Alternate Electoral Maps III

use election new.png

2037 United States of Europe election in my FHTL Ĉio Sub la Steloj. Not entirely finished (also excuse the hard-to-see electoral votes in the black boxes). The 8 (yup, 8) major parties are:
Liberals: Center-left, broad-tent party;
Christian Right: Mid- to far-right, anti-immigration, anti-Semitic, religious; popular in more Christian parts of USE
Federalists: Centre, weak national government, more autonomy for states; popular among minorities
Greens: Mid-left, pro-environment
Islamic People's: Mid-right, Islamic nationalism
Conservatives: Center-right, broad-tent party
Integralists: Centre, strong national government, support (jobs, welfare) to poorer regions of the USE
Socialists: Mid- to far-left, anti-big business, pro-welfare; popular in large cities
Total: Lib - 242 CR - 79 Fed - 28 Gre - 76 IP - 17 Con - 277 Int - 23 Soc - 39 Other - 10 (out of 791)
 

eadmund

Banned
Hmm. Maybe I just don't think it's realistic that the parties are divided exactly on class lines and every single other issue is entirely glossed over. With parties that have these ideologies I agree that you would see a stronger force from the rural left and more urban liberals breaking for the LibCons, but that just overgeneralises how people vote.
Although I don't want to get into current politics, I need examples so here goes. You have the district of Ilhan Omar, one of the most recognisable figures in the OTL Democratic Party's left-wing and an anathema to the broad right of US politics being won by a LibCon member, but the district of rep-elect Lauren Boebert (who is anything but that) being won over by the DFL. There are other factors at play besides how much money someone has. IMO something that looks like the results of the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections by congressional district (but with more Dem support in West Virginia and the Rust Belt) or the results of the 1984 or 1988 elections by district (but with generally more Democratic support across the board) would be more accurate. I like the idea of reorienting the parties, I just don't think you can only divide it along class lines.
You're right about Ilhan Omar's district, its average household income is significantly below the Minnesota average and that should have put it in the Labor column. That was an oversight on my part. I've updated the map and results to reflect that and changes to Wisconsin's 8th and both of Hawaii's districts. I did notice that about Colorado's 3rd and actually found it ironically fitting given that, as I've said above, the DFL is a party of the paranoid style.

On overgeneralising how people vote, I did pick Bonior for a reason.
 
2017 CSA Attorney General Election:

Democratic Nominee: Senator. Jeff Sessions (AL) 46.4%
People’s Nominee: State Attorney General. Roy Cooper (NC) 53.6%

1606602873449.png
 
Last edited:
2011 CSA Attorney General Election

Democratic: District Attorney. Susana Martinez (NM) 57.8%
People’s: Governor. Mike Beebe (AR) 42.2%

1606643364718.png
 
Just a thought experiment I've been working at, which basically is a system where Colombia has legislative constituencies (the idea is a MMP voting method, although it is not necessarily an MMP system). The results of the 2018 elections in Colombia:

  • Social and Political Front (democratic socialism, social democracy, indigenous and Afro-Colombian interests): 47 seats (12%)
  • Green Alliance (green politics, social liberalism): 40 seats (11%)
  • Radical Party (social democracy, liberalism, labour rights): 113 seats (30%)
  • Liberal Party - Golgotha (classical liberalism, libertarianism): 23 seats (6%)
  • Movement of National Salvation (national conservatism, economic liberalism): 154 seats (41%)
  • Two minor parties with political representation:
    • Sons of the Soil (creole interests, San Andrés separatism): 2 seats
    • Antioquian National Union (Antioquian autonomy, right-wing populism): 1 seat
The prime minister would probably be the Radical Humberto de la Calle, in coalition with the Greens and with parliamentary support from the Social and Political Front.
 
Here's a couple of French presidential election maps based on 2017 (not including overseas departments because I can't figure out how to add them to my basemap). Effectively, the idea was to see how the two most successful left- and right-wing candidates fare against each other if you take the centrist Macron and the far-right Le Pen out of the equation.

The first one is François Fillon (LR) vs Jean-Luc Mélenchon (FI) if they advanced to the second round and won the exact same margins against each other as in they did in the first round in OTL. Fillon took 20,01% of the vote to 19,58% for Mélenchon, so if he won by an 0,43% margin in a second round contest, he would beat Mélenchon with 50,22% to 49,78%.

1608133049937.png


The second map is Fillon and Jean Lassalle's votes combined vs Mélenchon and Benolt Hamon's votes combined, so ramming together the republican and socialist candidates. Since Hamon did better than Lassalle, this gives Mélenchon an edge of 25,94% to 21,42% (or a 4,52% margin of victory), with Mélenchon taking 52,26% and Fillon 47,74% if it were a second round contest.

