AHC: American Regional Competitive Party

The challenge is to, with a POD no earlier than the end of World War II, create a situation where a different set of major parties compete in one or a few states than in the general election. A current example is the situation in Puerto Rico. The later the POD, the better.
 
I don't think the DFL in Minnesota or the Non-Partisan League in North Dakota really count since they're both recognized as their states' Democratic parties and don't have an independent organization or platform.

Vermont's Progressive Party or Minnesota's Independence Party are the closest examples I can think of. You'd just need to make them both a little more popular - maybe have Bernie Sanders run officially on the Progressive ticket for the Senate, and get Jesse Ventura out to campaign for Independence candidates for the Minnesota statehouse.

The Greens are also competitive on a local level in some areas; they have a majority on the city council of Sebastopol, California.

If you want to build something completely new, I guess you could get moderate New England Republicans like Snowe and Brown to create a local center-right party if they feel like the national organization's far-right views are hurting them at the ballot box. (I could see Brown considering this if he loses this year.)
 
The biggest problem is the us fttp presidential system. No regional party could ever hope to win the presidency. So the have to vote for one of the other parties. Generally, thats likely to be a specific one, so they end up functionally being the regional variant of that federal party.

A situation like germany's conservative parties, i forget the names, where the bavarian party is different in name, but functions as the local version of the national party is possible.
 
Well, the Electoral College kills most chances of it to happen on a Presidential level, as Dathi says. You would require a voting bloc as monolithic and radical(ly reactionary) as the South to make a difference. A leftist variant probably couldn't happen, as it won't have enough regional traction.

I was thinking of the Vermont Progressives too, though they would become DFLized very quickly. Progressives VS Democrats could also happen, the Republicans of Vermont becoming absorbed by the latter, but that would leave poor Sanders rather alone in the House or Senate, since he probably wouldn't caucus with the Democrats he fights.
 
Well, the Electoral College kills most chances of it to happen on a Presidential level, as Dathi says. You would require a voting bloc as monolithic and radical(ly reactionary) as the South to make a difference. A leftist variant probably couldn't happen, as it won't have enough regional traction.

I was thinking of the Vermont Progressives too, though they would become DFLized very quickly. Progressives VS Democrats could also happen, the Republicans of Vermont becoming absorbed by the latter, but that would leave poor Sanders rather alone in the House or Senate, since he probably wouldn't caucus with the Democrats he fights.

The Progressives already do that with the Democrats in some regions of Vermont.
 
The two most successful post-war Presidential runs came from Dixecrat candidates, it's logical that it would come from there. maybe prevent the Republicans southern strategy indefinitely, American becomes something of a dominant party state for the Democrats with the south resisting with it's own permanent regionalist party.
 
The biggest problem is the us fttp presidential system.
Is the current system actually written into the Constitution, or would it be possible to change any of it without an amendment?

And could the various third parties work together enough to change it?
 
Is the current system actually written into the Constitution, or would it be possible to change any of it without an amendment?

And could the various third parties work together enough to change it?

You can change the voting system, but the Electoral College will still happen, and PR would take an amendment.
 
Top