A spinoff from Égalité ou indépendence: after Bob Rae trounces Bernard Valcourt to win a second majority government and third term, Valcourt resigns as leader. Somewhat unusually he stays on till a successor is chosen. Though many Tories expected a wide-open field, it quickly winnowed down to 2 scions. Labour critic Mathieu Sauvé was the heavy frontrunner due to his widespread popularity among Blue Tories, social conservatives and Quebecers. In contrast to the charismatic, cunning and perfectly bilingual Sauvé, justice critic Peter MacKay ran on a traditional Red Tory platform and promised continuity with the Mazankowski and Prentice governments. While aware of the rising Blue tide, he had underestimated it and failed to make significant inroads into the West or Quebec. Sauvé had convinced the grassroots that a sharp contrast would be rewarded at the polls. That October, he won a landslide to become the Tories' youngest - only 40- and first Francophone leader. Sauvé tapped Jason Kenney as his deputy but contrary to expectations named finance critic Scott Brison rather than MacKay as his Atlantic lieutenant. Privately Rae believes that his young rival, while undoubtedly talented and popular, is too conservative for moderate Ontarians.
Alternate Wikipedia Infoboxes
- Thread starter AYC
- Start date
- Status
Keep up the good work our wonderful Canadian trio. 
Aside from your constitutional squabbles, which I love, I've never been too interested in your actual politics, but Canadian elections are another thing entirely. They can just become so unpredictable and chaotic. It's harder to do that in the United States, but I did my best after mulling over this old thread.
President Gore is killed during 9/11. President Lieberman is initially very popular, but by 2004 he has proved more divisive than any President in decades. The surprise victory of the Two Pauls (Ron Paul and Wellstone) in Iowa showed that the public had soured on the wars in Sudan and Yemen. Lieberman was extremely frustrated that the more successfully concluded wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon that so helped the party in the 2002 midterms were forgotten. By G-d, we got a public option and a lowering of the Medicare age out of that majority! And nobody even talked about Libya, the smoothest intervention of all, crown jewel of the Arab Spring. Paul Wellstone had betrayed America as soon as he voted against the PATRIOT Act. After Wellstone's death before the New Hampshire primary, Russ Feingold filled his shoes, which was even worse, as he actually had the stamina to mount a serious presidential campaign. If he lost to Feingold, an independent campaign would be the campaign that America deserves, and more importantly, the campaign his Democratic Party deserves. Secretary of State John McCain would be a fine running mate indeed.
Lieberman ends up doing better in his party's primary than Rudy Guliani, though. Meanwhile, the current Republican New York Mayor sees an inevitable Paulslide as nothing short of a disaster, as America for Lieberman ensures the Republican nominee of a landslide even if he is the antipathy of everything Bloomberg stands for. It takes some persuasion to draft thethe heir of the Republican presidential family that was robbed of victory by Democratic treachery in Florida only four years previously to save the country. Secretly, Bloomberg hopes to become Acting President, as everyone expects the House to deadlock between pro-and anti-Paul Republicans with the announcement of Jeb Bush's run as an independent. But he is too clever by half. While Feingold is a very attractive candidate to liberals, why wouldn't voters in the populous states like New York, California, and Illinois just go for the real thing in Ralph Nader? He ran a very strong campaign in 2000. After all, the thing is going to go to Congress anyways, right?
Wrong. Turns out the election was shorter than 2000 after all. Lieberman had managed to pass Gore's attempted election law reforms (Republicans had stonewalled pretty much everything Gore wanted in a fury over Florida) in 2002 with his post-9/11 political capital, which made the fact that every state was too close to call more bearable. By December, the victor was clear when the recount in Texas ended and it was found it had opted for a favorite son over the brother of the former governor by 1,913 votes.
