Lincoln keeps Hannibal Hamlin on the ticket in 1864, resulting in a Hamlin Presidency.
Interesting AH ideas that aren't commonly used
- Thread starter lerk
- Start date
-
- Tags
- alternate history
Too much of a stretch, while AIDS had begun to spread to humans by the 30s or so, it was still extremely limited, for its to realistically be spread in Germany it would need some extensive German involvement in (equatorial) Africa, of the scale of Cuba at least, and they certainly didn’t have the interest or ressources to do it, even if they win ww2 and get Belgium they’ll never get access to the Belgian Congo with the RN and USN ruling the seas. And for Nazi Germany to survive to the 80s for it to be spread more naturally is... extremely unlikely, AIDS really was rare before WW1, we’re not even sure it had passed to the man at the time.
A much more realistic and equally scarier thought would be the spread of AIDS under a continuing apartheid South Africa, only 1% of pregnant women had AIDS in 1990, ten years later 25% had AIDS, A surviving apartheid South Africa (lots of POD possible, AIDS in itself may be enough if it is much more prevalant, but the easiest would be a delayed fall of the USSR and communism, South Africa had the ressources to continue the apartheid for a good decade)
would deal incredibly poorly to it, and the infection rate could easily reach 50%, this will be a disaster that will kill millions, and not just black Africans, after all South Africa committed atrocities on their white, gay conscript , thankfully most of the society was more accepting at the time but if AIDS become common the social progress will get reverted a lot.
And if apartheid lasts longer, it will end in. A civil war, it already could have easily IRL if not for Mandela, ITTL it’s a given... millions of infected black African will move to neighbouring countries, and there would be many white people with AIDS who will try to flee to first world countries, and potentially spread it again there, alternatively some countries may actually not accept white refugees out of fear of AIDS, and in this case the white population In Africa will only fight harder to keep their country.
This is a recipe for millions of death, maybe more than a dozen millions actually.
Last edited:
xsampa
Banned
Western countries generally adopting an antidemocratic outlook on the grounds that it fosters mass, consumer culture and mass participation, "spoiling" potential future elites by drowning them in consumer goods and being part of the herd. Furthermore, they argue that multiculturalism is also a vector for the masses because it caters to their desires for a separate culture, and increases the variety of consumer goods, feeding back into elite-destroying consumerism. Finally, there is a focus on efficiency, since competent elites must get things done.
I've read that to this day nobody has been able to figure out who legitimately won that 1948 Senate election.
For some diseased reason I was looking at the CBS coverage of the JFK assassination. There were several reports of Johnson in the corridors of Parkland Hospital, cradling one arm in the other. What if this was a sign of a cardiac episode and LBJ succumbed the same day, after he'd been sworn in?
In a minor point, on-screen Walter Cronkite had a nervous tic of taking off and replacing his glasses several times a minute.
In a minor point, on-screen Walter Cronkite had a nervous tic of taking off and replacing his glasses several times a minute.
Driftless
Donor
John McCormick - Speaker of the House - would have been sworn in. McCormick was 72 at the time and as I remember, there was some concern with that fact. I don't remember if that was a general age thing (which has long since been chucked out the door), or if there were other health concerns. His situation was just one of many considerations with the 25th amendment discussion
I don't know if Cronkite needed the glasses to read his notes; but that removal of the glasses was a "tell" that he was going off script. In his case, not some random notion fluttering across the synapses, but something he'd put considered thought into.
Conservatives win, or at least do better in, the 1945 UK General Election. IOTL, the Labour Party received alot of help from a terrible Conservative campaign, which included Churchill claiming that Atlee would end up setting up a Gestapo to enforce socialism. A campaign that toned down the rhetoric and offered a viable alternative to Labour's planned economy could have forced a hung Parliament or coalition between the Conservatives and Liberals.
Next, you have John William McCormack and Carl Hayden, but they both refuse in OTL, and they do the same here due to age. Dean Rusk as Secretary of State would resign for no apparent reason, as he did in OTL. Thus we end up with Treasury Secretary C. Douglas Dillon (a Republican) as President.
Dillon was pretty level-headed, an Eisenhower Republican and on the moderate wing. He'd probably focus more on the economic side rather than foreign policy, leaving that for others. He might not run in 1964 and that opens a lot of doors.
Plus he'd be the first president to have Jewish ancestry (his grandfather was Polish-Jewish).
For 64, the Dems have Hubert Humphrey, George Wallace, Terry Sanford, a massive draft movement for Robert Kennedy, even a possibility for Robert McNamara, Pat Brown, and Sam Yorty.
Republicans (Dillon does not run.) has Romney, (limited experience as he was inaugurated as Governor of Michigan in January '63, but he looked presidential,) Rockefeller, Goldwater, William Scranton, Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr.
Driftless
Donor
Considering the frazzled state of the country's mind post-assassination, Bay of Pigs, increased fighting in Viet Nam, Civil Rights struggles; a caretaker President working for quiet stability in the short term would have his hands full. That might be a useful presence in the short run, or, could it become a latter-day Buchanan administration?
