Alternate Electoral Maps II
- Thread starter Aaaaasima
- Start date
- Status
MoralisticCommunist
Banned
Thanks for taking such an interest in my series! To be honest I have yet to formulate what the sides will be in WWII, let alone WWIII, besides the general fact that WWIII serves as a World War II analog in this timeline, setting the stage for a three way cold war between the West vaguely under America, the Communists vaguely under the USSR, and the Asians vaguely under China. Also I'm considering the possibility of having France be the main antagonist in all three world wars, but that's still up in the air. Perhaps in the future I will flesh out the timeline more and make some maps of the three world wars, but for now my focus is simply on formulating the politics of each individual US state.
1976 if early polls had been right. Carter wins the popular vote about 61-36 and wins every state except for Utah. Despite Ford's horrendous loss, he manages to win more counties than McGovern. Carter cracks 80% in Arkansas and in his home state of Georgia, and wins the rest of the Southern states with between 65% and 79% of the vote. Carter's closest wins are Idaho, Wyoming, Alaska, Nebraska, Arizona, and Colorado. Ford wins Utah by about 2%.
Sounds like shades of 1984 , your time line is almost dystopian when you get down to it or at lest it would be in most places for somone like my self as a queer left leaning academic.
QUOTE="MoralisticCommunist, post: 15619765, member: 90266"]Thanks for taking such an interest in my series! To be honest I have yet to formulate what the sides will be in WWII, let alone WWIII, besides the general fact that WWIII serves as a World War II analog in this timeline, setting the stage for a three way cold war between the West vaguely under America, the Communists vaguely under the USSR, and the Asians vaguely under China. Also I'm considering the possibility of having France be the main antagonist in all three world wars, but that's still up in the air. Perhaps in the future I will flesh out the timeline more and make some maps of the three world wars, but for now my focus is simply on formulating the politics of each individual US state.[/QUOTE]
QUOTE="MoralisticCommunist, post: 15619765, member: 90266"]Thanks for taking such an interest in my series! To be honest I have yet to formulate what the sides will be in WWII, let alone WWIII, besides the general fact that WWIII serves as a World War II analog in this timeline, setting the stage for a three way cold war between the West vaguely under America, the Communists vaguely under the USSR, and the Asians vaguely under China. Also I'm considering the possibility of having France be the main antagonist in all three world wars, but that's still up in the air. Perhaps in the future I will flesh out the timeline more and make some maps of the three world wars, but for now my focus is simply on formulating the politics of each individual US state.[/QUOTE]
The situation in New England made me go check the OTL presidential elections. There have been only two elections where Massachusetts and Connecticut voted for the same candidate and Rhode Island voted for a different one: 1816 and 1980
Californian Populist (running mate from Rhode Island)
New York Conservative (running mate from Hawaii/Minnesota and close ties to the other)
Kentucky Libertarian (running mate from Massachusetts)
That might get you most of the states (but there's a few it doesn't explain). The results for that would be more like:
I can't imagine you can get much closer than that.
Merkel-slide
Popular vote
CDU 48%
SDP 20%
Greens 12%
FDP 9%
DL 8%
AfD 6%
E C
Merkel 59/69 Schulz 10/69
35+ needed to win
EV votes based on German upper chamber of parliament.
A Humphrey landslide in '68. Despite winning 442 electoral votes, I don't think Humphrey wins a majority of counties (largely because of Wallace). Wallace still holds on to Mississippi and Alabama quite easily, while Nixon does well out west and in the plains states. Humphrey does well everywhere else.
MoralisticCommunist
Banned
Sure! The link is right here: https://moralisticcommunist.deviantart.com/art/The-Seventh-Party-System-USA-map-700335176 And in the future I will remember to link that map to my Seventh Party System posts for more easy access.
Alex Richards
Donor
Another cross-post from Tippecanoe and Wallace too (see sig) featuring not that Wallace but another Wallace.
aka: what happens when you've got one man who nobody wants in office, but nobody in any of three significant parties can agree on who they'd prefer instead...
aka: what happens when you've got one man who nobody wants in office, but nobody in any of three significant parties can agree on who they'd prefer instead...
Alex Richards
Donor
No but it is his Progressive Party there, and he gets the title role.
That's George.
Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)/ Representative John Delaney (D-MD)
Governor Charlie Baker (I-MA)/ Governor Larry Hogan (I-MD)
President Donald Trump (R-NY)/ Vice President Mike Pence (R-IN)
Closest States:
Maryland I + 2.0%
Massachusetts I + 2.3%
Montana D+ 4.2%
First electoral map post so I know this is really unrealistic but oh well
As a Marylander, I just can't see it going Independent even with this combination. Hogan won the 2014 Gubernatorial election 51-47-1.5(L) and even with him being moderately popular, I can't see Trump below 20% in Maryland and they are all coming from people who voted for Hogan in 2014. I also can't see Warren/Delaney getting less than 40%. So I'm curious as to how you see the Maryland Presidential election going. (Delaney is unlikely to have any home state advantage, (I live in his district), so replacing him on the ticket with "Moderately liberal Turnip from Guam" isn't likely to change the Maryland vote.)
Yeah I agree I just wanted to see in what possible way an independent could win Maryland so I figured I would take two of the most moderate Republicans and stack them against a hit or miss Democrat. Like I said Ik this would never happen but It would be kinda interesting if something like that did happen. I also figured that since Delaney is the only one to officially announce his candidacy I might as well put him because let's be real here he doesn't have a chance. Also Maryland bro
Maryland and Moderate Democrat don't go together.Yeah I agree I just wanted to see in what possible way an independent could win Maryland so I figured I would take two of the most moderate Republicans and stack them against a hit or miss Democrat. Like I said Ik this would never happen but It would be kinda interesting if something like that did happen. I also figured that since Delaney is the only one to officially announce his candidacy I might as well put him because let's be real here he doesn't have a chance. Also Maryland bro
If that ws your goal then having the Democratic VP candidate be from Maryland was a mistake, on top of every other consideration.Yeah I agree I just wanted to see in what possible way an independent could win Maryland so I figured I would take two of the most moderate Republicans and stack them against a hit or miss Democrat. Like I said Ik this would never happen but It would be kinda interesting if something like that did happen. I also figured that since Delaney is the only one to officially announce his candidacy I might as well put him because let's be real here he doesn't have a chance. Also Maryland bro
- Status