This would be a weird time for Canadian politics!
Aka every other Canadian election.
This would be a weird time for Canadian politics!
British Columbia politics features what has to be one of the most insane episodes in political history: in 1933, wracked by unpopularity, indecision and infighting, the incumbent Conservative Party decided to not contest the upcoming election. Yes. Instead, the party simply left everything up to the individual riding associations. MLAs that supported the premier banded together as the Unionist party; MLAs who instead supported a former premier ran under the "Non-Partisan Independent Group" banner; and others simply ran as independents (or "Independent Conservatives"). Unsurprisingly, this strategy was a resounding failure, and the Conservatives went from 35 seats to 5.
Then I wondered: what if the federal party did this, too? After all, they faced all the same issues as the provincial counterpart, and even had a minor split in the Reconstruction Party!
So I whipped this up:
1: Results compared to those of Conservative Party in previous election.
Ultimately, the seat count is not massively different from OTL; the Conservatives lost 19 seats, but the bulk of those went to the Liberals, so the standings remain fairly similar. But boy oh boy does it look different: Social Credit finds itself in opposition; Reconstruction manages to gain a small toehold and not just a label for Stevens; and opposition is positively fragmented.
This would be a weird time for Canadian politics!
True enoughAka every other Canadian election.
I had thought so too, but after going through their results riding-by-riding, they were little more than a blip. Reconstruction candidates rarely broke into double digits, and those who did still routinely lagged 10-20pp behind the Liberal or Conservative candidate. The Conservative brand is weaker here, and it is benefiting Reconstruction somewhat, but they're just not in the position to leap the reward: they're splitters, they're more radical than the Conservatives, and they just don't have the organisation (or funds) to compete.Looks good, though I think Reconstruction would probably do better.
If Utah goes Trump, Trump has won the election. Also none of the boxes have change Obama as the previous President, nor taken redistricting into account.Two infoboxes I came up with real quick:
Well, you took Hillary's goal of being Obama's third term to a new level.
Actually, redistricting wouldn't take effect until the 2022 midterms, and the new Electoral College wouldn't be used until 2024.nor taken redistricting into account.
If Utah goes Trump, Trump has won the election. Also none of the boxes have change Obama as the previous President, nor taken redistricting into account.
I've always wondered, how do I make a neat-looking Wikipedia-style election map?(snip)
The United States presidential election of 2052...
The United States presidential election of 2052 was the 67th quadrennial election presidential election. Senator Lily Vang of California, the Democratic Party nominee, and her running mate Senator Michael Burson of Texas, defeated Republican Party nominee and incumbent Vice President Ethan Webster and his running mate, Governor Isabella Gutierrez of New Mexico.
I've always wondered, how do I make a neat-looking Wikipedia-style election map?
Nicely done, and I love the electoral map.
Also, New York can't get a break with its EV, can it?
Thanks! I'll be redoing my 1980-2020 infoboxes soon.Mm, download Inkscape and then download an electoral map in .SVG map from Wikipedia.
And now, the most Ridiculous UN Security Council Resolution ever Made.
The Security Council,
Expressing its continuing concern with the grave situation in the Middle East,
Noting that Israel's record and actions establish conclusively that it is not a peace-loving Member State and that it has not carried out its obligations under the Charter of the United Nations,
Noting further that Israel has consistently refused, in violation of Article 25 of the Charter, to withdraw from participating in the 1981 Eurovision Song Contest and every such Song Contest held thereafter, thus failing to carry out its obligations under the Charter,
Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, to which the participation of Israel in the Eurovision Song Contest is an obstacle;
Rejects Israel's Victories in the 1978, 1979 and 1998 Contests, which infringe upon the sovereign rights of the residents of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and of the occupied Syrian Golan;
Strongly condemns the continued Participation of Israel in the Eurovision Song Contest;
Condemns Italy and the United Kingdom for expressing full support for Israel in the second Semi-Final of the most recent Contest;
Calls for renewed and urgent efforts by the parties and the international community to achieve a comprehensive peace based on the vision of a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace with secure and recognized borders, as envisaged in Security Council resolution 1850 (2008), and recalls also the importance of the Arab Peace Initiative.
>Florida being more politically powerful than New York
feelsgood.png
Well, it is "The most Ridiculous UN Security Council Resolution ever Made"...A bit silly, however I would like to see more Eurovision wikiboxes......