Everyone underestimated the ferocity and novelty of the Paul campaign. The campaign use of grassroots supporters reminded many of the 1964 Goldwater campaign, but its use of the internet was revolutionary. Paul was able to win the Republican-leaning anti-war vote, particularly in the Western states. The October Surprise 2004 legalization of gay marriage (Sandra Day O'Connor had retired mid-way through the primaries, preferring that Lieberman name her successor instead of Paul) ultimately helped Paul more than any other candidate among traditional Republican voters who might have been inclined to vote for Bush. Coming so close to the election was seen as extremely political (today it's right up there with Bush v. Gore due to the timing), and nobody attacked the activist court as savagely as Paul, who advocated for the privatization of all marriage in response. Republicans approved; this was simpler and more to many real conservatives than Bush's call for a Constitutional Amendment. But Paul could not have won without some key blue states, which were won based on the division of the moderate vote between Bush and Lieberman, and the balkanization of the left-wing vote between Lieberman, Feingold, and Nader.
Russ Feingold had done about the best he could. He carried his own Wisconsin, the late Wellstone's Minnesota, Rhode Island, and most notably, the South. This was primarily due to Wellstone having the strong support of African-Americans in those states, but it was certainly historical to have those states go to a liberal Democratic and Jewish candidate. The entrance of Bush into the race hurt Feingold with college liberals and leftists, who saw Feingold as the likely winner of a deadlocked election. In the end, too many of them voted for "Nader in November, and Feingold in January." This made the difference in California, New York, Illinois, and Pennsylvania, where Feingold placed second. Had Feingold won all of those states, which were all extremely close, he would have won 288 electoral votes.
Joe Lieberman was unpopular with Republicans and half of the Democratic Party, but he was still fairly popular with actual independents. He campaigned as if he was the incumbent of a united party, and placed second in the popular vote. He carried his native Connecticut, McCain's Arizona, independent-happy Maine, military-base heavy Hawaii, New Jersey (the only state where he won a plurality of the Jewish vote instead of Feingold. Mike Bloomberg helped Bush do fairly well in this demographic as well), as well as some surprise states where Feingold and Nader both underperformed and Paul and Bush split the Republican-leaning vote.
Jeb Bush won the popular vote, and ran his campaign as if he would win the electoral vote. He was very close in many states, running second or a close third, but ultimately only won Ohio, Florida, Utah, and Massachusetts, certainly an unusual grouping of states. Ohio was the only state where Bush's style of campaign actually paid off. Florida could arguably be lumped in that category as well, but Bush was always at an advantage there due to his popularity as governor. Utah proved rather hostile to every candidate but Bush, while Massachusetts was the reverse: everyone did rather evenly there, and Bush happened to squeak through.
Ralph Nader's reputation completely changed as a result of the election. Based on his strong performance from 2000, the Green Party welcomed him back with open arms. He selected the Mayor of San Francisco as his running mate. He embarrassed Feingold by winning Washington, D.C. based on the promotion of DC statehood. Aside from this special focus on his main residence, Nader concentrated his campaign on the most populous states, to great success. Too much success. Nader was attacked for throwing the states, and the election to Paul. To the amazement of many of his own supporters, Nader not only refuted the allegations, but said he welcomed Paul's election based on his foreign policy and corporate welfare issues. Most disturbingly to Nader voters was the candidate's insistence that Paul was preferable to even Feingold on these issues. The Green Party had overcome that magic 5%, but they had lost their star forever. The Nader made famous by Unsafe at Any Speed was unrecognizable after 2004. President Paul would name Nader to head a special committee investigating corporate welfare. Nader had been hoping for the head of the EPA, or Secretary of Transportation, or even Ambassador to the United Nations, but President Paul left all of those positions vacant.