1608137243297.png


Obviously a straight election between these parties probably wouldn't really have turned out this way, but I found it interesting to imagine based on the data.
 
Last edited:
Here's a couple of French presidential election maps based on 2017 (not including overseas departments because I can't figure out how to add them to my basemap). Effectively, the idea was to see how the two most successful left- and right-wing candidates fare against each other if you take the centrist Macron and the far-right Le Pen out of the equation.

The first one is François Fillon (LR) vs Jean-Luc Mélenchon (FI) if they advanced to the second round and won the exact same margins against each other as in they did in the first round in OTL. Fillon took 20,01% of the vote to 19,58% for Mélenchon, so if he won by an 0,43% margin in a second round contest, he would beat Mélenchon with 50,22% to 49,78%.

View attachment 608337

The second map is Fillon and Jean Lassalle's votes combined vs Mélenchon and Benolt Hamon's votes combined, so ramming together the republican and socialist candidates. Since Hamon did better than Lassalle, this gives Mélenchon an edge of 25,94% to 21,42% (or a 4,52% margin of victory), with Mélenchon taking 52,26% and Fillon 47,74% if it were a second round contest.

View attachment 608354

Obviously a straight election between these parties probably wouldn't really have turned out this way, but I found it interesting to imagine based on the data.
Data suggests Mélenchon would’ve beaten Fillon by around 57%: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2017_French_presidential_election#Mélenchon–Fillon
 
Data suggests Mélenchon would’ve beaten Fillon by around 57%: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2017_French_presidential_election#Mélenchon–Fillon
That wouldn't surprise me, but this is based on the raw votes from the first round carrying over to the second instead of the polls.
 
Not AH, but I made a 2000-2016 swing map for Massachusetts. I started this in October but just got around to finishing it today. It's an interesting comparison because the margin in each election was nearly identical (D+27.3 in 2000, D+27.2 in 2016) but a lot of dramatic swings occurred at a local level. Working class and many rural areas saw the hardest shifts to the right- Acushnet, on the Southcoast, swung 53% to the right. The strongest swings to the left were in places in western MA with lots of Nader 2000 voters and wealthy suburbs of Boston- Dover, southwest of Boston, swung 41% to the left.
1608244084849.png
 
Larger versions of the maps in the infoboxes in this post

Maps of the 1966 midterm elections after a bigger 1964 landslide

View attachment 608938
(The House is D-R 287-148, with the GOP getting a net gain of 85 seats)
View attachment 608939
(The Senate is D-R 72-28, with the GOP getting a net gain of 1)
View attachment 608940
(The Governorships are D-R 31-19, with the GOP getting a net gain of 7 seats)
Really liking this series. Can't wait for a 1968 election.
 
Behold, another American Federation TL election.

1608405684897.png

The Republic of Minnesota has always been known, despite its rural character, as one of the Federation's more radical states. In its early days, the Liberal Party government it elected in the first organized election to its General Assembly (the lower house of its legislature), led by Alexander Ramsey, immediately abolished slavery and made any enforcement of it a criminal offence. He also instituted civil rights protections for freedmen like suffrage and an early form of discrimination laws. Despite this, Ramsey also represents the strange contradiction of Minnesotan politics in that he was also vehemently opposed to Native Americans remaining in the country and only went so far in instituting any kind of social welfare.

For the next few decades, the Liberals and their main rival party, the Conservatives, would interchange in power, but with the First World War, the country's nature started to change significantly. While leftist groups had had an undercurrent in the early years of the 20th century, the First World War galvanized their support, particularly among ethnic Germans and Scandinavians in Minnesota disillusioned by the Liberals' and Conservatives' alacrity to intervene in Europe. Initially it seemed the Communists might emerge as a major force, but the intervention of the young, charismatic Floyd B. Olson in the small Farmer-Labor Party or FLP (named to appeal to both rural and urban marginalized workers) led to that party's meteoric rise over the decade.

After grand coalitions between the Liberals and Conservatives had kept the FLP out, in late 1929, just as the Great Depression was starting to hit home, the Liberals broke with the Conservatives and brought down the government, causing an election in which the FLP won a plurality easily. Under its governance over the next twenty years, the modern Minnesotan welfare state, universal healthcare system and collective bargaining industrial relations system came into being, and have remained so- despite the occasional tampering of governments- ever since. While Floyd would not live to see all of it- he died in 1936 while still in office- his party would become dominant in Minnesota for years to come, and in every election since 1929 it has won pluralities of both the popular vote and of the General Assembly's seats.

