Both were the two closest states in the South OTL. Florida went to Johnson by 2.3% and Virgina by 7.36% They also both went to Nixon in 1960.
Alternate Wikipedia Infoboxes IV (Do not post Current Politics Here)
- Thread starter Glide08
- Start date
- Status
Two national flag referendums were held by the British government in May and July 2017 and resulted in the electorate endorsing the continued use of the Union Flag.
The first referendum to determine the preferred alternative flag took place on Thursday 4th May 2017, in line with the local elections, and asked, "If the flag of the United Kingdom changes, which flag would you prefer?"
The second referendum took place on Thursday 8th June 2017 and asked voters to choose between the selected alternative (the White Oak Flag) and the existing Union Flag. The final decision was to keep the current flag.
Reception of the process was critical, with no great enthusiasm shown among the public.
The United Kingdom has a history of debate about whether the national flag should be changed. For several decades, alternative designs have been proposed, with varying degrees of support. There is no consensus among proponents of changing the flag as to which design should replace the flag. Debate has often focused on the lack of national symbolism for Wales on the design, which incorporates the Crosses of St George (for England), St Andrew (for Scotland), and St Patrick (for Northern Ireland).
In January 2014, Prime Minister Owen Paterson first proposed the idea floated the idea of a referendum on a new flag ahead of that year's general election. The proposal was met with a mixed response. During the general election campaign, Paterson confirmed that a nationwide referendum on whether or not to change flag design, if the Unionist Party was re-elected for a third parliamentary term. Following the Unionist re-election the details of the referendum were announced.
Shortly after the general election, party leaders were invited to a cross-party, 12 person Flag Select Committee comprising of Members of Parliament from all major political parties. The purpose of the cross-party Committee was to review the proposed legislation allowing for the referendums to take place, and to nominate candidates for a Flag Consideration Panel by mid-February 2015. Members included Will Auckland (Chancellor of the Exchequer), Priti Patel (representing the Unionists), Tom Watson (representing Labour), Jonathan Bartley (representing the Green Party of England and Scotland), Liz Saville Roberts (representing Plaid Cymru), Jeremy Browne (representing Taxpayers Alliance) and Frank Field (representing Progress). UKFirst refused to participate.
Following the passage of the Flag (Referendum Act) 2015, the Committee appointed a National Flag Commission. The Commission was comprised of "respected British People" with representative age, regional, gender and ethnic demographics. Their purpose was to publicise the referendum process, seek flag submissions and suggestions from the public, and to decide on a final shortlist of four suitable options for the first referendum.
Chair
Chris Patten: Former Unionist MP, Minister, Governor of Hong Kong and current Chancellor of the University of Oxford
Deputy Chair
Bonnie Greer: Playwright and Author
Other Members
Peter Bazalgette: Television Executive
Lord Bilimoria: Businessman
Richard Dannatt: Former Chief of the General Staff
Jessica Ennis-Hill: Athlete
Clive Woodward: Former coach of the England Rugby Union Team
Maurice Saatchi: Co-Founder of Saatchi & Saatchi
Fiona Woolf: Former Lord Mayor of London
Rosina St James: Chair of the British Youth Council
Alan Langlands: Academic
Bobi Jones: Welsh language academic
The Commission was criticised for not having any professional vexillologists or designers as members.
As part of the public engagement process, flag designs and symbolism/value suggestions were solicited until 1st January 2017. which resulted in a total of 104,212 design suggestions. Despite low attendance at public meetings, The Commission noted strong online engagement with over 6,000,000 visits to the website and 15,000,000 engagements on social media.
The panel reported that feedback found the themes of freedom, history, equality, respect and family to be the most significant to British people. However it was later revealed that those themes were dwarfed by the amount of feedback critical of the flag change process. From the submitted design, found the most common colours were red, white, blue, black and green. The most common elements incorporated into the flag designs were the Oak Leaf, Lion, Celtic Knot and Cross of St George. The main themes incorporated into the designs were Welsh culture, nature and history.