You really have to work hard to be anything like Buchanan. (Although Trump is doing a good job at that...) I think Dillon would do a good job for the short time he's President. The Dems seem likely to win 64 and 68.
Driftless
Donor
Probably so; Buchanan faced a much worse set of problems and pretty much fumbled most situations, either by inaction or by making the wrong choice. It would be hard to see Dillon doing as badly.
Maybe the Ford administration would be a somewhat useful comparison for a Dillon admin? More so in approach, rather than inputs and outputs. By that I mean, a decent man with little to no agenda coming into office, is thrust into the top executive position, with a comparatively short time frame till the next election.
George W. Bush successfully passes his 2006 immigration bill. This could result in an immigration backlash keeping McCain from getting the nomination in 2008, but the major effects would come in the 2010s. The US would have slightly stronger economy and anti-immigration politics would be muted because you'd have a larger population of foreign-born voters, many of whom would probably vote in Republican primaries, while unemployment in the Eurozone would be slightly lower due to emigration of skilled workers. The POD would probably be Bush pushing for the bill in 2005, when he still has political capital, rather than starting with Social Security reforms.
McCormack was as healthy as any 72-year-old in that day and age, but except for consenting to have his name put in nomination as a "favorite son" candidate at a couple of National Conventions he'd had no Presidential ambitions. He wouldn't have resigned but he wouldn't have made any radical changes to the existing Kennedy policy or run for election. In 1964 there would have been another 1960 situation for the Democrats; a number of candidates for what was essentially an open seat. McCormack was not the material of which Presidential kingmakers was made so the Democratic convention would have been wide open. Call it a POD cafeteria.
Same song, different verse then. McCormack as the 'caretaker' till the election, and given he won't run (If for different reasons.) it be the same as the floor is open for both the Dems and GOP. (Best case, Vietnam becomes a defensive War as we cut back on support to South Vietnam and has a small number of soldiers in Indochina, or we outright pull out of the South, the counterculture becomes much more general peace and love, and nuclear disarmament.)
Yeah there was vote stealing on both sides so I don't think it would ever have been possible to figure out.
One way to ensure a significantly better Conservative performance would be to butterfly away the Beveridge Report (which was not a given, Beveridge didn't even want the job as he was more interested in planning/rationing and he had many enemies across Whitehall, not least of all Ernie Bevin and the Treasury).
this occurred to me yesterday but i'd forgotten about it until just now: there's another interesting quirk of Canadian comics which could easily affect Superman if he was a Canadian superhero. after World War II, the Canadian comics industry IOTL kinda died off but, eventually, alot of it was commemorated with postage stamps and iirc there was even an obituary printed for Johnny Canuck as a superhero in the '60s with the general explanation that, after the war ended, Canada didn't need heroes anymore. maybe the same fate would befall Superman ITTL.I don't see a need to connect them. I do think it means Supes doesn't see the "power creep", which was driven by his appearances in serials. More broadly, I'd say it makes the Canadian publisher a major player in the business, owning one of the most popular characters around in the late '30s & early '40s. (Which also means big money in licence deals for all manner of related products. Enough to take over a Poverty Row studio?) Big question is, what do they do about Cap Marv? Do they sue? Or do the creators of the Big Red Cheese actually end up working for the same publisher?Which gives the publisher the two biggest characters of the era.
Owning Supes, alone, probably means Canadian comics are more competitive, & diverse, being carried by the profits his books generate. Maybe this also attracts other creative talent, which is also good for Canadian comics.
How about another: Oswald's first shot hits a light standard (as OTL), then the rifle jams.
It wasn't "no need for heroes" that just affected Canada. Some of the superhero "backlash" nearly killed them in the U.S., too. Canada had been protected by wartime import quotas; postwar, U.S. publishers just swamped the Canadian market. If a Canadian company owned Superman, it'd have the two top-selling books in the industry (I presume they'd still do what National did, & go from the debut book to a second eponymous book; it's about 1mil copies/mo each, at peak), & have one of the handful of characters to survived the superhero "backlash" of the late '40s & early '50s. (If the Canadians also publish the Big Red Cheese, they've got the four
biggest-selling books...; CM was selling about 1½mil/mo each in his two books.) Not to mention the money from licence deals (lunchboxes, PJs, sheets, puzzles, & such), if not from movie serials (which might also apply) & radio (which probably does). (This also presupposes the Canadians haven't created *Wonder Woman & *Namor & *Human Torch, too.)Does this attract a lot of talent that OTL never worked in comics? Maybe. Does it attract a lot of the OTL talent that created everybody from Green Arrow to Green Lantern to Thor to Spidey?
(Not Stan, but Jack, & Steve, & Roy Thomas, & JR Sr, &, later, Mantlo & Buckler & Starlin.) That's probable, IMO. Does this enable the Canadians to produce Justice Society, Enemy Ace, Haunted Tank, Spiderman, Thor, you name it? Does it mean buyouts of Dell & Charlton & EC? (Or even mean these companies never happen?)This company actually purchasing (frex) Monogram, maybe it's enough for a *"Marvel Cinematic Universe" in the '50s...