil war meets neo calvary wars, that would be a full mobility war from california till the tennesse with both sides trading ground for momentum.
Yeah Turtledove should have chose either a political social or war story, tried to do both and fumbled badly in both regards
Bulldoggus
Banned
I agree that there'd be certain swamps in Virginia, but there would mostly be massive flanking operations. In fact, probably mobile technology, communications and bomber planes would improve faster than OTL, for both flanking raids and cornered armies trying to bust out before the lines solidified.
And also, the whole idea of Featherstone committing (or even attempting) a holocaust of ALL black people is insanity. I mean, Jews were, relatively speaking, a tiny group. Black people were up to half the population in a lot of areas, even more in others. It would be basically impossible to commit genocide on that scale. The worst it could get is a series of nasty pogroms. The WWII parallel was so forced- I mean, isn't being a repressive racist dictator evil enough without full acts of genocide?
Yeah as say some rivers and the easter seaboard combination of coast, swamp and mountain would be the most brutal terrain in history but the rest would be mobility, as yout say, the use of logistic and oil would be vital(union have enought for itself in pennsilvania and california when CSA swim on it with Seqoyah and Texas) in all other fronts.
Featherstone was somewhat realistically in how natural was his rise of power(even more natural to hitler would say) but yeah, the holocaust pararel was overdone, as you say, more violence and radicalism would be natural and maybe deportation or dumping them to mexico, being black in CSA would be literal hell in earth, specially with not place to run(USA didn't care, their still dixie for them)
Bulldoggus
Banned
Yep, but even the brutal bits wouldn't produce something on the level of a Somme or a Verdun or even a Ypres, just because of the massive flanking maneuvers that everyone would make (For example, I can picture the Union trying to sneak through and hit Birmingham, or a bloody series of battles in which the Confederates bust out, rampage thru Indiana in an effort to get Chicago, and eventually getting cornered and massacred.
Deportations wouldn't happen- it would deplete the worker base. Really, I could see more oppression happening alongside regular, violent pogroms that disrupt the social order, destroy black businesses and churches, and generally make life for Confederate blacks so tumultuous that it is impossible for them to create social organizations, find companionship and solidarity, and build networks/groups to resist this oppression. If I were running a racist dictatorship, that's how I would do it.
In regards to this, are you keeping the Confederate parties as Whigs and Radical Liberals, or are you changing it to Democrats and *insert party name here*
Bulldoggus
Banned
Democrats (planter elite), Radicals (urban workers) and Jacksonians (Rural small farmers).
Last edited: