Isaac Beach
Banned
Hey could I ask a favour? Could someone make a wikibox with Basil Brush as British Prime Minister? I imagine he’d be a Tory given he’s so posh.
Alternate Wikipedia Infoboxes V (Do Not Post Current Politics Here)
- Status
I'm confused how/why Georgia and South Carolina get renamed while Alabama and Mississippi have their names maintained
Listen I am the holder of the opinion that The Bends is the only good Radiohead album so
The Republicans scored a major victory in the 1990 midterms when they were able to recruit Congressman and former University of Michigan Professor Theodore J. Kaczynski as their nominee for governor against the two-term incumbent James Blanchard. They cleared the field for him, pushing State Senator John Engler to accept the position of Lieutenant instead. Kaczynski would win the primary almost unopposed and went on to secure a decent victory over the incumbent, who was wracked with trouble after dropping his running mate and dealing with senator Don Riegle's involvement in the Keating Five scandal.
The Republicans scored a major victory in the 1990 midterms when they were able to recruit Congressman and former University of Michigan Professor Theodore J. Kaczynski as their nominee for governor against the two-term incumbent James Blanchard. They cleared the field for him, pushing State Senator John Engler to accept the position of Lieutenant instead. Kaczynski would win the primary almost unopposed and went on to secure a decent victory over the incumbent, who was wracked with trouble after dropping his running mate and dealing with senator Don Riegle's involvement in the Keating Five scandal.
Kaczynski going into politics is an interesting idea and I think out of the two main parties he'd probably be a Republican as you've shown here. I assume he's a sort of anti-consumerism traditionalist that he was OTL here? Come to think of it he very well may still be at the University of Michigan in NSS.
what are you talking about, that's unironically their worst album, it's even worse than pablo honey
Wow, sorry about that. Life has been incredibly busy on my end (and continues to be as we get closer to New Brunswick's general election), but I finally found enough time to put this update together. Enjoy! I expect @True Grit will actually enjoy this update, lol.
Despite not even being fifty years of age, Bernard Lord had been a fixture of New Brunswick politics for quite some time. When he was selected as leader of the downtrodden Progressive Conservatives, nobody really gave him the time of day. He was a former defeated PC candidate, someone who had dabbled with the NDP in his university days, and appeared set to perhaps deliver the Tories a couple more seats as the Liberals continued their unstoppable march forward. Fast forward fourteen years and three election victories, and Premier Bernard Lord was the most successful Conservative in Atlantic Canada, bar none. He had swiftly dispatched Camille Theriault, the presumed heir to McKenna, and Shawn Graham, the boy who would be king. But Lord, after securing his third straight majority, appeared tired of the back and forth of provincial politics, and like McKenna before him announced his resignation after a decade in power. By the end of 2009 the ensuing leadership race replaced Lord with cabinet minister and Saint John bigwig, Trevor Holder. In terms of New Brunswick politics, very rarely does a Premier last longer than ten years. Richard Hatfield did, and it destroyed his party completely. Premier Holder was eager to avoid having this happen on his watch, despite polls showing the Liberals amassing an impressive lead under their new leader, Moncton-area MLA Michael Murphy, a longtime aspirant to the role.
Styling the campaign as a referendum on the Tories, Murphy sought to avoid making the mistakes that had plagued Shawn Graham four years earlier, namely focusing more on northern Francophone ridings at the expense of southern Anglophone electorates. Yet the core strategy for the election would be about who New Brunswickers wanted as their Premier, as opposed to the policies being offered by the two main parties. This served both leaders fine, as their party’s respective platforms, just as they had in the last election, did not appear radically different from one another. Trouble was, neither man was exceptionally popular with voters. Trevor Holder was the uncharismatic head of an unpopular government, while Murphy was a boring ex-lawyer who was only leading because of who he and his party were not. Liberals warned that another four years of the Conservatives would add further pressure on the debt, which had been on the rise after a brief reduction in the early years of Lord’s final mandate. Conservatives warned that Murphy would take his marching orders from the federal party, meaning increased taxes, spending recklessly, and the reversal of all the work the they had done to fix up the province. But, despite the fact that the election was between the Liberals and Conservatives, there were other parties offering bold new ideas. Having selected the boundless energetic Francophone Roger Duguay, the New Democrats hoped that they would be able to take advantage of voters frustration with the two major parties and elect a handful of their own members, something of a historical first in New Brunswick. Meanwhile the newly formed Green Party, led by former Liberal leadership candidate Jack McDougall, expressed similar views; after suffering decade after decade of the same old party politics, voters were looking for a fresh alternative.
Everyone knew the election was the Liberal’s to lose. They had the superior fundraising numbers, the superior polling numbers, impassioned supporters, and had spent the last four years recruiting strong candidates and building a strong campaign machine, especially with respect to the online world of Twitter and Facebook. The Tories were simply too old fashioned to fight them on such a battlefield. Still, a strict message of keeping the province strong and an even stricter campaign team helped the PCs diminish the overwhelming Liberal lead, not to mention the reports of some party infighting in the camp of the opposition. Murphy had never been considered an ally of the Liberal’s “old boys” club after they had back Graham over him in 2002, and the tensions remained. A poor performance by Michael Murphy in the English debate further eroded the Liberals momentum, until polls showed the race narrowing to only a ten point lead. On Election Night, as CTV’s Steve Murphy and his panelists gathered to deliver and analyze the results, it quickly became apparent that many undecided voters had broken for Premier Holder and his party in the final days of the campaign. But it wouldn’t be enough. By ten o’clock, the major broadcasters all projected that Michael Murphy and the Liberals would capture a majority government. Twelve years of Tory rule had come to an end.
Premiers of New Brunswick:
Frank McKenna (Liberal) 1987-1997
Ray Frenette (Liberal) 1997-1998
Camille Thériault (Liberal) 1998-1999
Bernard Lord (Progressive Conservative) 1999-2009
Trevor Holder (Progressive Conservative) 2009-2011
Michael Murphy (Liberal) 2011-
If a general election were held today, which potential leadership candidate would make you more likely to vote for the Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick?
Prince Edward Island had long been a province accustomed to political dynasties. Alexander Campbell and his Liberals ruled the small Island for twelve years back in the days of Pearson and Trudeau. After a brief, seven year interlude with the Tories, the Liberals would return under Joe Ghiz, who with his successors Catherine Callbeck and Keith Milligan, governed the province for a decade. Embracing the Progressive Conservatives under Pat Binns, the Tories would themselves govern uninterrupted for eleven years with little effective opposition. Enter Alan Buchanan, a former Liberal cabinet minister during the 1990s and the man who had slayed the boy wonder and son of former Premier Joe Ghiz, Robert Ghiz. After so much time with the Tories, voters had simply grown tired of Pat Binns, who on most accounts was still personally popular with a large number of Islanders. Binns’ government had fallen prey to the cruelest opponent of a political party; time. Scandals, complacedness, wasteful spending, they were all the hallmarks of a government which had become too comfortable, and arguably arrogant during their time in charge. It was simply time to switch back to the Grits, and they did so in a big way, handing them a majority in both the popular vote and in the legislature. With little interest in leading the opposition, Pat Binns resigned as leader of his party, eventually replaced with former cabinet minister George MacDonald.
A former teacher, MacDonald had long been involved with municipal politics, serving as a ward councilor for the city of Charlottetown throughout much of the 1980s and 1990s, before being elected Mayor in 1997. Opting not to seek a third term as Mayor, MacDonald would go on to narrowly defeat Robert Ghiz in the riding of Charlottetown Rochford-Square in 2003, managing to remain the only Progressive Conservative in the area following the Liberal’s victory four years later. Coming from the most populous city in the province, and enjoying the highest name recognition, MacDonald was the overwhelming favourite to replace former Premier Binns, and was acclaimed as party leader in 2009. With an incumbent Tory government in Ottawa, and the most recent federal election delivering two MPs to the government benches, Egmont’s Gail Shea and Charlottetown’s Rob Lantz, some provincial PCs hoped they could pull off a similar upset across the province.
Premier Buchanan, meanwhile, seemed to enjoy his new office immensely. Rubbing shoulder to shoulder with his provincial counterparts, glad handing the Prime Minister, appearing at photo-ops across Prince Edward Island, speaking at the odd federal Liberal fundraiser as one of the few incumbent Grit Premiers. It was fun. His caucus was united behind him, and polls had his party overwhelmingly ahead of the opposition Tories, in some cases by close to twenty percentage points.
The campaign itself was largely uneventful. Issues debated included increased funding to healthcare by the federal government, who seemed lukewarm to the notion of increased spending. George MacDonald and the PCs argued that that provincial spending had grown out of control under Buchanan and the Liberals, and if left to continue, the province would see its finances get out of control over the next four years. The Tories would continue the current amount of funding for healthcare and infrastructure, but comense a review of all government departments to determine whether current spending was being done responsibly. Buchanan and his party challenged that the opposition conservatives would cut and slash everything important to everyday Islanders, and attempted to link their more moderate opponents to some of the more right-wing elements of the federal Conservative Party. Various op-eds and articles bemoaned the lack of voter engagement in the campaign, with most provincial residents largely ignoring the candidates and the debates between the major party leaders.
When all was said and done, the Liberals secured their second mandate from voters, down two seats and two percentage points from four years earlier. George MacDonald and the Tories rebounded slightly, picking up those seats which had left the Grits. An expected result for a lacklustre and unimaginative campaign.
Premiers of Prince Edward Island:
Joe Ghiz (Liberal) 1986-1993
Catherine Callbeck (Liberal) 1993-1996
Pat Binns (Progressive Conservative) 1996-2007
Alan Buchanan (Liberal) 2007-
If a general election were held today, which potential leadership candidate would make you more likely to vote for the Progressive Conservative Party of PEI?
Since coming to power in 2003, the Manitoban New Democrats had embarked upon an ambitious legislative agenda. Spending on healthcare and education were increased almost every year, taxes on a variety of goods like tobacco and liquor were increased, anti-smoking legislation had been drafted, university tuition fees were reduced, coal-burning factories banned, adoption rights extended to same-sex couples, they had pushed the federal government to legalize marriage equality, and had strengthened ties between the provincial government and its labour and Aboriginal counterparts. Compared to the fledgling New Democratic governments that had been in charge of Ontario, British Columbia, and in neighbouring Saskatchewan, where Premier Lingenfelter could only look on with envy, pundits agreed that the Manitoba NDP had emerged as the most successful and stable government in the party’s history. Although, many pointed to the provinces strong natural resources, in particular agriculture and the strength of Manitoba Hydro as what enabled the provincial government to post consecutive balanced-budgets and further increase spending.
It wasn’t just Lingenfelter who was jealous of Blaikie’s success. Even in spite of the global financial crisis, the government of Manitoba appeared to have weathered the storm better than most, and enjoyed a substantial lead over its Progressive Conservative and Liberal opponents in the polls. All things considered, it looked as though the NDP were set to be re-elected once again to their third majority. Opposition leader Merv Tweed, Gary Filmon’s former Industry Minister, had taken charge of the provincial Tories simply due to the fact that no one else wanted the job. The Conservatives were, more or less, broke, trailing in the polls against a popular incumbent, and were taking in little fundraising numbers compared to the New Democrats. Once again, it appeared that a rural right-wing opposition leader would fall to a party which dominated Winnipeg and urban Manitoba. As for the Liberals, still under the leadership of Kevin Lamoureux, they were equally, if not more, lifeless. Holding only two seats in the legislature, the Liberals didn’t even enjoy official party status, and had last held power in the province back in the late 1950s. According to the polls, this trend was set to continue.
Overall, the campaign unfolded as expected. The New Democrats promised to keep hydro rates at current levels, offer more daycare spaces, $10M to tackle crime, shorter wait times, and the accusations that the Tories would cut and slash everything important to Manitobans. Meanwhile the Progressive Conservatives advocated for harsher punishments for cases of domestic violence and spousal abuse, increased transparency in healthcare, additional palliative care beds, spend more money to fight Alzheimer’s, and implement a wave of new tax cuts for Manitobans. Lamoureux and the Liberal’s platform called for $44M on transit funding, $44.5M for daycare, better flood protection, strengthened broadband internet, and more funding to better equip law enforcement officers.
The election yielded a legislature little different to the last one. Despite dropping in the popular vote, the New Democrats gained a single seat, while the opposition conservatives witness the exact opposite; losing a seat despite gaining five per cent in the popular vote. Kevin Lamoureux was once again left as the sole Liberal in the Manitoban legislature, as more and more of his voting base moved towards the free-market-espousing Progressive Conservatives. Bill Blaikie had captured his third, and privately conceded final, win. The jockeying over who would succeed Blaikie began in earnest, as did the race to replace both Merv Tweed and Kevin Lamoureux, both of whom opted to retire rather than wage another battle against the NDP.
Premiers of Manitoba
Gary Filmon (Progressive Conservative) 1988-1997
Jim Downey (Progressive Conservative) 1997-1998
Brian Pallister (Progressive Conservative) 1998-2002
Bill Blaikie (New Democratic) 2003-
If a general election were held today, which potential leadership candidate would make you more likely to vote for the Progressive Conservative Party of Manitoba?
Janet Ecker liked to view herself as the successor to Bill Davis. She had served in his office alongside both Hugh Segal and John Tory, talked regularly with her old boss over the phone, gauging his opinion on policy and politics, and liked to remind people that she had supported Larry Grossman in his bid to replace Davis when the latter opted to retire in 1985. Yet for all her Red Tory leanings, Ecker became a loyal soldier of the Common Sense Revolution when she was elected as part of Mike Harris’s team in 1995, and worked hard to enact his infamous right-wing agenda, both in her time as Social Services and later Education Minister. But with the growth of the provincial deficit, wasteful spending, and the government’s unpopularity, Mike Harris opted to retire. Party members and activists were spooked by the Tories cratering poll numbers, and were willing to forgive Ecker’s more moderate, even left-leaning tendencies if it meant another chance at power. As the Globe and Mail stated in its editorial following Ecker’s selection, the party’s heart and soul was with Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, but their minds and ballots went to Janet Ecker. Although some of these voters would forget this lesson years later.
It paid off, and better than anyone, let alone the Tories, could hope. The Tories won re-election after entering a campaign more than ten points behind in the polls. Premier Ecker quickly became the de facto leader of the annual First Ministers’ Conferences. Not only that, but the Tories managed to win re-election again four years later, thanks in part to a spirited campaign waged by NDP leader Jack Layton, and a dispirited campaign by Dwight Duncan. But now both those men were gone. After losing six seats, Dwight Duncan’s ambition to become Premier was ended, and he was replaced with the brawling George Smitherman. Jack Layton, by-in-large the most liked and trusted politician at Queen’s Park, passed away after losing his battle with cancer, forcing his party into a leadership election only months before the provincial election. Following the outpouring of grief and sadness from Queen’s Park and the province as a whole, the New Democrats would ultimately select long-time Northern Ontario MPP and close Layton ally Gilles Bisson. Pundits from the Globe and Mail, MacLeans, and the Toronto Star all agreed; this was the most exciting election of the 2011 season, and likely to be the meanest and dirtiest campaign in Ontario history. After sixteen years in power, seven under Harris and nine under Ecker, it seemed like the Ontario PCs were headed for disaster. Much like in 2003, polls had the Tories as much as twenty points behind their Liberal opponents. Making matters worse, Ecker’s relationship with the party’s more right-wing flank has begun to boil over, with routine threats of a leadership review, or Frank Klees, who was contemplating a run for the leadership of the Reform Party, would replace her, or there would be the creation of a new conservative party to split the vote. Thus, Premier Ecker found herself fighting against four opponents; the Liberals, the New Democrats, the media, and right-wing Conservatives.
The Liberals were first out of the gate in the campaign. George Smitherman, in a speech to a few hundred people in downtown Toronto, slammed the Conservatives from everything from wasteful spending to patronage and corruption. It was a barn-burner of a speech, illustrating that the Liberals, typically preoccupied with their rural-urban divide, would be a completely different animal in this election. Speaking to immigrant communities, aboriginal leaders, union activists, and Bay Street employees, Smitherman criss-crossed the province, all the while speaking the same message; change and renewal. Gilles Bisson meanwhile bemoaned the divide not between urban and rural voters, but of rich and poor, arguing that the provincial government needed to do much more to combat poverty throughout Toronto and Northern Ontario, where suicide rates were on the rise. With only a limited time to prepare for the election after Layton’s death, Bisson struggled to connect to voters who missed the fire and energy of his predecessor. As for Janet Ecker, her campaign was a strange mixture of right-wing spending, tax cuts, and shrinking government, and Red Tory policies of increased healthcare and transit spending, looking at increasing the minimum wage, and devoting more funding for Ontario’s schools. There was a disconnect between Ecker and her party’s increasingly conservative base, which despised anything that even remotely smelled of government waste. In order to at least save her party from falling to third, the only option left to her was move towards the right, territory that she had previously rejected and mistrusted. Voters sensed the inauthenticity, and the Tories continued to trail.
On Election Night it didn’t take long for CTV, CBC, and the Agenda with Steve Paikin to call the election for George Smitherman and the Liberals. The Tories, despite falling only six percentage points, lost more than half their seats, including Ecker’s riding in Ajax. It was a wave. Once again, the federal Conservatives and Jim Dinning found themselves losing yet another ally, making his ability to implement his mandate all the harder.
Premiers of Ontario:
David Peterson (Liberal) 1985-1990
Bob Rae (New Democratic) 1990-1995
Mike Harris (Progressive Conservative) 1995-2002
Janet Ecker (Progressive Conservative) 2002-2011
George Smitherman (Liberal) 2011-
If a general election were held today, which potential leadership candidate would make you more likely to vote for the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario?
When Premier Efford announced that he would be holding a press conference just outside the House of Assembly, everyone knew what it was about. For the last few years the Premier had been suffering the tolls of diabetes, and had increasingly appeared tired of his job. So, when he told reporters that he was retiring from politics effective immediately, the only surprise was that it took this long for it to happen. Luckily for his party, their outgoing leader had left his successor a strong and sturdy vessel for which to sail. Newfoundland and Labrador had bucked the odds and found economic stability in times of global crisis, thanks in part to its recent oil wealth. The province had defied the national trends in the last federal election and delivered its vote to the federal Liberals. The unassuming, yet affable John Efford enjoyed a significant degree of popularity, which had rubbed off on his party. The opposition Conservatives had yet to find their footing after their embarrassing defeat under Kathy Dunderdale, and appeared to be in the midst of a struggle with the provincial New Democrats as to who voters thought best suited to serve as the Official Opposition in the House of Assembly.
And, much like the circumstances that led to one Premier’s retirement, the expectation as to who would take up the mantle was fairly well known. Siobhán Coady had racked up the favours, fought in the trenches, made herself visible throughout the province and at various Liberal political events, and was perceived by both her fellow Grits and the public at large as the only person capable enough, and likeable enough, to keep the Liberals in office. So when Coady announced her intention to seek her party’s leadership, she did so as the only official candidate. Former party president Danny Dumaresque had publicly mused about challenging Coady, but was politely informed of the consequences should he do so, and quietly exited the race before even entering it. Thus, for the first time in its history, the province of Newfoundland and Labrador found itself being led by a woman, likely leaving the likes of Joey Smallwood and Frank Moores spinning in their graves. But for Premier Coady, the road to re-election wasn’t without some potholes. Lorraine Michael of the NDP and Jerome Kennedy of the PC Party were likeable candidates, and seemed hellbent on kicking the Liberals from office. But both appeared to lack the federal allies, or the issues needed to wage a successful coup of such sorts.
The Liberals campaign message was simple and effective; the good times were finally here for Newfoundland and Labrador, and the Liberals and Siobhán Coady were the only ones able to defend those good times from Ottawa and the other provinces. Some pundits pointed out that it was ironic in some sense that Premier Coady was so high in the polls, considering what had befallen Kathy Dunderdale. Although the former Tory leader was never personally popular, many rationalized her defeat in that the socially conservative Newfoundlanders simply weren’t prepared to be led by a woman. Yet, four years later, here was a woman clearly in the lead. Jerome Kennedy and the PCs were left to play the only card that they could; that the province would be better served allying with the federal government than being oppositional to it. While it played well in some corners of the province, it didn’t do much good for the leader of the opposition to look like he was prepared to kowtow to Prime Minister Jim Dinning. Sensing an opportunity, New Democrats took advantage of their leader’s popularity with voters, and attacked Premier Coady and her party for not spending enough of the province’s newfound wealth on the poor and the disadvantaged. By focusing on what the government could do more about, rather than what it had already accomplished, captured the narrative, and soon made Lorraine Michael the main target of Liberal attacks.
Come Election Night, as voters across the province settled onto their couches and bar stools, the results rolled in. Premier Siobhán Coady and her party were indeed returned to power with a majority government. The momentum of incumbency during a time of economic strength proved impossible to overcome. However, as the battle for second unfolded, the New Democrats edged out the Progressive Conservatives, meaning that for the first time in Newfoundland history, the two most powerful individuals in the House of Assembly would be women. Once again, the Tories were left wondering what went wrong, and who could possibly lead them back from the wilderness come 2015.
Premiers of Newfoundland & Labrador:
Clyde Wells (Liberal) 1989-1996
Loyola Sullivan (Progressive Conservative) 1996-2005
John Efford (Liberal) 2005-2011
Siobhán Coady (Liberal) 2011
If a general election were held today, which potential leadership candidate would make you more likely to vote for the Progressive Conservative Party of Newfoundland & Labrador?
Known as Canada’s “other” New Democratic government, Premier Dwain Lingenfelter didn’t exactly enjoy the same popularity levels as his neighbour in Manitoba. But, to be fair to Lingenfelter, his situation wasn’t as bad as some liked to make it out to be. The province’s GDP had grown from $35.6 billion to $39.5 billion, thanks in part to a growth in natural resource sector, unemployment had risen only marginally, from 4.4 percent in 2007 to 5.0 percent in 2011, and the debt had steadied out to around approximately $101 million. There hadn’t been any major scandals involving members of the cabinet, nor anyone within the Premier’s office. Premier Lingenfelter enjoyed wide and passionate support amongst the members of his caucus, party, and voters who expressed a preference for the Saskatchewan New Democratic Party. Then why, asked the chorus of NDP activists and political nerds across the country, was the NDP trailing their Saskatchewan Party opponents?
Part of it had to do with perception. Dwain Lingenfelter was by all accounts a career politician, and his opponents were quick to remind voters of that fact whenever they could. First elected to the legislature in 1978, Lingenfelter had served under two New Democratic Premiers; Allan Blakeney and Roy Romanow. The only time Lingenfelter hadn’t been a member of cabinet or an MLA was after his defeat in 1986, after which he briefly served as President of his party, before winning a by-election back to the legislature in 1988. More than thirty years as an elected politician did little to dispel the oppositions attempts to paint the Premier as “out of touch” when things went wrong. There was also the fact that the New Democrats were facing a formidable opponent in the form of former Finance Minister Brad Wall. Folksy, charismatic, Baptist, and viewed as one of the smartest and hardest working MLA’s in the province, Wall was the most logical and most electable candidate to replace Elwin Hermanson. Plus, Wall came from the PC-side of the Saskatchewan Party merger, and lacked the Reform Party connections that the Saskatchewan NDP routinely threw at the former Premier. The Saskatchewan Party also benefited from the recent implosion of the Saskatchewan Liberal Party, now under the leadership of former riding candidate Ryan Bater. The party’s former leader, and sole MLA, David Karwacki, had resigned as leader, but kept his seat, in order to focus on his bid for the federal Liberal leadership. Without Karwacki’s presence in the legislature or campaign trail, anti-NDP, free enterprise voters began to coalesce behind Wall and the Saskatchewan Party. Despite the New Democrats attempts to promote the Liberals, if only to divide their opposition, assistance from their federal counterparts, and the trend in the rest of the country, it appeared as though the province’s traditionally third place party was headed for an even worse showing.
Right from the start the NDP unleashed a wave of negative advertising against Wall, painting him as a right-wing ideologue who would cut and slash everything he touched. Essentially, it was the game plan that had worked for the Liberals in Prince Edward Island, Ontario, and New Brunswick. Lingenfelter reminded voters that Brad Wall was one of the chief architects of the last Saskatchewan Party government, and was Elwin Hermanson’s right-hand man. Unions across the province unleashed their own campaigns against Wall, painting him as an enemy of the worker, a man more interested in a balance sheet than people. Wall's platform meanwhile avoided any mention of same-sex or abortion rights, and resisted the typical conservative trope of handing out tax cuts for businesses. It was a centrist, "compassionate conservative" agenda that invested in the province's welfare system. Thus, the NDP found its attacks struggling to stick to their opponents. It got so bad that Premier Lingenfelter referred to his opponent as the "little thief from Swift Current". In fact, in an odd turn of events, Lingenfelter and his party offered a relatively confusing platform, which offered both centre right and centre left policy proposals. Simultaneously they attacked the Saskatchewan Party for irresponsible spending promises, and advocating for rent controls and public ownership of Potash. When voters were asked what each of the leaders stood for, there wasn’t much difficulty when it came to Brad Wall. When it came to Dwain Lingenfelter, voters were a little more confused.
Still, the economy was strong, and despite the Saskatchewan Party’s time in power, the province was still seen as the birthplace of the New Democratic Party, and thus predominantly socially democratic. That perception came to an end on Election Night, as voters handed Brad Wall and his party a majority mandate, and sent the Saskatchewan NDP in search of a new leader.
Premiers of Saskatchewan:
Roy Romanow (New Democratic) 1991-1999
Elwin Hermanson (Saskatchewan) 1999-2007
Dwain Lingenfelter (New Democratic) 2007-2011
Brad Wall (Saskatchewan) 2011-
If a general election were held today, which potential leadership candidate would make you more likely to vote for the New Democratic Party of Saskatchewan?
Styling the campaign as a referendum on the Tories, Murphy sought to avoid making the mistakes that had plagued Shawn Graham four years earlier, namely focusing more on northern Francophone ridings at the expense of southern Anglophone electorates. Yet the core strategy for the election would be about who New Brunswickers wanted as their Premier, as opposed to the policies being offered by the two main parties. This served both leaders fine, as their party’s respective platforms, just as they had in the last election, did not appear radically different from one another. Trouble was, neither man was exceptionally popular with voters. Trevor Holder was the uncharismatic head of an unpopular government, while Murphy was a boring ex-lawyer who was only leading because of who he and his party were not. Liberals warned that another four years of the Conservatives would add further pressure on the debt, which had been on the rise after a brief reduction in the early years of Lord’s final mandate. Conservatives warned that Murphy would take his marching orders from the federal party, meaning increased taxes, spending recklessly, and the reversal of all the work the they had done to fix up the province. But, despite the fact that the election was between the Liberals and Conservatives, there were other parties offering bold new ideas. Having selected the boundless energetic Francophone Roger Duguay, the New Democrats hoped that they would be able to take advantage of voters frustration with the two major parties and elect a handful of their own members, something of a historical first in New Brunswick. Meanwhile the newly formed Green Party, led by former Liberal leadership candidate Jack McDougall, expressed similar views; after suffering decade after decade of the same old party politics, voters were looking for a fresh alternative.
Everyone knew the election was the Liberal’s to lose. They had the superior fundraising numbers, the superior polling numbers, impassioned supporters, and had spent the last four years recruiting strong candidates and building a strong campaign machine, especially with respect to the online world of Twitter and Facebook. The Tories were simply too old fashioned to fight them on such a battlefield. Still, a strict message of keeping the province strong and an even stricter campaign team helped the PCs diminish the overwhelming Liberal lead, not to mention the reports of some party infighting in the camp of the opposition. Murphy had never been considered an ally of the Liberal’s “old boys” club after they had back Graham over him in 2002, and the tensions remained. A poor performance by Michael Murphy in the English debate further eroded the Liberals momentum, until polls showed the race narrowing to only a ten point lead. On Election Night, as CTV’s Steve Murphy and his panelists gathered to deliver and analyze the results, it quickly became apparent that many undecided voters had broken for Premier Holder and his party in the final days of the campaign. But it wouldn’t be enough. By ten o’clock, the major broadcasters all projected that Michael Murphy and the Liberals would capture a majority government. Twelve years of Tory rule had come to an end.
Premiers of New Brunswick:
Frank McKenna (Liberal) 1987-1997
Ray Frenette (Liberal) 1997-1998
Camille Thériault (Liberal) 1998-1999
Bernard Lord (Progressive Conservative) 1999-2009
Trevor Holder (Progressive Conservative) 2009-2011
Michael Murphy (Liberal) 2011-
If a general election were held today, which potential leadership candidate would make you more likely to vote for the Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick?
Prince Edward Island had long been a province accustomed to political dynasties. Alexander Campbell and his Liberals ruled the small Island for twelve years back in the days of Pearson and Trudeau. After a brief, seven year interlude with the Tories, the Liberals would return under Joe Ghiz, who with his successors Catherine Callbeck and Keith Milligan, governed the province for a decade. Embracing the Progressive Conservatives under Pat Binns, the Tories would themselves govern uninterrupted for eleven years with little effective opposition. Enter Alan Buchanan, a former Liberal cabinet minister during the 1990s and the man who had slayed the boy wonder and son of former Premier Joe Ghiz, Robert Ghiz. After so much time with the Tories, voters had simply grown tired of Pat Binns, who on most accounts was still personally popular with a large number of Islanders. Binns’ government had fallen prey to the cruelest opponent of a political party; time. Scandals, complacedness, wasteful spending, they were all the hallmarks of a government which had become too comfortable, and arguably arrogant during their time in charge. It was simply time to switch back to the Grits, and they did so in a big way, handing them a majority in both the popular vote and in the legislature. With little interest in leading the opposition, Pat Binns resigned as leader of his party, eventually replaced with former cabinet minister George MacDonald.
A former teacher, MacDonald had long been involved with municipal politics, serving as a ward councilor for the city of Charlottetown throughout much of the 1980s and 1990s, before being elected Mayor in 1997. Opting not to seek a third term as Mayor, MacDonald would go on to narrowly defeat Robert Ghiz in the riding of Charlottetown Rochford-Square in 2003, managing to remain the only Progressive Conservative in the area following the Liberal’s victory four years later. Coming from the most populous city in the province, and enjoying the highest name recognition, MacDonald was the overwhelming favourite to replace former Premier Binns, and was acclaimed as party leader in 2009. With an incumbent Tory government in Ottawa, and the most recent federal election delivering two MPs to the government benches, Egmont’s Gail Shea and Charlottetown’s Rob Lantz, some provincial PCs hoped they could pull off a similar upset across the province.
Premier Buchanan, meanwhile, seemed to enjoy his new office immensely. Rubbing shoulder to shoulder with his provincial counterparts, glad handing the Prime Minister, appearing at photo-ops across Prince Edward Island, speaking at the odd federal Liberal fundraiser as one of the few incumbent Grit Premiers. It was fun. His caucus was united behind him, and polls had his party overwhelmingly ahead of the opposition Tories, in some cases by close to twenty percentage points.
The campaign itself was largely uneventful. Issues debated included increased funding to healthcare by the federal government, who seemed lukewarm to the notion of increased spending. George MacDonald and the PCs argued that that provincial spending had grown out of control under Buchanan and the Liberals, and if left to continue, the province would see its finances get out of control over the next four years. The Tories would continue the current amount of funding for healthcare and infrastructure, but comense a review of all government departments to determine whether current spending was being done responsibly. Buchanan and his party challenged that the opposition conservatives would cut and slash everything important to everyday Islanders, and attempted to link their more moderate opponents to some of the more right-wing elements of the federal Conservative Party. Various op-eds and articles bemoaned the lack of voter engagement in the campaign, with most provincial residents largely ignoring the candidates and the debates between the major party leaders.
When all was said and done, the Liberals secured their second mandate from voters, down two seats and two percentage points from four years earlier. George MacDonald and the Tories rebounded slightly, picking up those seats which had left the Grits. An expected result for a lacklustre and unimaginative campaign.
Premiers of Prince Edward Island:
Joe Ghiz (Liberal) 1986-1993
Catherine Callbeck (Liberal) 1993-1996
Pat Binns (Progressive Conservative) 1996-2007
Alan Buchanan (Liberal) 2007-
If a general election were held today, which potential leadership candidate would make you more likely to vote for the Progressive Conservative Party of PEI?
New Democratic leader Bill Blaikie was the seemingly untouchable force behind Manitoban politics. First elected as Premier in 2003, the long-time federal MP swept away the provincial Tory juggernaut under Brian Pallister, before handing them a second defeat at the polls four years later. After suffering numerous defeats with Gary Doer, the coiffed hair, “third way” talking centrist, the Manitoban New Democrats had finally found power through the scruffy looking former Baptist preacher who criticized both the ideology of Tony Blair and the tactics employed by the left. Compared to the boyish charms of Bernard Lord, the clean-cut appearance of Gordon Campbell and John Hamm, Blaikie was an odd-looking figure at First Minister Conferences. Yet, two election victories later, the Manitoban Premier stood as one of the most senior and influential figures in the federation, often serving as an intermediary between waring provinces, in particular those out in Western Canada. Despite his political differences with many of his fellow Premiers, Blaikie’s experience as a Christian minister brought with it an added set of skills that benefited the NDPer’s more congenial approach.Since coming to power in 2003, the Manitoban New Democrats had embarked upon an ambitious legislative agenda. Spending on healthcare and education were increased almost every year, taxes on a variety of goods like tobacco and liquor were increased, anti-smoking legislation had been drafted, university tuition fees were reduced, coal-burning factories banned, adoption rights extended to same-sex couples, they had pushed the federal government to legalize marriage equality, and had strengthened ties between the provincial government and its labour and Aboriginal counterparts. Compared to the fledgling New Democratic governments that had been in charge of Ontario, British Columbia, and in neighbouring Saskatchewan, where Premier Lingenfelter could only look on with envy, pundits agreed that the Manitoba NDP had emerged as the most successful and stable government in the party’s history. Although, many pointed to the provinces strong natural resources, in particular agriculture and the strength of Manitoba Hydro as what enabled the provincial government to post consecutive balanced-budgets and further increase spending.
It wasn’t just Lingenfelter who was jealous of Blaikie’s success. Even in spite of the global financial crisis, the government of Manitoba appeared to have weathered the storm better than most, and enjoyed a substantial lead over its Progressive Conservative and Liberal opponents in the polls. All things considered, it looked as though the NDP were set to be re-elected once again to their third majority. Opposition leader Merv Tweed, Gary Filmon’s former Industry Minister, had taken charge of the provincial Tories simply due to the fact that no one else wanted the job. The Conservatives were, more or less, broke, trailing in the polls against a popular incumbent, and were taking in little fundraising numbers compared to the New Democrats. Once again, it appeared that a rural right-wing opposition leader would fall to a party which dominated Winnipeg and urban Manitoba. As for the Liberals, still under the leadership of Kevin Lamoureux, they were equally, if not more, lifeless. Holding only two seats in the legislature, the Liberals didn’t even enjoy official party status, and had last held power in the province back in the late 1950s. According to the polls, this trend was set to continue.
Overall, the campaign unfolded as expected. The New Democrats promised to keep hydro rates at current levels, offer more daycare spaces, $10M to tackle crime, shorter wait times, and the accusations that the Tories would cut and slash everything important to Manitobans. Meanwhile the Progressive Conservatives advocated for harsher punishments for cases of domestic violence and spousal abuse, increased transparency in healthcare, additional palliative care beds, spend more money to fight Alzheimer’s, and implement a wave of new tax cuts for Manitobans. Lamoureux and the Liberal’s platform called for $44M on transit funding, $44.5M for daycare, better flood protection, strengthened broadband internet, and more funding to better equip law enforcement officers.
The election yielded a legislature little different to the last one. Despite dropping in the popular vote, the New Democrats gained a single seat, while the opposition conservatives witness the exact opposite; losing a seat despite gaining five per cent in the popular vote. Kevin Lamoureux was once again left as the sole Liberal in the Manitoban legislature, as more and more of his voting base moved towards the free-market-espousing Progressive Conservatives. Bill Blaikie had captured his third, and privately conceded final, win. The jockeying over who would succeed Blaikie began in earnest, as did the race to replace both Merv Tweed and Kevin Lamoureux, both of whom opted to retire rather than wage another battle against the NDP.
Premiers of Manitoba
Gary Filmon (Progressive Conservative) 1988-1997
Jim Downey (Progressive Conservative) 1997-1998
Brian Pallister (Progressive Conservative) 1998-2002
Bill Blaikie (New Democratic) 2003-
If a general election were held today, which potential leadership candidate would make you more likely to vote for the Progressive Conservative Party of Manitoba?
It paid off, and better than anyone, let alone the Tories, could hope. The Tories won re-election after entering a campaign more than ten points behind in the polls. Premier Ecker quickly became the de facto leader of the annual First Ministers’ Conferences. Not only that, but the Tories managed to win re-election again four years later, thanks in part to a spirited campaign waged by NDP leader Jack Layton, and a dispirited campaign by Dwight Duncan. But now both those men were gone. After losing six seats, Dwight Duncan’s ambition to become Premier was ended, and he was replaced with the brawling George Smitherman. Jack Layton, by-in-large the most liked and trusted politician at Queen’s Park, passed away after losing his battle with cancer, forcing his party into a leadership election only months before the provincial election. Following the outpouring of grief and sadness from Queen’s Park and the province as a whole, the New Democrats would ultimately select long-time Northern Ontario MPP and close Layton ally Gilles Bisson. Pundits from the Globe and Mail, MacLeans, and the Toronto Star all agreed; this was the most exciting election of the 2011 season, and likely to be the meanest and dirtiest campaign in Ontario history. After sixteen years in power, seven under Harris and nine under Ecker, it seemed like the Ontario PCs were headed for disaster. Much like in 2003, polls had the Tories as much as twenty points behind their Liberal opponents. Making matters worse, Ecker’s relationship with the party’s more right-wing flank has begun to boil over, with routine threats of a leadership review, or Frank Klees, who was contemplating a run for the leadership of the Reform Party, would replace her, or there would be the creation of a new conservative party to split the vote. Thus, Premier Ecker found herself fighting against four opponents; the Liberals, the New Democrats, the media, and right-wing Conservatives.
The Liberals were first out of the gate in the campaign. George Smitherman, in a speech to a few hundred people in downtown Toronto, slammed the Conservatives from everything from wasteful spending to patronage and corruption. It was a barn-burner of a speech, illustrating that the Liberals, typically preoccupied with their rural-urban divide, would be a completely different animal in this election. Speaking to immigrant communities, aboriginal leaders, union activists, and Bay Street employees, Smitherman criss-crossed the province, all the while speaking the same message; change and renewal. Gilles Bisson meanwhile bemoaned the divide not between urban and rural voters, but of rich and poor, arguing that the provincial government needed to do much more to combat poverty throughout Toronto and Northern Ontario, where suicide rates were on the rise. With only a limited time to prepare for the election after Layton’s death, Bisson struggled to connect to voters who missed the fire and energy of his predecessor. As for Janet Ecker, her campaign was a strange mixture of right-wing spending, tax cuts, and shrinking government, and Red Tory policies of increased healthcare and transit spending, looking at increasing the minimum wage, and devoting more funding for Ontario’s schools. There was a disconnect between Ecker and her party’s increasingly conservative base, which despised anything that even remotely smelled of government waste. In order to at least save her party from falling to third, the only option left to her was move towards the right, territory that she had previously rejected and mistrusted. Voters sensed the inauthenticity, and the Tories continued to trail.
On Election Night it didn’t take long for CTV, CBC, and the Agenda with Steve Paikin to call the election for George Smitherman and the Liberals. The Tories, despite falling only six percentage points, lost more than half their seats, including Ecker’s riding in Ajax. It was a wave. Once again, the federal Conservatives and Jim Dinning found themselves losing yet another ally, making his ability to implement his mandate all the harder.
Premiers of Ontario:
David Peterson (Liberal) 1985-1990
Bob Rae (New Democratic) 1990-1995
Mike Harris (Progressive Conservative) 1995-2002
Janet Ecker (Progressive Conservative) 2002-2011
George Smitherman (Liberal) 2011-
If a general election were held today, which potential leadership candidate would make you more likely to vote for the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario?
When Premier Efford announced that he would be holding a press conference just outside the House of Assembly, everyone knew what it was about. For the last few years the Premier had been suffering the tolls of diabetes, and had increasingly appeared tired of his job. So, when he told reporters that he was retiring from politics effective immediately, the only surprise was that it took this long for it to happen. Luckily for his party, their outgoing leader had left his successor a strong and sturdy vessel for which to sail. Newfoundland and Labrador had bucked the odds and found economic stability in times of global crisis, thanks in part to its recent oil wealth. The province had defied the national trends in the last federal election and delivered its vote to the federal Liberals. The unassuming, yet affable John Efford enjoyed a significant degree of popularity, which had rubbed off on his party. The opposition Conservatives had yet to find their footing after their embarrassing defeat under Kathy Dunderdale, and appeared to be in the midst of a struggle with the provincial New Democrats as to who voters thought best suited to serve as the Official Opposition in the House of Assembly.
And, much like the circumstances that led to one Premier’s retirement, the expectation as to who would take up the mantle was fairly well known. Siobhán Coady had racked up the favours, fought in the trenches, made herself visible throughout the province and at various Liberal political events, and was perceived by both her fellow Grits and the public at large as the only person capable enough, and likeable enough, to keep the Liberals in office. So when Coady announced her intention to seek her party’s leadership, she did so as the only official candidate. Former party president Danny Dumaresque had publicly mused about challenging Coady, but was politely informed of the consequences should he do so, and quietly exited the race before even entering it. Thus, for the first time in its history, the province of Newfoundland and Labrador found itself being led by a woman, likely leaving the likes of Joey Smallwood and Frank Moores spinning in their graves. But for Premier Coady, the road to re-election wasn’t without some potholes. Lorraine Michael of the NDP and Jerome Kennedy of the PC Party were likeable candidates, and seemed hellbent on kicking the Liberals from office. But both appeared to lack the federal allies, or the issues needed to wage a successful coup of such sorts.
The Liberals campaign message was simple and effective; the good times were finally here for Newfoundland and Labrador, and the Liberals and Siobhán Coady were the only ones able to defend those good times from Ottawa and the other provinces. Some pundits pointed out that it was ironic in some sense that Premier Coady was so high in the polls, considering what had befallen Kathy Dunderdale. Although the former Tory leader was never personally popular, many rationalized her defeat in that the socially conservative Newfoundlanders simply weren’t prepared to be led by a woman. Yet, four years later, here was a woman clearly in the lead. Jerome Kennedy and the PCs were left to play the only card that they could; that the province would be better served allying with the federal government than being oppositional to it. While it played well in some corners of the province, it didn’t do much good for the leader of the opposition to look like he was prepared to kowtow to Prime Minister Jim Dinning. Sensing an opportunity, New Democrats took advantage of their leader’s popularity with voters, and attacked Premier Coady and her party for not spending enough of the province’s newfound wealth on the poor and the disadvantaged. By focusing on what the government could do more about, rather than what it had already accomplished, captured the narrative, and soon made Lorraine Michael the main target of Liberal attacks.
Come Election Night, as voters across the province settled onto their couches and bar stools, the results rolled in. Premier Siobhán Coady and her party were indeed returned to power with a majority government. The momentum of incumbency during a time of economic strength proved impossible to overcome. However, as the battle for second unfolded, the New Democrats edged out the Progressive Conservatives, meaning that for the first time in Newfoundland history, the two most powerful individuals in the House of Assembly would be women. Once again, the Tories were left wondering what went wrong, and who could possibly lead them back from the wilderness come 2015.
Premiers of Newfoundland & Labrador:
Clyde Wells (Liberal) 1989-1996
Loyola Sullivan (Progressive Conservative) 1996-2005
John Efford (Liberal) 2005-2011
Siobhán Coady (Liberal) 2011
If a general election were held today, which potential leadership candidate would make you more likely to vote for the Progressive Conservative Party of Newfoundland & Labrador?
Known as Canada’s “other” New Democratic government, Premier Dwain Lingenfelter didn’t exactly enjoy the same popularity levels as his neighbour in Manitoba. But, to be fair to Lingenfelter, his situation wasn’t as bad as some liked to make it out to be. The province’s GDP had grown from $35.6 billion to $39.5 billion, thanks in part to a growth in natural resource sector, unemployment had risen only marginally, from 4.4 percent in 2007 to 5.0 percent in 2011, and the debt had steadied out to around approximately $101 million. There hadn’t been any major scandals involving members of the cabinet, nor anyone within the Premier’s office. Premier Lingenfelter enjoyed wide and passionate support amongst the members of his caucus, party, and voters who expressed a preference for the Saskatchewan New Democratic Party. Then why, asked the chorus of NDP activists and political nerds across the country, was the NDP trailing their Saskatchewan Party opponents?
Part of it had to do with perception. Dwain Lingenfelter was by all accounts a career politician, and his opponents were quick to remind voters of that fact whenever they could. First elected to the legislature in 1978, Lingenfelter had served under two New Democratic Premiers; Allan Blakeney and Roy Romanow. The only time Lingenfelter hadn’t been a member of cabinet or an MLA was after his defeat in 1986, after which he briefly served as President of his party, before winning a by-election back to the legislature in 1988. More than thirty years as an elected politician did little to dispel the oppositions attempts to paint the Premier as “out of touch” when things went wrong. There was also the fact that the New Democrats were facing a formidable opponent in the form of former Finance Minister Brad Wall. Folksy, charismatic, Baptist, and viewed as one of the smartest and hardest working MLA’s in the province, Wall was the most logical and most electable candidate to replace Elwin Hermanson. Plus, Wall came from the PC-side of the Saskatchewan Party merger, and lacked the Reform Party connections that the Saskatchewan NDP routinely threw at the former Premier. The Saskatchewan Party also benefited from the recent implosion of the Saskatchewan Liberal Party, now under the leadership of former riding candidate Ryan Bater. The party’s former leader, and sole MLA, David Karwacki, had resigned as leader, but kept his seat, in order to focus on his bid for the federal Liberal leadership. Without Karwacki’s presence in the legislature or campaign trail, anti-NDP, free enterprise voters began to coalesce behind Wall and the Saskatchewan Party. Despite the New Democrats attempts to promote the Liberals, if only to divide their opposition, assistance from their federal counterparts, and the trend in the rest of the country, it appeared as though the province’s traditionally third place party was headed for an even worse showing.
Right from the start the NDP unleashed a wave of negative advertising against Wall, painting him as a right-wing ideologue who would cut and slash everything he touched. Essentially, it was the game plan that had worked for the Liberals in Prince Edward Island, Ontario, and New Brunswick. Lingenfelter reminded voters that Brad Wall was one of the chief architects of the last Saskatchewan Party government, and was Elwin Hermanson’s right-hand man. Unions across the province unleashed their own campaigns against Wall, painting him as an enemy of the worker, a man more interested in a balance sheet than people. Wall's platform meanwhile avoided any mention of same-sex or abortion rights, and resisted the typical conservative trope of handing out tax cuts for businesses. It was a centrist, "compassionate conservative" agenda that invested in the province's welfare system. Thus, the NDP found its attacks struggling to stick to their opponents. It got so bad that Premier Lingenfelter referred to his opponent as the "little thief from Swift Current". In fact, in an odd turn of events, Lingenfelter and his party offered a relatively confusing platform, which offered both centre right and centre left policy proposals. Simultaneously they attacked the Saskatchewan Party for irresponsible spending promises, and advocating for rent controls and public ownership of Potash. When voters were asked what each of the leaders stood for, there wasn’t much difficulty when it came to Brad Wall. When it came to Dwain Lingenfelter, voters were a little more confused.
Still, the economy was strong, and despite the Saskatchewan Party’s time in power, the province was still seen as the birthplace of the New Democratic Party, and thus predominantly socially democratic. That perception came to an end on Election Night, as voters handed Brad Wall and his party a majority mandate, and sent the Saskatchewan NDP in search of a new leader.
Premiers of Saskatchewan:
Roy Romanow (New Democratic) 1991-1999
Elwin Hermanson (Saskatchewan) 1999-2007
Dwain Lingenfelter (New Democratic) 2007-2011
Brad Wall (Saskatchewan) 2011-
If a general election were held today, which potential leadership candidate would make you more likely to vote for the New Democratic Party of Saskatchewan?
Accurateworldwar
Banned
Obviously we need to see how Governor Kaczynski dares against incumbent President Jim Jones in the 1996 presidential election
Behold, the result of far too much in-depth research into England's most famous folk hero!
After King Arthur, of course.
Robert II of Locksley
This article is about the historical figure, the outlawed grandson of Robert of Locksley. For their depictions in popular culture, see Robin Hood.
Robert II of Locksley, also known as Robert of Huntingdon, was an outlaw and bandit active during the reigns of Henry III of England and his son and heir, Edward I of England. Presumably the son and heir to rebel baron Richard of Locksley, 1st Earl of Huntingdon, Robert was disenfranchised and deprived of his inheritance after the disastrous Battle of Evesham during the Second Barons' War. Facing charges of treason, Robert appears to have modelled himself, deliberately or otherwise, after his Angevin-era ancestor Sir Robert of Locksley, and allegedly lived as an outlaw in Sherwood Forest, Barnsdale, and wider Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire.
It is in this phase of his life that he adopted the alias "Robin Hood"; his biography and exploits, along with those of his ancestor and his fellow outlawed rebel Roger Godberd, have since come to form the basis of the legend of Robin Hood. Given the attribution of his activities to the reign of "King Edward", it is most plausible that his floruit extended to at least 1272 (the beginning of Edward I's de jure reign) or 1274 (Edward's return from the Holy Land during the Eighth Crusade.) His fate afterwards is unknown; Robin Hood receiving the king's pardon appears to be a detail lifted not from Robert's own biography, but that of Roger Godberd's.
Robert's life, along with his ancestor Sir Robert Locksley and Roger Godberd, hence forms the nucleus of the Robin Hood of popular legend.
Early life and background
Given that Robert's fortunes arose from being heir presumptive to Richard of Locksley, 1st Earl of Huntingdon, the simplest explanation is that Robert was the son of Richard; likewise, as Robert specifically identified with Sir Robert of Locksley, an outlawed forester of Loxley Chase knighted by Richard I of England for his aid during the Revolt of 1194, and based much of his career upon his biography, the most parsimonious conclusion is that Robert II of Locksley was Sir Robert's grandson, and Richard was Robert I's son.
Robert II's presumed birthdate is extrapolated from the theory that "1247" on the Kirklees headstone purporting to inter Robin Hood refers not to "Robin Hood"'s death, but his birth; backing for a birthdate of this time-frame is circumstantially supported by the validity of his resulting age during the Second Barons' War. Apart from this speculation, little is known about Robert's background beyond his connection to South Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire.
Second Barons' War
Robert's father, Richard of Locksley, appears to have sided with Simon de Montfort, 6th Earl of Leicester during the numerous disputes between their fellow barons and Henry III of England, presumably some time after the "Mad Parliament" of 1258 which attempted to pass the Provisions of Oxford, which were confirmed by the Provisions of Westminster the following year, but revoked via Papal Bull as there is no special mention of Richard of Locksley in any of the rolls relating to these Provisions.
Nevertheless, Richard's support of Simon either during or immediately after his self-imposed exile in the aftermath of the papal bull appears to have endeared Richard to Simon sufficiently for de Montfort to promote him to the Earldom of Huntingdon, perhaps on the grounds of its historic association with the Earldom of Northumbria, held by his wife Isabelle of Ivinghoe, daughter of Wilfred of Ivinghoe. This title had lapsed in 1237 with the death of John of Scotland along with the Earldom of Chester, which Simon granted to himself in 1264.
If Richard's conversion to the Barons' cause was during this time-frame, it may have represented the northernmost extent of the overthrow of the king's support base, following the violent "debt cancellations" amounting to pogroms aimed at Jewish moneylenders in London, Winchester, Canterbury, Cambridge, Lincoln and Northampton.
Whichever the case, it was as Earl of Huntingdon, and his son Robert, knighted by Simon de Montfort himself, as heir presumptive, that Richard participated at the Battle of Evesham, where Henry III and his son Edward Longshanks sought to wrest control of the country back from the rebellious barons. The battle was a disaster for the barons and their forces were massacred, with Simon de Montfort and Richard of Locksley slain alongside fellow rebel leaders Peter de Montfort and Hugh le Despencer, amongst others.
Outlaw and bandit
Robert had survived, and escaped to press his claim on the Earldom of Huntingdon; however, as the war wound down it was clear that Simon de Montfort's endowments were considered null and void, and Robert was dispossessed of his knighthood and earldom, and further declared as an fugitive from justice when he refused to sign the Dictum of Kenilworth, and joined the faction of the "Disinherited" with John Deyville on the Isle of Ely; Deyville and his brother Robert had taken command of the northern rebels upon the death of Richard. His misfortune appeared to be on the brink of reversal when Gilbert de Clare, 7th Earl of Gloucester (who had previously turned against the barons at Evesham) attacked London seeking more favourable terms for himself and his fellow dispossessed lords.
The precise timing of Robert's turn to banditry and adoption of the "Robin Hood" alias is unknown; however, if he is to be identified with the "Robertus Hod" at the final rebel stronghold at Ely, this marks 1267 as his terminus post quem. It appears that Robert fell out with John Deyville over the latter's violent methods, and refused to accept the king's peace, being similarly disgusted with Gilbert de Clare. A "Robertus Hod" is next reported as defaulting on a court hearing in 1268 based on crimes committed several years prior alongside a certain Simon de Constable in East Yorkshire; although Simon de Constable was pardoned by the king, there is no mention of Robert Hood or the other criminals' fate.
The extent of Robert's activities as "Robert Hood" may be inferred through comparison with his fellow rebel and outlaw Roger Godberd, who served under Simon de Montfort during the Barons' War. Many aspects of the Robin Hood legend, such as his association with Sherwood Forest, command of a hundred followers, relationship with the Sheriff of Nottingham, special protection by a knight named Richard, and pardon by the King, in fact derive from Roger Godberd's biography; minus aspects unique to Roger Godberd's life, Robert Hood's career appears to be defined by his activities in Barnsdale Forest and related locations such as Wentbridge, and his association with Little John and Friar Tuck.
The chief sources to the historicity of Robert Hood's career, besides the ballads and plays concerning Robin Hood, are mentions by Scottish chroniclers:
Litil Iohun [Little John] and Robert Hude [Robert Hood]
Waythmen [Forest outlaws] war commendit gud [praised well];
In Ingilwode [Inglewood] and Bernnysdaile [Barnsdale]
Thai oyssit [practiced] al this tyme thar trawale [labour]. (Andrew of Wyntoun's Orygynale Chronicle, c. 1420)
Then arose the famous murderer, Robert Hood, as well as Little John, together with their accomplices from among the disinherited, whom the foolish populace are so inordinately fond of celebrating both in tragedies and comedies, and about whom they are delighted to hear the jesters and minstrels sing above all other ballads.
About whom also certain praiseworthy things are told, as appears in this -- that when once in Barnsdale, avoiding the anger of the king and the threats of the prince, he was according to his custom most devoutly hearing Mass and had no wish on any account to interrupt the service -- on a certain day, when he was hearing Mass, having been discovered in that very secluded place in the woods when the Mass was taking place by a certain sheriff (viscount) and servant of the king, who had very often lain in wait for him previously, there came to him those who had found this out from their men to suggest that he should make every effort to flee.
This, on account of his reverence for the sacrament in which he was then devoutly involved, he completely refused to do. But, the rest of his men trembling through fear of death, Robert, trusting in the one so great whom he worshipped, with the few who then bravely remained with him, confronted his enemies and easily overcame them, and enriched by the spoils he took from them and their ransom, ever afterward singled out the servants of the church and the Masses to be held in greater respect, bearing in mind what is commonly said: "God harkens to him who hears Mass frequently." (Walter Bower's Continuation of John Fordun's Scotichronicon, c. 1440)
Robin Hood's association with Maid Marian is complex, and relates to the history of both characters with May Day festivities, along with the Le Jeu de Robin et de Marion relating the story of a shepherdess named Marion who fights off the advances of an amorous knight with the help of her lover Robin. The syncretising of Robin Hood, Maid Marian, and this play may be related to the animosity between Robert Hood and Gilbert de Clare, and his affairs with Gilbert's cousin Matilda, who feared for her life due to the ambitions of the Earl. Matilda was the daughter of William de Clare, the uncle of Gilbert, and thus was a rival heiress to the de Clares' considerable holdings. So long as Robert lived, Gilbert felt his position threatened.
Thus, Anthony Munday's plays, known collectively as The Downfall and the Death of Robert Earl of Huntingdon, which relates Robert's noble origins and relationship with the persecuted Matilda, who then adopts the identity of Maid Marian, may simply be committing the same error as the Scottish historian John Major in his Historia Majoris Britanniae. Major conflates Robert II of Locksley with his Angevin-era ancestor, Sir Robert of Locksley, and Munday carries this error forward whilst appropriating the alleged plight of Matilda FitzWalter at King John's hands for his play. By this time, Roger Godberd's exploits had already been thoroughly folded into this so-called "composite Robin Hood".
Although Roger Godberd's career is known to have ended following Henry III's death, when Edward I returned to England, Robert Hood's fortunes are less well-known. The Robin Hood of the ballads, although granted the king's pardon, ultimately repudiates it and returns to the greenwood. Robin Hood is mentioned in conjunction with Edward I in notes made on the manuscript of the Polychronicon dated to 1460:
However, as Sherwood Forest is explicitly mentioned, this may once again be a result of the conflation of his career with Roger Godberd's. Andrew of Wyntoun's entry is recorded under the date 1283, which would imply a career extending over nearly 18 years; if the date of 1247 is taken to be Robert Hood's year of birth, he would have been active from age of around 18 to 36, which is not implausible. Nevertheless, all of the above remains as mere speculation.
Contribution to the Robin Hood legend
Main article: Robin Hood#Historicity
The Robin Hood of popular culture, as discussed above, appears to originate from fewer than three strands:
Robert of Locksley's existence must be inferred from the reconciliation of the fame of "Robin Hood" as a personage and as an alias by the time of the early-to-mid 13th century (such as the various "Robert Hod"s and "Hobbehod"s between 1228 and 1234 in pipe rolls) and the various attempts by chroniclers such as the anonymous author of the Sloane Manuscript and John Major in his Historia Majoris Britanniae to place Robert Hood's activities in the timeframe of Richard I's reign.
These are corroborated by the Wardour Manuscript detailing Sir Robert of Locksley's service in 1194. As for the lack of previous mention to the Earldom of Huntingdon with regards to Robert Hood's career, it is notable that by these exegeses, Robert II of Locksley never held the earldom in reality, only his father as a token of appreciation by Simon de Montfort. Robert I of Locksley being a yeoman prior to his involvement in the Revolt of 1194 and Robert II of Locksley being deprived of his inheritance due to the outcome of the Battle of Evesham handily reconcile these apparent contradictions.
It is notable that the early historical references (Andrew of Wyntoun and Walter Bower), along with the vast majority of the earlier ballads, all mention Robin Hood's association with Barnsdale Forest and Little John, with the exception of Robin Hood and the Monk, which mentions Sherwood Forest, although explicitly as a destination, and the margin interpolation in the Polychronicon. Evidently by the mid-to-late fifteenth century, Robert Hood had gained his identification with Barnsdale and slowly begun to absorb the legend of Roger Godberd.