After the initial shortlist of four was criticised for being "bland" and "uninspiring" a campaign spearheaded by actress and television presenter Joanna Lumley saw a fifth design, "Coal, Sea and Blood", designed by Thomas Heatherwick, make it onto the shortlist.
The initial referendum on Thursday 4th May 2017 saw both of Paul Smith's shortlisted designs come out on top, with the black and red version narrowly beating Owen Paterson's favoured blue and red style.
The second referendum, held five weeks later, resulted in the existing Union Flag being overwhelmingly retained.
Following the results, Paterson announced his intention to resign as Prime Minister for unrelated reasons. His successor, Will Auckland, has made no indications of wishing to revisit the subject.
The first referendum to determine the preferred alternative flag took place on Thursday 4th May 2017, in line with the local elections, and asked, "If the flag of the United Kingdom changes, which flag would you prefer?"
The second referendum took place on Thursday 8th June 2017 and asked voters to choose between the selected alternative (the White Oak Flag) and the existing Union Flag. The final decision was to keep the current flag.
Reception of the process was critical, with no great enthusiasm shown among the public.
The United Kingdom has a history of debate about whether the national flag should be changed. For several decades, alternative designs have been proposed, with varying degrees of support. There is no consensus among proponents of changing the flag as to which design should replace the flag. Debate has often focused on the lack of national symbolism for Wales on the design, which incorporates the Crosses of St George (for England), St Andrew (for Scotland), and St Patrick (for Northern Ireland).
In January 2014, Prime Minister Owen Paterson first proposed the idea floated the idea of a referendum on a new flag ahead of that year's general election. The proposal was met with a mixed response. During the general election campaign, Paterson confirmed that a nationwide referendum on whether or not to change flag design, if the Unionist Party was re-elected for a third parliamentary term. Following the Unionist re-election the details of the referendum were announced.
Shortly after the general election, party leaders were invited to a cross-party, 12 person Flag Select Committee comprising of Members of Parliament from all major political parties. The purpose of the cross-party Committee was to review the proposed legislation allowing for the referendums to take place, and to nominate candidates for a Flag Consideration Panel by mid-February 2015. Members included Will Auckland (Chancellor of the Exchequer), Priti Patel (representing the Unionists), Tom Watson (representing Labour), Jonathan Bartley (representing the Green Party of England and Scotland), Liz Saville Roberts (representing Plaid Cymru), Jeremy Browne (representing Taxpayers Alliance) and Frank Field (representing Progress). UKFirst refused to participate.
Following the passage of the Flag (Referendum Act) 2015, the Committee appointed a National Flag Commission. The Commission was comprised of "respected British People" with representative age, regional, gender and ethnic demographics. Their purpose was to publicise the referendum process, seek flag submissions and suggestions from the public, and to decide on a final shortlist of four suitable options for the first referendum.
Chair
Chris Patten: Former Unionist MP, Minister, Governor of Hong Kong and current Chancellor of the University of Oxford
Deputy Chair
Bonnie Greer: Playwright and Author
Other Members
Peter Bazalgette: Television Executive
Lord Bilimoria: Businessman
Richard Dannatt: Former Chief of the General Staff
Jessica Ennis-Hill: Athlete
Clive Woodward: Former coach of the England Rugby Union Team
Maurice Saatchi: Co-Founder of Saatchi & Saatchi
Fiona Woolf: Former Lord Mayor of London
Rosina St James: Chair of the British Youth Council
Alan Langlands: Academic
Bobi Jones: Welsh language academic
The Commission was criticised for not having any professional vexillologists or designers as members.
As part of the public engagement process, flag designs and symbolism/value suggestions were solicited until 1st January 2017. which resulted in a total of 104,212 design suggestions. Despite low attendance at public meetings, The Commission noted strong online engagement with over 6,000,000 visits to the website and 15,000,000 engagements on social media.
The panel reported that feedback found the themes of freedom, history, equality, respect and family to be the most significant to British people. However it was later revealed that those themes were dwarfed by the amount of feedback critical of the flag change process. From the submitted design, found the most common colours were red, white, blue, black and green. The most common elements incorporated into the flag designs were the Oak Leaf, Lion, Celtic Knot and Cross of St George. The main themes incorporated into the designs were Welsh culture, nature and history.
After the initial shortlist of four was criticised for being "bland" and "uninspiring" a campaign spearheaded by actress and television presenter Joanna Lumley saw a fifth design, "Coal, Sea and Blood", designed by Thomas Heatherwick, make it onto the shortlist.
The initial referendum on Thursday 4th May 2017 saw both of Paul Smith's shortlisted designs come out on top, with the black and red version narrowly beating Owen Paterson's favoured blue and red style.
The second referendum, held five weeks later, resulted in the existing Union Flag being overwhelmingly retained.
Following the results, Paterson announced his intention to resign as Prime Minister for unrelated reasons. His successor, Will Auckland, has made no indications of wishing to revisit the subject.
Last edited:
Are we talking RL Pat Brown, or Wikibox Pat Brown who is forced to run a two Catholic ticket?
The latter beyond a shadow of a doubt would do a lot worse than LBJ in the upper south.
Last edited:
Alex Richards
Donor
That amused me no end @Lord Roem.
Though the thing that's always frustrated me with the OTL New Zealand one was how much it felt like that one bloke trying to force through the one he'd designed on the public. It's no wonder it was rejected really.
Also: NATIONAL CYMRY CONSTITUENCIES AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Though the thing that's always frustrated me with the OTL New Zealand one was how much it felt like that one bloke trying to force through the one he'd designed on the public. It's no wonder it was rejected really.
Also: NATIONAL CYMRY CONSTITUENCIES AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Dorozhand
Banned
Kick
Comprehensive mass thought-reform through psychochemical therapy is viable, if heavy handed, tactic to bring about the totality of empathy. With empathy, there is hope in fighting white-cis-male supremacy. The masses must simply be guided by the enlightened towards equality and dignity; the oppressors must blind themselves in the light of compassion in order to rejoin the whole of society and be guided by its wise current.
The revolution is chugging along nicely and effectively, even though a few eggs too many got cracked to make the omlette as the Hypnopompics dove a little too far into the spirituality and metaphysics of social revolution.
I'd be fully down with this state's program, though, if only because the cause of people's liberation outweighs simplistic eurocentric moral concerns. The ideal is so much bigger than that. From hauntologie's lamentation for the lost modernist futures cancelled by post-modern vapidity arises a New Socialist Being to achieve harmony among the collective and developmental cultivation of the individual.
This site can shut down now, IMOTwo national flag referendums were held by the British government in May and July 2017 and resulted in the electorate endorsing the continued use of the Union Flag.
The first referendum to determine the preferred alternative flag took place on Thursday 4th May 2017, in line with the local elections, and asked, "If the flag of the United Kingdom changes, which flag would you prefer?"
The second referendum took place on Thursday 8th June 2017 and asked voters to choose between the selected alternative (the Silver Fern Flag) and the existing New Zealand flag. The final decision was to keep the current flag.
Reception of the process was critical, with no great enthusiasm shown among the public.
The United Kingdom has a history of debate about whether the national flag should be changed. For several decades, alternative designs have been proposed, with varying degrees of support. There is no consensus among proponents of changing the flag as to which design should replace the flag. Debate has often focused on the lack of national symbolism for Wales on the design, which incorporates the Crosses of St George (for England), St Andrew (for Scotland), and St Patrick (for Northern Ireland).
In January 2014, Prime Minister Owen Paterson first proposed the idea floated the idea of a referendum on a new flag ahead of that year's general election. The proposal was met with a mixed response. During the general election campaign, Paterson confirmed that a nationwide referendum on whether or not to change flag design, if the Unionist Party was re-elected for a third parliamentary term. Following the Unionist re-election the details of the referendum were announced.
Shortly after the general election, party leaders were invited to a cross-party, 12 person Flag Select Committee comprising of Members of Parliament from all major political parties. The purpose of the cross-party Committee was to review the proposed legislation allowing for the referendums to take place, and to nominate candidates for a Flag Consideration Panel by mid-February 2015. Members included Will Auckland (Chancellor of the Exchequer), Priti Patel (representing the Unionists), Tom Watson (representing Labour), Jonathan Bartley (representing the Green Party of England and Scotland), Liz Saville Roberts (representing Plaid Cymru), Jeremy Browne (representing Taxpayers Alliance) and Frank Field (representing Progress). UKFirst refused to participate.
Following the passage of the Flag (Referendum Act) 2015, the Committee appointed a National Flag Commission. The Commission was comprised of "respected British People" with representative age, regional, gender and ethnic demographics. Their purpose was to publicise the referendum process, seek flag submissions and suggestions from the public, and to decide on a final shortlist of four suitable options for the first referendum.
Chair
Chris Patten: Former Unionist MP, Minister, Governor of Hong Kong and current Chancellor of the University of Oxford
Deputy Chair
Bonnie Greer: Playwright and Author
Other Members
Peter Bazalgette: Television Executive
Lord Bilimoria: Businessman
Richard Dannatt: Former Chief of the General Staff
Jessica Ennis-Hill: Athlete
Clive Woodward: Former coach of the England Rugby Union Team
Maurice Saatchi: Co-Founder of Saatchi & Saatchi
Fiona Woolf: Former Lord Mayor of London
Rosina St James: Chair of the British Youth Council
Alan Langlands: Academic
Bobi Jones: Welsh language academic
The Commission was criticised for not having any professional vexillologists or designers as members.
As part of the public engagement process, flag designs and symbolism/value suggestions were solicited until 1st January 2017. which resulted in a total of 104,212 design suggestions. Despite low attendance at public meetings, The Commission noted strong online engagement with over 6,000,000 visits to the website and 15,000,000 engagements on social media.
The panel reported that feedback found the themes of freedom, history, equality, respect and family to be the most significant to British people. However it was later revealed that those themes were dwarfed by the amount of feedback critical of the flag change process. From the submitted design, found the most common colours were red, white, blue, black and green. The most common elements incorporated into the flag designs were the Oak Leaf, Lion, Celtic Knot and Cross of St George. The main themes incorporated into the designs were Welsh culture, nature and history.
After the initial shortlist of four was criticised for being "bland" and "uninspiring" a campaign spearheaded by actress and television presenter Joanna Lumley saw a fifth design, "Coal, Sea and Blood", designed by Thomas Heatherwick, make it onto the shortlist.
The initial referendum on Thursday 4th May 2017 saw both of Paul Smith's shortlisted designs come out on top, with the black and red version narrowly beating Owen Paterson's favoured blue and red style.
The second referendum, held five weeks later, resulted in the existing Union Flag being overwhelmingly retained.
Following the results, Paterson announced his intention to resign as Prime Minister for unrelated reasons. His successor, Will Auckland, has made no indications of wishing to revisit the subject.
Are you writing in-character or something? Because you never struck me as the type to think abuse of psychological practices on a massive scale to punish dissidents was a good thing. In the thing you're linking to, you actually talk about lobotomizing racists.
Bryton
Banned
An early 2003 general election based on (but not an exact carbon copy of) 308's scenario. I switched it up a bit.
The election call took everyone by surprise, but then again it had been a whirlwind summer for the Liberal Party of Canada. John Manley dropped out of the leadership race to replace Jean Chrétien at the end of July, and Sheila Copps, seeing the writing on the wall, did the same shortly afterwards. With Paul Martin the only name left on the leadership ballot, the party moved up the convention to mid-August and Martin was officially named the party's leader then.
With a caucus revolt brewing, Chrétien no longer saw his planned retirement date of February 2004 as tenable. He stepped down, and Martin became Prime Minister on August 20, 2003. Liberals knew they had to act quickly. The party was leading in the polls by a comfortable margin, but the right would not be divided for long. Word that Stephen Harper and Peter MacKay, leaders of the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservatives, respectively, were talking about a merger forced the Liberals into action. Calling for a mandate of his own, Paul Martin visited Governor General Adrienne Clarkson on August 24, a Sunday, and asked for the dissolution of parliament. The election date was set for Monday, September 29, 2003.
MacKay and Harper were indeed talking about merging the two parties into one, but the talks were still in a very early stage. While Martin was speaking with Clarkson, MacKay and Harper were speaking on the telephone. They agreed there was no time to formally unite the two parties. Who would be the leader anyway? What if the two parties agreed not to run against each other, and worked out the merger after the campaign was over? Harper favoured the party that placed ahead of the other in the 2000 election getting the consensus right-of-centre candidate in each riding. And of course he would - the Canadian Alliance captured more than twice the Tories' vote in 2000. MacKay was not in agreement. The latest polls had the PCs ahead of the Canadian Alliance, particularly in Ontario where Harper's numbers were very weak. MacKay wanted Ontario. But Harper knew that if he gave it to him, the Tories could very well outnumber his party's caucus after the election. And Ontario was key to his electoral hopes for the future. The two agreed that they would just have to fight one more election as two separate parties. They wished each other luck, and the campaign was on.
This would be both Harper's and MacKay's first campaign as party leaders, as well as Martin's. Jack Layton of the New Democrats was also going to take his first kick at the can. Things were going moderately well for the NDP. After capturing just 8.5% of the vote in 2000, Layton had boosted the party back into double-digits. The party was not yet ready for a breakthrough, but if he played his cards right Layton could give the NDP its best result since 1988.
The only veteran leader was Gilles Duceppe of the Bloc Québécois, entering his third campaign as leader. But the party was adrift. In April, the Parti Québécois had been booted out of power with its worst performance in 30 years and the latest polls put the Bloc around 30% in the province. Duceppe needed something to breathe new life into the sovereignty movement. He would eventually get it, but not soon enough.
Paul Martin did not prove to be the best campaigner, but things were working in his favor. The internecine fighting the Liberals were known for was virtually non-existent, thanks to the party's strong polling numbers. In Ontario, where the provincial campaign had been delayed in order not to overlap with the federal one, Dalton McGuinty took the extra time to campaign with the federal Liberals, boosting both party's support levels. At the crowded leaders' debate, where the truce between Harper and MacKay seemed to collapse on live television, Martin stood above the fray as the four other leaders bickered.
Stephen Harper had hoped to use the campaign to portray himself and his party as a potential alternative by moving to the centre, but with nasty attack ads from the Liberals portraying him as an extremist the polls not moving along with him - and a disaster looming - Harper instead had to turn back to the right to shore up his base. It was a decision that gave Peter MacKay an opportunity. With his own polling numbers going nowhere, MacKay tried to position his party as the only electable conservative option, visiting winnable ridings in Alberta and Ontario. His numbers did not move enough to turn the tide, and MacKay spent most of the last week of the campaign in Atlantic Canada, where his party was competitive with the Liberals. In such a crowded playing field, it was difficult for Jack Layton to get his voice heard. But he was making some significant gains in British Columbia and Alberta, and was holding on to Alexa McDonough's support base in Atlantic Canada. However, Quebec and Ontario, his two native provinces by birth and residence, were not swinging over to the NDP.
Gilles Duceppe was also having trouble. A strong French-language debate in which three of the five contestants had less than passable French, dooming any hopes that MacKay had of a return to Jean Charest-levels of support in Quebec, boosted the Bloc at the expense of the other opposition parties. But the Liberals were still supreme. The new Charest government was in the midst of its honeymoon. Seeing where the winds were blowing, Charest even campaigned with Martin. What could Duceppe do? Bernard Landry had just been dealt a humiliating defeat, but the PQ's leader gamely went on the hustings along with Duceppe. The result, though, was to shift the Bloc's campaign focus ever more on the question of sovereignty.
Even though it was quite obvious that it was going to be a Liberal landslide once again, but polling for being the leader of the opposition was so close that it was uncertain. McKay could pull off an upset and bring the Tories back as a force to be reckon with. Even some polls showed Layton and crew polling third and even second place. This was going to be the eye grabbing moment of the election. When the votes were counted, it was a massacre. The Liberals formed the largest government in Canadian history, even surpassing (in seat numbers) Brian Mulroney's triumph in 1984.
The Liberals had won every region of the country except Alberta and the Yukon. In British Columbia, the Liberals took 37.5% and 21 seats against 25.5% and nine seats for the Canadian Alliance. The NDP captured 21% and four seats, while the Tories were shutout at just 9% of the vote. Harper did win his home province of Alberta with 39.5% and 20 seats, but the Tories had prevented him from doing better. MacKay's urban swing through the province paid some dividends, as the PCs took 26% of the vote and two seats. The Liberals, at 18.5%, and the NDP, at 15%, also captured two seats apiece.
The Liberals won the Prairies with 36.5% of the vote, enough to give them 15 seats. The NDP finished second, the only region where they did, with 22% and six seats, while the Canadian Alliance had 18.5% and five seats (all in Saskatchewan) and the Tories had 18% and two seats, both of them in Manitoba. In Ontario, the Liberals took 56.5% of the vote and 99 seats, leaving just two seats each for the NDP (13.5%) and the PCs (19%). The Canadian Alliance, at just 9.5% of the vote, was shutout.
It was a two horse race in Quebec, but the Liberals dominated. They captured 53.5% of the vote against 35.5% for the Bloc, enough to give the Liberals 54 seats to just 15 for the Bloc. The Tories had 6% of the vote, and managed one seat out of the landslide. The NDP took 2.5% of the vote and Harper just 1%. Despite MacKay hailing from the region, the PCs finished second in Atlantic Canada with 32% of the vote and nine seats. The Liberals won 44.5% and 19 seats, while the NDP held four seats with 20% of the vote. The Canadian Alliance had just 2.5% of the vote there.
With such poor performances throughout the country, and finishing third in the vote count, Stephen Harper resigned as leader of the Canadian Alliance on the night of the election. He had seen his party's vote share cut in half, as well as its caucus. Leading such a rump party for four more years of Liberal domination was just not worth it. A promising career was cut short. Gilles Duceppe requested a leadership review in his election night speech, and lost it in December. Jack Layton would stay on having just been elected the NDP's leader, and he had increased the party's representation. The question was whether Peter MacKay would stay. He, too, had just been named PC leader. He had proven a capable campaigner. What's more, he seemed to like it. He had finished second in the popular vote and had MPs in every province except British Columbia, Saskatchewan, and Prince Edward Island. By comparison, the Canadian Alliance was represented only in Canada's three westernmost provinces. If MacKay could manage it, he might be able to reunite the two parties on his own terms. He pledged to stay on as well.
With a caucus revolt brewing, Chrétien no longer saw his planned retirement date of February 2004 as tenable. He stepped down, and Martin became Prime Minister on August 20, 2003. Liberals knew they had to act quickly. The party was leading in the polls by a comfortable margin, but the right would not be divided for long. Word that Stephen Harper and Peter MacKay, leaders of the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservatives, respectively, were talking about a merger forced the Liberals into action. Calling for a mandate of his own, Paul Martin visited Governor General Adrienne Clarkson on August 24, a Sunday, and asked for the dissolution of parliament. The election date was set for Monday, September 29, 2003.
MacKay and Harper were indeed talking about merging the two parties into one, but the talks were still in a very early stage. While Martin was speaking with Clarkson, MacKay and Harper were speaking on the telephone. They agreed there was no time to formally unite the two parties. Who would be the leader anyway? What if the two parties agreed not to run against each other, and worked out the merger after the campaign was over? Harper favoured the party that placed ahead of the other in the 2000 election getting the consensus right-of-centre candidate in each riding. And of course he would - the Canadian Alliance captured more than twice the Tories' vote in 2000. MacKay was not in agreement. The latest polls had the PCs ahead of the Canadian Alliance, particularly in Ontario where Harper's numbers were very weak. MacKay wanted Ontario. But Harper knew that if he gave it to him, the Tories could very well outnumber his party's caucus after the election. And Ontario was key to his electoral hopes for the future. The two agreed that they would just have to fight one more election as two separate parties. They wished each other luck, and the campaign was on.
This would be both Harper's and MacKay's first campaign as party leaders, as well as Martin's. Jack Layton of the New Democrats was also going to take his first kick at the can. Things were going moderately well for the NDP. After capturing just 8.5% of the vote in 2000, Layton had boosted the party back into double-digits. The party was not yet ready for a breakthrough, but if he played his cards right Layton could give the NDP its best result since 1988.
The only veteran leader was Gilles Duceppe of the Bloc Québécois, entering his third campaign as leader. But the party was adrift. In April, the Parti Québécois had been booted out of power with its worst performance in 30 years and the latest polls put the Bloc around 30% in the province. Duceppe needed something to breathe new life into the sovereignty movement. He would eventually get it, but not soon enough.
Paul Martin did not prove to be the best campaigner, but things were working in his favor. The internecine fighting the Liberals were known for was virtually non-existent, thanks to the party's strong polling numbers. In Ontario, where the provincial campaign had been delayed in order not to overlap with the federal one, Dalton McGuinty took the extra time to campaign with the federal Liberals, boosting both party's support levels. At the crowded leaders' debate, where the truce between Harper and MacKay seemed to collapse on live television, Martin stood above the fray as the four other leaders bickered.
Stephen Harper had hoped to use the campaign to portray himself and his party as a potential alternative by moving to the centre, but with nasty attack ads from the Liberals portraying him as an extremist the polls not moving along with him - and a disaster looming - Harper instead had to turn back to the right to shore up his base. It was a decision that gave Peter MacKay an opportunity. With his own polling numbers going nowhere, MacKay tried to position his party as the only electable conservative option, visiting winnable ridings in Alberta and Ontario. His numbers did not move enough to turn the tide, and MacKay spent most of the last week of the campaign in Atlantic Canada, where his party was competitive with the Liberals. In such a crowded playing field, it was difficult for Jack Layton to get his voice heard. But he was making some significant gains in British Columbia and Alberta, and was holding on to Alexa McDonough's support base in Atlantic Canada. However, Quebec and Ontario, his two native provinces by birth and residence, were not swinging over to the NDP.
Gilles Duceppe was also having trouble. A strong French-language debate in which three of the five contestants had less than passable French, dooming any hopes that MacKay had of a return to Jean Charest-levels of support in Quebec, boosted the Bloc at the expense of the other opposition parties. But the Liberals were still supreme. The new Charest government was in the midst of its honeymoon. Seeing where the winds were blowing, Charest even campaigned with Martin. What could Duceppe do? Bernard Landry had just been dealt a humiliating defeat, but the PQ's leader gamely went on the hustings along with Duceppe. The result, though, was to shift the Bloc's campaign focus ever more on the question of sovereignty.
Even though it was quite obvious that it was going to be a Liberal landslide once again, but polling for being the leader of the opposition was so close that it was uncertain. McKay could pull off an upset and bring the Tories back as a force to be reckon with. Even some polls showed Layton and crew polling third and even second place. This was going to be the eye grabbing moment of the election. When the votes were counted, it was a massacre. The Liberals formed the largest government in Canadian history, even surpassing (in seat numbers) Brian Mulroney's triumph in 1984.
The Liberals had won every region of the country except Alberta and the Yukon. In British Columbia, the Liberals took 37.5% and 21 seats against 25.5% and nine seats for the Canadian Alliance. The NDP captured 21% and four seats, while the Tories were shutout at just 9% of the vote. Harper did win his home province of Alberta with 39.5% and 20 seats, but the Tories had prevented him from doing better. MacKay's urban swing through the province paid some dividends, as the PCs took 26% of the vote and two seats. The Liberals, at 18.5%, and the NDP, at 15%, also captured two seats apiece.
The Liberals won the Prairies with 36.5% of the vote, enough to give them 15 seats. The NDP finished second, the only region where they did, with 22% and six seats, while the Canadian Alliance had 18.5% and five seats (all in Saskatchewan) and the Tories had 18% and two seats, both of them in Manitoba. In Ontario, the Liberals took 56.5% of the vote and 99 seats, leaving just two seats each for the NDP (13.5%) and the PCs (19%). The Canadian Alliance, at just 9.5% of the vote, was shutout.
It was a two horse race in Quebec, but the Liberals dominated. They captured 53.5% of the vote against 35.5% for the Bloc, enough to give the Liberals 54 seats to just 15 for the Bloc. The Tories had 6% of the vote, and managed one seat out of the landslide. The NDP took 2.5% of the vote and Harper just 1%. Despite MacKay hailing from the region, the PCs finished second in Atlantic Canada with 32% of the vote and nine seats. The Liberals won 44.5% and 19 seats, while the NDP held four seats with 20% of the vote. The Canadian Alliance had just 2.5% of the vote there.
With such poor performances throughout the country, and finishing third in the vote count, Stephen Harper resigned as leader of the Canadian Alliance on the night of the election. He had seen his party's vote share cut in half, as well as its caucus. Leading such a rump party for four more years of Liberal domination was just not worth it. A promising career was cut short. Gilles Duceppe requested a leadership review in his election night speech, and lost it in December. Jack Layton would stay on having just been elected the NDP's leader, and he had increased the party's representation. The question was whether Peter MacKay would stay. He, too, had just been named PC leader. He had proven a capable campaigner. What's more, he seemed to like it. He had finished second in the popular vote and had MPs in every province except British Columbia, Saskatchewan, and Prince Edward Island. By comparison, the Canadian Alliance was represented only in Canada's three westernmost provinces. If MacKay could manage it, he might be able to reunite the two parties on his own terms. He pledged to stay on as well.
Last edited:
What the hell?
I am really, really trying to find a reason not to ban you for this entirely revolting bit of prose. Right now I am not seeing any particularly good reason to force the rest of the members to share this Board with you. It is okay to massively drug the populous. even though some folks die (the number isn't mentioned, just that a few "too many" eggs got cracked in the process)? Like hell it is.
If you can convince me that this isn't anything close to what it appears to be (and judging by the posts in the Test thread you referenced that may take some doing) we'll let this go with a kick. If you can't, you will get an upgrade.
I just realized that 308's scenario hasn't had a proper infobox+map drawn up for it.
That's fixed now:
Fair.
Although I distinctly remember someone did all the elections of that timeline.
Although I distinctly remember someone did all the elections of that timeline.
Glad to see my work digging for a picture of Martin where he doesn't look befuddled paid off.
I originally had Harper not smiling, but the picture I found for him made him look like he was wight from Game of Thrones when scaled down to fit in the infobox, so I guess the story is now he's laughing in disbelief at the Alliance's performance.
- Status