It is not exactly accurate to describe Minnesota as having a dominant party system, of course. For one thing, since the 1930s it has used PR, with 10 constituencies of (currently) 15 members each being elected to the General Assembly each election cycle, and only during three landslide victories- under Olson in 1933, Hubert Humphrey in 1965 and Paul Wellstone in 2000- have the FLP won an absolute majority of seats.

Many would argue that the party system as we know it did not really start until the 1969 election, though. That was the year in which the FLP under Humphrey lost power for the first time in 20 years in rather striking circumstances, as the colorful Eugene McCarthy, the new Liberal leader, managed to sow discontent among the FLP's left and energize the right to vote a coalition headed by his party in. It succeeded, but McCarthy's gradual shift from an anti-establishment populist to an anti-establishment right-winger badly damaged the Liberals' image in the long run. After a brief FLP administration headed by the rather humdrum Walter Mondale, the recently-rebranded Conservatives, now known as the Moderates akin to the Swedish party of the same name and led by Rudy Boschwitz, took power and spent the 80s 'streamlining' Minnesota's economy.

Unlike most right-wing governments of the 80s, though, Boschwitz did not do much to roll back the welfare state or weaken unions in Minnesota, knowing they were much too popular with the country's citizens to even try, and simply focused on reducing the country's deficit. Furthermore, he was pressured by the Minnesotan left not to do so, and private initiatives by right-wing Moderates failed. When the right-wing Jon Grunseth succeeded Boschwitz as leader and PM and tried to make cuts to welfare, he immediately made himself Minnesota's public enemy number one, and the FLP's Rudy Perpich looked certain to take power.

The 1993 election, however, upturned the status quo of Minnesotan politics for good, as former wrestler Jesse Ventura entered the political arena by creating the Independence Party. Ventura, who has led the party on and off for the 23 years since (usually coming back whenever an election or serious policy issue emerges), established the Independence Party as 'a party based around not ideological commitments, but practicality and the common good of Minnesota'. It worked a charm to snatch voters from both the left and the right, and he successfully forced the humiliated Moderates and Liberals to support a coalition under his leadership.

After winning re-election in 1997, Ventura's star declined and the affable new FLP leader Paul Wellstone successfully ousted him, holding power for 8 years until being replaced by Moderate Norm Coleman as the Great Recession hit Minnesota. Coleman soon ran into the same problems as Grunseth, though, and in the 2011 election he was ousted as PM by former comedian Al Franken, with the FLP ruling Minnesota ever since.

Despite this, the 2010s have been a difficult decade for the FLP. After falling to just 29.6% of the vote in 2008, their lowest in nearly a century, the party's polling numbers have hovered around that level ever since and the parliamentary arithmetic has proved difficult for them to avoid capitulating to smaller left-wing and centrist parties. Under Franken, this was minimized as his personal popularity was sizeable and allowed him to win the 2015 election with a sizeable plurality, and a speech he gave in late 2016 denouncing the rise of the far right across the world briefly made him a leftist hero of sorts.

This reputation was torpedoed the following year when allegations of sexual harassment by Franken came out, and he resigned in disgrace. For a while, this, as well as the tokenistic-looking election of the more moderate Tina Smith (who had grown up in New Mexico) to replace him and become Minnesota's first female PM, made it look like the FLP were sure to lose the next election. Unfortunately for the Moderates, they made a terrible decision in response, picking Michelle Bachmann to run against Smith for the next election. Bachmann was a Moderate in the Grunseth and Coleman mould, something which was a poor fit for the public mood, many of whom sympathized with Franken's sentiments (though not Franken himself) and were concerned a Bachmann-led government might embrace far-right populism.

Consequently, Smith called a snap election in May of 2018 which the FLP won a third term in, though with just 46 seats (29 short of a majority), the arithmetic was to be tight. However, in keeping with his nebulous politics, Ventura decided to coalesce with Smith, and with the smaller parties like the Greens, feminist Women of Minnesota (WoM) and LGBTQ activist Rainbow Party generally inclined towards a leftist government, Smith was back in office.

Her first full term, as with those of most world leaders in recent times, has been eventful and difficult, particularly in the past year. Initially Minnesota seemed to be weathering the COVID-19 pandemic fairly well thanks to its well-funded healthcare system and generous use of furloughs, but in May, an entirely different crisis struck the country when an unarmed black man, George Floyd, was murdered in an act of police brutality.

The shockwaves this sent through Minnesotans, who generally considered themselves one of the most progressive countries in the Federation, are hard to overstate, and despite Smith immediately condemning the officers involved and calling for reform, many on the left have felt this would not go far enough. Public sympathy for them and the protestors against police brutality intensified when protests against the Minneapolis PD ended with riots instigated by more acts of brutality by police officers.