By the end of the next century, as codified by the Historia Majoris Britanniae and The Downfall and Death of Robert Earl of Huntingdon, the "composite Robin" had solidified, with Robert I of Locksley's Angevin-era origins and career, Roger Godberd's association with Sherwood Forest and entanglements with the Sheriff of Nottingham, and Robert II of Locksley's history of nobility and disinheritance leading to a career of banditry, leaving a complex network of origins and literary traditions to be untangled by future generations.
Massive props to http://www.robinhoodlegend.com/ , without which this would not have been possible in the least.
Everything in bold except for the Locksleys, the Ivinghoes, Matilda de Clare and the so-called "Wardour Manuscript" (actually the text of Ivanhoe) is historically attested.
After King Arthur, of course.
===
Robert II of Locksley
This article is about the historical figure, the outlawed grandson of Robert of Locksley. For their depictions in popular culture, see Robin Hood.
Robert II of Locksley, also known as Robert of Huntingdon, was an outlaw and bandit active during the reigns of Henry III of England and his son and heir, Edward I of England. Presumably the son and heir to rebel baron Richard of Locksley, 1st Earl of Huntingdon, Robert was disenfranchised and deprived of his inheritance after the disastrous Battle of Evesham during the Second Barons' War. Facing charges of treason, Robert appears to have modelled himself, deliberately or otherwise, after his Angevin-era ancestor Sir Robert of Locksley, and allegedly lived as an outlaw in Sherwood Forest, Barnsdale, and wider Nottinghamshire and Yorkshire.
It is in this phase of his life that he adopted the alias "Robin Hood"; his biography and exploits, along with those of his ancestor and his fellow outlawed rebel Roger Godberd, have since come to form the basis of the legend of Robin Hood. Given the attribution of his activities to the reign of "King Edward", it is most plausible that his floruit extended to at least 1272 (the beginning of Edward I's de jure reign) or 1274 (Edward's return from the Holy Land during the Eighth Crusade.) His fate afterwards is unknown; Robin Hood receiving the king's pardon appears to be a detail lifted not from Robert's own biography, but that of Roger Godberd's.
Robert's life, along with his ancestor Sir Robert Locksley and Roger Godberd, hence forms the nucleus of the Robin Hood of popular legend.
=
Early life and background
Given that Robert's fortunes arose from being heir presumptive to Richard of Locksley, 1st Earl of Huntingdon, the simplest explanation is that Robert was the son of Richard; likewise, as Robert specifically identified with Sir Robert of Locksley, an outlawed forester of Loxley Chase knighted by Richard I of England for his aid during the Revolt of 1194, and based much of his career upon his biography, the most parsimonious conclusion is that Robert II of Locksley was Sir Robert's grandson, and Richard was Robert I's son.
Robert II's presumed birthdate is extrapolated from the theory that "1247" on the Kirklees headstone purporting to inter Robin Hood refers not to "Robin Hood"'s death, but his birth; backing for a birthdate of this time-frame is circumstantially supported by the validity of his resulting age during the Second Barons' War. Apart from this speculation, little is known about Robert's background beyond his connection to South Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire.
=
Second Barons' War
Robert's father, Richard of Locksley, appears to have sided with Simon de Montfort, 6th Earl of Leicester during the numerous disputes between their fellow barons and Henry III of England, presumably some time after the "Mad Parliament" of 1258 which attempted to pass the Provisions of Oxford, which were confirmed by the Provisions of Westminster the following year, but revoked via Papal Bull as there is no special mention of Richard of Locksley in any of the rolls relating to these Provisions.
Nevertheless, Richard's support of Simon either during or immediately after his self-imposed exile in the aftermath of the papal bull appears to have endeared Richard to Simon sufficiently for de Montfort to promote him to the Earldom of Huntingdon, perhaps on the grounds of its historic association with the Earldom of Northumbria, held by his wife Isabelle of Ivinghoe, daughter of Wilfred of Ivinghoe. This title had lapsed in 1237 with the death of John of Scotland along with the Earldom of Chester, which Simon granted to himself in 1264.
If Richard's conversion to the Barons' cause was during this time-frame, it may have represented the northernmost extent of the overthrow of the king's support base, following the violent "debt cancellations" amounting to pogroms aimed at Jewish moneylenders in London, Winchester, Canterbury, Cambridge, Lincoln and Northampton.
Whichever the case, it was as Earl of Huntingdon, and his son Robert, knighted by Simon de Montfort himself, as heir presumptive, that Richard participated at the Battle of Evesham, where Henry III and his son Edward Longshanks sought to wrest control of the country back from the rebellious barons. The battle was a disaster for the barons and their forces were massacred, with Simon de Montfort and Richard of Locksley slain alongside fellow rebel leaders Peter de Montfort and Hugh le Despencer, amongst others.
=
Outlaw and bandit
Robert had survived, and escaped to press his claim on the Earldom of Huntingdon; however, as the war wound down it was clear that Simon de Montfort's endowments were considered null and void, and Robert was dispossessed of his knighthood and earldom, and further declared as an fugitive from justice when he refused to sign the Dictum of Kenilworth, and joined the faction of the "Disinherited" with John Deyville on the Isle of Ely; Deyville and his brother Robert had taken command of the northern rebels upon the death of Richard. His misfortune appeared to be on the brink of reversal when Gilbert de Clare, 7th Earl of Gloucester (who had previously turned against the barons at Evesham) attacked London seeking more favourable terms for himself and his fellow dispossessed lords.
The precise timing of Robert's turn to banditry and adoption of the "Robin Hood" alias is unknown; however, if he is to be identified with the "Robertus Hod" at the final rebel stronghold at Ely, this marks 1267 as his terminus post quem. It appears that Robert fell out with John Deyville over the latter's violent methods, and refused to accept the king's peace, being similarly disgusted with Gilbert de Clare. A "Robertus Hod" is next reported as defaulting on a court hearing in 1268 based on crimes committed several years prior alongside a certain Simon de Constable in East Yorkshire; although Simon de Constable was pardoned by the king, there is no mention of Robert Hood or the other criminals' fate.
The extent of Robert's activities as "Robert Hood" may be inferred through comparison with his fellow rebel and outlaw Roger Godberd, who served under Simon de Montfort during the Barons' War. Many aspects of the Robin Hood legend, such as his association with Sherwood Forest, command of a hundred followers, relationship with the Sheriff of Nottingham, special protection by a knight named Richard, and pardon by the King, in fact derive from Roger Godberd's biography; minus aspects unique to Roger Godberd's life, Robert Hood's career appears to be defined by his activities in Barnsdale Forest and related locations such as Wentbridge, and his association with Little John and Friar Tuck.
The chief sources to the historicity of Robert Hood's career, besides the ballads and plays concerning Robin Hood, are mentions by Scottish chroniclers:
Litil Iohun [Little John] and Robert Hude [Robert Hood]
Waythmen [Forest outlaws] war commendit gud [praised well];
In Ingilwode [Inglewood] and Bernnysdaile [Barnsdale]
Thai oyssit [practiced] al this tyme thar trawale [labour]. (Andrew of Wyntoun's Orygynale Chronicle, c. 1420)
Then arose the famous murderer, Robert Hood, as well as Little John, together with their accomplices from among the disinherited, whom the foolish populace are so inordinately fond of celebrating both in tragedies and comedies, and about whom they are delighted to hear the jesters and minstrels sing above all other ballads.
About whom also certain praiseworthy things are told, as appears in this -- that when once in Barnsdale, avoiding the anger of the king and the threats of the prince, he was according to his custom most devoutly hearing Mass and had no wish on any account to interrupt the service -- on a certain day, when he was hearing Mass, having been discovered in that very secluded place in the woods when the Mass was taking place by a certain sheriff (viscount) and servant of the king, who had very often lain in wait for him previously, there came to him those who had found this out from their men to suggest that he should make every effort to flee.
This, on account of his reverence for the sacrament in which he was then devoutly involved, he completely refused to do. But, the rest of his men trembling through fear of death, Robert, trusting in the one so great whom he worshipped, with the few who then bravely remained with him, confronted his enemies and easily overcame them, and enriched by the spoils he took from them and their ransom, ever afterward singled out the servants of the church and the Masses to be held in greater respect, bearing in mind what is commonly said: "God harkens to him who hears Mass frequently." (Walter Bower's Continuation of John Fordun's Scotichronicon, c. 1440)
Robin Hood's association with Maid Marian is complex, and relates to the history of both characters with May Day festivities, along with the Le Jeu de Robin et de Marion relating the story of a shepherdess named Marion who fights off the advances of an amorous knight with the help of her lover Robin. The syncretising of Robin Hood, Maid Marian, and this play may be related to the animosity between Robert Hood and Gilbert de Clare, and his affairs with Gilbert's cousin Matilda, who feared for her life due to the ambitions of the Earl. Matilda was the daughter of William de Clare, the uncle of Gilbert, and thus was a rival heiress to the de Clares' considerable holdings. So long as Robert lived, Gilbert felt his position threatened.
Thus, Anthony Munday's plays, known collectively as The Downfall and the Death of Robert Earl of Huntingdon, which relates Robert's noble origins and relationship with the persecuted Matilda, who then adopts the identity of Maid Marian, may simply be committing the same error as the Scottish historian John Major in his Historia Majoris Britanniae. Major conflates Robert II of Locksley with his Angevin-era ancestor, Sir Robert of Locksley, and Munday carries this error forward whilst appropriating the alleged plight of Matilda FitzWalter at King John's hands for his play. By this time, Roger Godberd's exploits had already been thoroughly folded into this so-called "composite Robin Hood".
Although Roger Godberd's career is known to have ended following Henry III's death, when Edward I returned to England, Robert Hood's fortunes are less well-known. The Robin Hood of the ballads, although granted the king's pardon, ultimately repudiates it and returns to the greenwood. Robin Hood is mentioned in conjunction with Edward I in notes made on the manuscript of the Polychronicon dated to 1460:
Around this time [i.e. the reign of Edward I], according to popular opinion, a certain outlaw named Robin Hood, with his accomplices, infested Sherwood and other law-abiding areas of England with continuous robberies.
