Search results

Romulans and Cardassians wouldn't have stranded themselves in the first place. The Klingons, who knows, but if they did strand themselves they'd no doubt earn a glorious death before getting far.

How are you measuring production? And for what time period?

I'd notice that - in October.

It's pretty much a GOP solid victory map. With New Mexico and Iowa sticking out a little.

That's a heck of a leap for a starting point.

Or as part of it maybe.

Ok, so I went all DEMOGRAPHICS on this. Race/income/education/political ideology/religiosity/etc Trump does best with lower income, less educated whites (but not highly religious), anti-immigration/free trade voters, Reform Party/Perot loyalists, registered independents, and “hardhats”. Bush...

Trump is as close to a pure (white) populist as the U.S. has seen in a while, and posses serious threats to the voter bases of both Bush (who fairly easily cruised through the primaries as OTL) and Gore. Gore was expecting to be able to ignore Nader's (whose campaign never approaches OTL 2000...

Now it's important to remember that the Trump of 2000 is not the Trump we now know and love (:rolleyes:). Anti-immigration, including wall building, and anti-free trade (especially anti-NAFTA) is central to his campaign, but the rhetoric never descends to the level of calling people racists, nor...

Clowns to the left, jokers to right A Trump with Reform in 2000 election scenario In this scenario, Perot decides after his '92 run to put more effort into creating the Reform Party as a strong and lasting organization, a legitimate threat to the main two. He does slightly better than OTL in...

It's not very likely to be honest. Christianity was always a top down imposition, the people were never really into it in any real way.

So what's the thing that rhymes with blue?

Except we know what would happen with Sealion.

The key question of course is how much Great Britain is actually committed to the effort.

Midterms will be very different with a Republican president. Democratic gains could occur instead of the massive losses.

That certainly seems like the most (only?) plausible way for the "in parts" way to work. Though after selling New Orleans, the rest of Louisiana isn't of any use to Napoleon, hence why he dumped it OTL... But maybe if the US negotiators refuse to budge from what they were authorize to do, it...

Jefferson had authorized $10 million for New Orleans, if Napoleon had taken that properly the rest just gets taken anyways, but maybe would pay more after the fact. Mexico was not independent yet and Spain would seem unlikely to pay their own territory back. Hard to see anyone else remotely...

Britain is the only with any chance to prevent American settlers from taking it anyways (thought that would inevitably take a war they didn't want) and they weren't likely to be given France money at this time.

Matters greatly when they do it, who it applies to, the conditions on the to be freed slaves, the POD in Britain that allowed this, how they go about supporting or enforcing it, etc.

The Mississippi River there is some of the highest percentage African-American counties in the nation, so that's interesting. The pattern wasn't that clear in Alabama's black belt though.