In response to this, the FLP, under pressure from the Greens, instigated a new policy of defunding police departments across the country, as well as enacting a zero tolerance policy on any officers who use violent means against protestors. This seems to have had a beneficial impact for now, but the Communists have been growing in strength in the polls during the parliament, and their stance that the police force should be abolished altogether has gained some traction amongst the Minnesotan left.

While the FLP has been pushed to the left, the Moderates are badly divided, with some supporting measures to crack down on racism while the party's right has resolutely defended the police and argued the protests are 'stopping them doing their jobs'. Despite facing criticism from within his party, the Moderate leader, Mike McFadden, has managed to more tactfully critique the government and the left's strategies, accusing Smith of hypocrisy for weakening police unions in the wake of the crisis (as mentioned, collective bargaining and the right to a union are important values in Minnesota).

With an election due by May 2022, it remains unclear which way the wind will blow. Smith and her supporters in the government are hoping the measures taken so far will quell the police's discontent; McFadden will be hoping for his party to hold together and secure the crucial support of the Liberals and Independence they need to form a government; and Smith's opponents on the left will hope to gain the support required to pressure her into police abolition, which some have even compared to Minnesota's 19th century abolition of slavery for its significance for civil rights. In any case, even though the FLP will most probably emerge as the biggest party as it has for every election in nearly a century, the future of Minnesotan politics has almost never looked so uncertain.
 
Last edited:
Minnesotans, who generally considered themselves one of the most progressive countries in the Federation
So this is part of a TL where I assume the US is analogous to the Russian Federation, wherein the states are relatively independent of each other but all within the umbrella of the federal government? Or is the federation more so an EU analogue?
 
So this is part of a TL where I assume the US is analogous to the Russian Federation, wherein the states are relatively independent of each other but all within the umbrella of the federal government? Or is the federation more so an EU analogue?
I originally thought of it as an EU analogue, but thinking about it it probably works better as a Russian analogue since the federal government is a bit stronger than the federalism in the EU. The states do have independent lawmaking powers with relatively limited restrictions from the federal government though (so it's possible for a nation of the AF to withdraw from it, though none of them actually have).
 
One of the solidest states of the Solid South, a bellwether of the Upper South, and a rock-ribbed Republican Western stronghold, West Texas has had many political identities over the past century. Joe Biden's 55 point loss is a slight improvement from Hillary Clinton, but it is still clear that the old Democratic dominance in West Texas is long gone.
West Texas Presidential Elections.png
 
Found myself messing around with President Infinity. I added the party's of the FNM-verse along with their respective ideologies, created "stock" candidates whose ideology mimicked the party-line, then pit them against each other in an OTL US. I did adjust the base percentages to mimic the fact that in FNM, the third party is relatively popular and the fourth party has pockets of significant support - otherwise the GOP stand in and the DEM stand in would dominate.

Anyway, this was the result of a modern election using FNM parties but OTL states:

2018 FNM PI Test.png
 


Johnny Cash vs George H.W Bush in 1988. I imagined here that Cash ran a pretty similar campaign to Jimmy Carter’a 1976 campaign, running as a socially moderate, fiscally populist/progressive evangelical Christian good ol’ boy. as for Cash’s prior experience that leads to him being the Democratic nominee, let’s say he wins the TN senate seat that Al Gore won in 1984 irl.
 
Alternate History (Gore Victory) Electoral Maps:

2000

Al Gore - 342 Electoral Votes
George W Bush - 195 Electoral Votes


Screenshot_20201225-010410_Chrome.jpg


Flips from 1996:
Arkansas
Arizona
Kentucky
Louisiana

West Virginia


2004

Bill Frist - 276 Electoral Votes
Al Gore - 261 Electoral Votes

Screenshot_20201225-004724_Chrome.jpg


Flips from 2000:
Florida
Iowa
Missouri
Ohio

Tennessee


2008

Bill Frist - 280 Electoral Votes
Blanche Lincoln - 258 Electoral Votes


Screenshot_20201225-010151_Chrome.jpg


Flips from 2004:
New Hampshire


2012

Tim Hutchinson - 347 Electoral Votes
Hillary Clinton - 191 Electoral Votes

Screenshot_20201225-011130_Chrome.jpg


Flips from 2008:
Michigan
Minnesota
Nevada
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin



2016

Elizabeth Warren - 333 Electoral Votes
Tim Hutchinson - 205 Electoral Votes


Screenshot_20201225-012124_Chrome.jpg


Flips from 2012:
Arizona

Colorado
Florida

Maine's 2nd District
Michigan
Minnesota
Nevada
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Pennsylvania
Virginia

Wisconsin


2020

Elizabeth Warren - 289 Electoral Votes
Mike Pence - 249 Electoral Votes

Screenshot_20201225-013051_Chrome.jpg


Flips from 2016:
Florida
North Carolina
 
Top