However, as Sherwood Forest is explicitly mentioned, this may once again be a result of the conflation of his career with Roger Godberd's. Andrew of Wyntoun's entry is recorded under the date 1283, which would imply a career extending over nearly 18 years; if the date of 1247 is taken to be Robert Hood's year of birth, he would have been active from age of around 18 to 36, which is not implausible. Nevertheless, all of the above remains as mere speculation.
=
Contribution to the Robin Hood legend
Main article: Robin Hood#Historicity
The Robin Hood of popular culture, as discussed above, appears to originate from fewer than three strands:
- Robert of Locksley, yeoman and disenfranchised forester knighted by Richard I of England for his service during the Revolt of 1194; may have been the origin of "Robert Hood" as a stock alias for an outlaw
- Robert II of Locksley, otherwise known as "Robert Hood", disenfranchised heir to the Earldom of Huntingdon active as a criminal during and after the Second Barons' War, associated with Barnsdale Forest and Little John
- Roger Godberd, soldier in the service of Simon de Montfort who turned to banditry following the Battle of Evesham, arrested multiple times by Reginald de Grey, Sheriff of Nottingham, pardoned by Edward I
Robert of Locksley's existence must be inferred from the reconciliation of the fame of "Robin Hood" as a personage and as an alias by the time of the early-to-mid 13th century (such as the various "Robert Hod"s and "Hobbehod"s between 1228 and 1234 in pipe rolls) and the various attempts by chroniclers such as the anonymous author of the Sloane Manuscript and John Major in his Historia Majoris Britanniae to place Robert Hood's activities in the timeframe of Richard I's reign.
These are corroborated by the Wardour Manuscript detailing Sir Robert of Locksley's service in 1194. As for the lack of previous mention to the Earldom of Huntingdon with regards to Robert Hood's career, it is notable that by these exegeses, Robert II of Locksley never held the earldom in reality, only his father as a token of appreciation by Simon de Montfort. Robert I of Locksley being a yeoman prior to his involvement in the Revolt of 1194 and Robert II of Locksley being deprived of his inheritance due to the outcome of the Battle of Evesham handily reconcile these apparent contradictions.
It is notable that the early historical references (Andrew of Wyntoun and Walter Bower), along with the vast majority of the earlier ballads, all mention Robin Hood's association with Barnsdale Forest and Little John, with the exception of Robin Hood and the Monk, which mentions Sherwood Forest, although explicitly as a destination, and the margin interpolation in the Polychronicon. Evidently by the mid-to-late fifteenth century, Robert Hood had gained his identification with Barnsdale and slowly begun to absorb the legend of Roger Godberd.
By the end of the next century, as codified by the Historia Majoris Britanniae and The Downfall and Death of Robert Earl of Huntingdon, the "composite Robin" had solidified, with Robert I of Locksley's Angevin-era origins and career, Roger Godberd's association with Sherwood Forest and entanglements with the Sheriff of Nottingham, and Robert II of Locksley's history of nobility and disinheritance leading to a career of banditry, leaving a complex network of origins and literary traditions to be untangled by future generations.
=
Massive props to http://www.robinhoodlegend.com/ , without which this would not have been possible in the least.
Everything in bold except for the Locksleys, the Ivinghoes, Matilda de Clare and the so-called "Wardour Manuscript" (actually the text of Ivanhoe) is historically attested.
ST15RM
Banned
And the award for “longest post of the year” goes to...
But all jokes aside this is a neat lil scenario and the amount of detail you put in is spectacular. Very nice.
The United States Grand Prix, since its inception in 1959, has been raced on 6 different tracks: Sebring (1959-1962), Watkins Glen (1963-1975), Road Atlanta (1976-1979), Road America (1980-1999), Indianapolis (2000-2009, 2013-), and Sonoma (2010-2012). The race has always been a favorite for fans on the F1 calendar and attracts some of the biggest crowds in F1 history; with the 2000 race at Indianapolis having 250,000 fans in attendance. Frenchman Alain Prost has won the United States Grand Prix the most times, with 7, all of them coming at Road America.
Famous moments:
2014: After leading most of the race in his Williams, 2008 winner Filipe Massa suffered a tyre puncture 4 laps from the finish, giving Sebastian Vettel the win.
2012: In the last race on the Sonoma circuit, Lewis Hamilton held off a charging Michael Schumacher and Fernando Alonso to win by 0.378 seconds.
2007: In a dramatic race which included Kimi Raikonnen flying into the catchfence at the last turn and Honda's Jenson Button capturing a surprise podium, Fernando Alonso took home his first USGP victory.
2004: Jenson Button's BAR and Ralf Schumacher's BMW both retired from the lead, giving the win to Schumacher's team mate, Juan Montoya, becoming the first driver to win both the Indy 500 and the United States Grand Prix at Indianapolis.
2000: After word was spread that the USGP would not be held at Road America after 1999, many tracks were considered to be new hosts of the event, including Daytona, Sonoma, Long Beach, Laguna Seca, Portland, and St. Petersburg. But in the end, the Grand Prix was headed to the famous Indianapolis Motor Speedway. In an exciting and chaotic race, a five-lap duel between David Coulthard and Michael Schumacher ended with Schumacher running wide in the first corner on the last lap, and David Coulthard securing the win.
1999: The last race at Road America proved to be one for the ages, with torrential rain downpouring all throughout the Grand Prix. Pole-sitter Damon Hill's Jordan retired on lap 4 after crashing in the Kink. Eddie Irvine's Ferrari then crashed out of the lead on lap 16 after trying to pass the lapped car of Marc Gene's Minardi. Benneton driver Alex Wurz then gained the lead as Michael Schumacher, Mika Hakkinen, Jean Alesi and David Coulthard all retired. Wurz then got in the grass, giving the lead to Stewart's Johnny Herbert, who later won with Wurz second and Heinz-Harald Frentzen's Jordan securing third.
1998: In a race that saw many cars get taken out at the first turn on lap one, including Oliver Panis' Prost getting airborne, and only 6 cars finishing, Williams' Heinz-Harald Fretzen held off Jean Alesi's Sauber and Jos Verstappen's Stewart to take his first F1 win.
1997: Damon Hill's Arrows took a run-away victory with teammate Pedro Diniz capturing second, with Michael Schumacher and Jacques Villeneuve colliding on the last corner, putting them both out of the points.
1990: In a race lead by the Leyton House of Ivan Cappelli, Alain Prost passed Cappelli with two laps to go to take his 6th victory in the United States Grand Prix.
1986: In a wet-dry race, McLaren's Keke Rosberg took his last F1 win after Aryton Senna's Lotus and Alain Prost's McLaren collided on the first turn of the last lap being the predecessor of the famous rivalry when teammates at McLaren.
1981: Gilles Villeneuve overtook Nelson Piquet at the line, becoming one of the closest finishes in Formula One history.
1978: In a race that included Derek Daly's Ensign catching air and crashing in the catchfence, Nika Lauda's Brabham engine blew with 6 laps to go, with Gilles Villeneuve capturing his maiden victory.
Famous moments:
2014: After leading most of the race in his Williams, 2008 winner Filipe Massa suffered a tyre puncture 4 laps from the finish, giving Sebastian Vettel the win.
2012: In the last race on the Sonoma circuit, Lewis Hamilton held off a charging Michael Schumacher and Fernando Alonso to win by 0.378 seconds.
2007: In a dramatic race which included Kimi Raikonnen flying into the catchfence at the last turn and Honda's Jenson Button capturing a surprise podium, Fernando Alonso took home his first USGP victory.
2004: Jenson Button's BAR and Ralf Schumacher's BMW both retired from the lead, giving the win to Schumacher's team mate, Juan Montoya, becoming the first driver to win both the Indy 500 and the United States Grand Prix at Indianapolis.
2000: After word was spread that the USGP would not be held at Road America after 1999, many tracks were considered to be new hosts of the event, including Daytona, Sonoma, Long Beach, Laguna Seca, Portland, and St. Petersburg. But in the end, the Grand Prix was headed to the famous Indianapolis Motor Speedway. In an exciting and chaotic race, a five-lap duel between David Coulthard and Michael Schumacher ended with Schumacher running wide in the first corner on the last lap, and David Coulthard securing the win.
1999: The last race at Road America proved to be one for the ages, with torrential rain downpouring all throughout the Grand Prix. Pole-sitter Damon Hill's Jordan retired on lap 4 after crashing in the Kink. Eddie Irvine's Ferrari then crashed out of the lead on lap 16 after trying to pass the lapped car of Marc Gene's Minardi. Benneton driver Alex Wurz then gained the lead as Michael Schumacher, Mika Hakkinen, Jean Alesi and David Coulthard all retired. Wurz then got in the grass, giving the lead to Stewart's Johnny Herbert, who later won with Wurz second and Heinz-Harald Frentzen's Jordan securing third.
1998: In a race that saw many cars get taken out at the first turn on lap one, including Oliver Panis' Prost getting airborne, and only 6 cars finishing, Williams' Heinz-Harald Fretzen held off Jean Alesi's Sauber and Jos Verstappen's Stewart to take his first F1 win.
1997: Damon Hill's Arrows took a run-away victory with teammate Pedro Diniz capturing second, with Michael Schumacher and Jacques Villeneuve colliding on the last corner, putting them both out of the points.
1990: In a race lead by the Leyton House of Ivan Cappelli, Alain Prost passed Cappelli with two laps to go to take his 6th victory in the United States Grand Prix.
1986: In a wet-dry race, McLaren's Keke Rosberg took his last F1 win after Aryton Senna's Lotus and Alain Prost's McLaren collided on the first turn of the last lap being the predecessor of the famous rivalry when teammates at McLaren.
1981: Gilles Villeneuve overtook Nelson Piquet at the line, becoming one of the closest finishes in Formula One history.
1978: In a race that included Derek Daly's Ensign catching air and crashing in the catchfence, Nika Lauda's Brabham engine blew with 6 laps to go, with Gilles Villeneuve capturing his maiden victory.
- Status