Alternate Electoral Maps II

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd flip several states here.

I think Sanders wins South Carolina, Utah, Kansas, South Dakota, and Kentucky while he loses Nebraska, Arkansas, North Dakota, and maybe Alaska.

Utah should go blue if the Republican is doing that bad nationally, keep in mind even Mitt Romney barely cleared 60% there in this year's Senate race. I think North Dakota and Nebraska are just too red for them go Democratic at the Presidential level, while South Dakota almost always votes to the left of ND these days. I couldn't see Kentucky and West Virginia going in opposite directions considering Sanders is winning WV here and it's much more Republican than Kentucky. Arkansas just isnti going Democratic for President anytime in the near future, under any circumstances. it would be one of the very last states to go Democratic in a massive national landslide.
Electoral College 2020 (S T B).png

So something like this? I kept ND blue because of story reasons and heavy farmer and Native Support for Sanders in the plains states, but otherwise followed your advice, mostly.
 
The United States Election of 1796 (4 A.E.)
5 years after Pennsylvania's translocation to the New World, America has paved its way into a prosperous future. George Washington has overseen the nation be whisked away, separated from all the other states except for the one he resided in. Then, in turn, be made into a self-sufficient country that's set its mind to tame the wilderness around it. With the introduction of the West Point Academy, Washington would lead the implementation of the Constitution from the institution's more advanced nation. Knowing that the new Constitution would allow him to still reside and advise congress if he wanted to, George Washington would decide that 2 terms would be enough for him and a new leader would need to hold the reigns to serve their country well. Washington would end his last year and term in office creating friendly ties to the newly translocated Iroquois Confederacy and cementing himself as one of the greats.

The question now would be who will fill the void of greatness that Washington has left behind?

Formed early on in U.S. history, the Federalist Party dominated U.S. politics as the single state that was separated by the event was already dominated by northern pro-administrationalists. With Robert Morris Jr. being an incredible Vice-President during Washington's presidency, he would easily be granted the nomination for the presidency in the 1796 election. The problem though would who would be his running mate; The "West Point" Constitution would state the the Vice President would be voted on separate from the presidency and introduced with the presidential nominee as a "ticket" for the general election. The Federalists would ultimately decide on Representative George Cabot who, while originally from Massachusetts, stayed in the government to oversee the the predicament they were in and became a champion politician in congress. His leadership, easily solidified the ticket to be a sure winner in the election.

The true opposition to the Federalists came from the Landless Party, consisting of previous anti-federalists and southern politicians who have lost their states to the event yet still stayed in congress. They've spent the last couple years without any real leadership as they were mostly built around being an opposition party. However, with the introduction of West Point, new southerners have started to become interested in the Party as they had their own qualms with the successors of the Federalists in their part of time. At this point, the party itself would center around Albert Gallatin. Gallatin was a man with strong opposition to the economics of the Federalists, yet wasn't heavily heard before the Event. With new support, he would be the nominated as the best man to go against Morris. Thomas Sumter would win the Vice-Presidency nomination on the Landless Party after a contentious primary.

As November 4th became closer, the Federalists knew they would win the presidency. The only concern was how well the Landless Party would do.

Election Results:
US 1796 (4 A.E.) Election.png

Vice President Robert Morris Jr. (F-PA) | Representative George Cabot (F-PA): 17 EV of 22; 56.6% of PV
Representative Albert Gallatin (L-PA) | State Representative Thomas Sumter (L-PA): 5 EV of 22; 43.1% of PV

And apparently, their concerns were warranted.

Gallatin would be a considerably harder opponent to beat than Morris had thought. With added support from West Point up-timers and his advisory to make greater campaigns than those before him Gallatin would be the fan favorite of being the new change that the nation needed after Washington's resignation. In response Morris started to put passion into his campaigns that would lead him into the Presidency.

Meanwhile in the House of Representatives the Landless Party movement would explode by Gallatin's successes. Previous anti-federalists, who were beat out by the Federalist stranglehold in the last two elections, carved a whole new position in congress adding 6 seats to their measly three in the 3rd Congress.

Even though the Federalists have kept their majority, the Landless gains have started to become a real issue that could bite them in the future. Only time will tell as the Congress of the nation moves into the 4th Congress.

The 4th Congress:

1796 Congress.png

Federalist Party: 13 seats of 22 total
Landless Party: 9 seats of 22 total​
 
Google Trends data from the last 30 days
genusmap.php

Switch - 346 EV
Xbox - 192 EV
PlayStation - 0 EV

(The inner Nintendo nerd in me is giddy :))
 
Last edited:
1916
genusmap.php

Fmr. Justice Charles Evan Hughes (R-NY), Fmr. Vice President Charles W. Fairbanks (D-IN) - 268 EV
President Woodrow Wilson (R-NJ), Vice President Thomas R. Marshall - 263 EV
 
I've continued to go back and tinker with the New Rutherford Scenario. This is a revised version of the congressional districts map:

1024
And at this link (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kb9p2PPu7PI4t0d9G9k3JAsmOSEDQmXRWFtf37nxIl4/edit?usp=sharing), I've compiled all of the results by congressional district into a table, which was derived from Daily Kos's Data Set and modified by me for this project. The table includes a list of all 435 congressional districts, the incumbents as of 2017 in the New Rutherford Scenario, and the percentages earned by Rutherford and Leach in each district. It is also color-coded. All districts that are coded light blue are districts carried by both President Rutherford and a Democratic Representative; those coded dark blue are carried by Rutherford and a Republican Representative. Light red districts are districts carried by Leach and a Democratic Representative; dark red are districts carried by both Leach and a Republican Representative.

There are 283 districts carried by Rutherford and a Democratic Representative; 114 districts carried by Rutherford and a Republican Representative; 35 districts carried by Leach and a Republican Representative; and 3 districts carried by Leach and a Democratic Representative.​

I would deeply appreciate any comments or observations about the results as they are compiled in the tables. Are there any results that intrigue you? Please let me know if there are. The table is by no means final, as I still have to make sure that I have exact determinations for all of Leach's percentages.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top