Aside from your constitutional squabbles, which I love, I've never been too interested in your actual politics, but Canadian elections are another thing entirely. They can just become so unpredictable and chaotic. It's harder to do that in the United States, but I did my best after mulling over this old thread.President Gore is killed during 9/11. President Lieberman is initially very popular, but by 2004 he has proved more divisive than any President in decades. The surprise victory of the Two Pauls (Ron Paul and Wellstone) in Iowa showed that the public had soured on the wars in Sudan and Yemen. Lieberman was extremely frustrated that the more successfully concluded wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon that so helped the party in the 2002 midterms were forgotten. By G-d, we got a public option and a lowering of the Medicare age out of that majority! And nobody even talked about Libya, the smoothest intervention of all, crown jewel of the Arab Spring. Paul Wellstone had betrayed America as soon as he voted against the PATRIOT Act. After Wellstone's death before the New Hampshire primary, Russ Feingold filled his shoes, which was even worse, as he actually had the stamina to mount a serious presidential campaign. If he lost to Feingold, an independent campaign would be the campaign that America deserves, and more importantly, the campaign his Democratic Party deserves. Secretary of State John McCain would be a fine running mate indeed.
Lieberman ends up doing better in his party's primary than Rudy Guliani, though. Meanwhile, the current Republican New York Mayor sees an inevitable Paulslide as nothing short of a disaster, as America for Lieberman ensures the Republican nominee of a landslide even if he is the antipathy of everything Bloomberg stands for. It takes some persuasion to draft thethe heir of the Republican presidential family that was robbed of victory by Democratic treachery in Florida only four years previously to save the country. Secretly, Bloomberg hopes to become Acting President, as everyone expects the House to deadlock between pro-and anti-Paul Republicans with the announcement of Jeb Bush's run as an independent. But he is too clever by half. While Feingold is a very attractive candidate to liberals, why wouldn't voters in the populous states like New York, California, and Illinois just go for the real thing in Ralph Nader? He ran a very strong campaign in 2000. After all, the thing is going to go to Congress anyways, right?
Wrong. Turns out the election was shorter than 2000 after all. Lieberman had managed to pass Gore's attempted election law reforms (Republicans had stonewalled pretty much everything Gore wanted in a fury over Florida) in 2002 with his post-9/11 political capital, which made the fact that every state was too close to call more bearable. By December, the victor was clear when the recount in Texas ended and it was found it had opted for a favorite son over the brother of the former governor by 1,913 votes.
Everyone underestimated the ferocity and novelty of the Paul campaign. The campaign use of grassroots supporters reminded many of the 1964 Goldwater campaign, but its use of the internet was revolutionary. Paul was able to win the Republican-leaning anti-war vote, particularly in the Western states. The October Surprise 2004 legalization of gay marriage (Sandra Day O'Connor had retired mid-way through the primaries, preferring that Lieberman name her successor instead of Paul) ultimately helped Paul more than any other candidate among traditional Republican voters who might have been inclined to vote for Bush. Coming so close to the election was seen as extremely political (today it's right up there with Bush v. Gore due to the timing), and nobody attacked the activist court as savagely as Paul, who advocated for the privatization of all marriage in response. Republicans approved; this was simpler and more to many real conservatives than Bush's call for a Constitutional Amendment. But Paul could not have won without some key blue states, which were won based on the division of the moderate vote between Bush and Lieberman, and the balkanization of the left-wing vote between Lieberman, Feingold, and Nader.
Russ Feingold had done about the best he could. He carried his own Wisconsin, the late Wellstone's Minnesota, Rhode Island, and most notably, the South. This was primarily due to Wellstone having the strong support of African-Americans in those states, but it was certainly historical to have those states go to a liberal Democratic and Jewish candidate. The entrance of Bush into the race hurt Feingold with college liberals and leftists, who saw Feingold as the likely winner of a deadlocked election. In the end, too many of them voted for "Nader in November, and Feingold in January." This made the difference in California, New York, Illinois, and Pennsylvania, where Feingold placed second. Had Feingold won all of those states, which were all extremely close, he would have won 288 electoral votes.
Joe Lieberman was unpopular with Republicans and half of the Democratic Party, but he was still fairly popular with actual independents. He campaigned as if he was the incumbent of a united party, and placed second in the popular vote. He carried his native Connecticut, McCain's Arizona, independent-happy Maine, military-base heavy Hawaii, New Jersey (the only state where he won a plurality of the Jewish vote instead of Feingold. Mike Bloomberg helped Bush do fairly well in this demographic as well), as well as some surprise states where Feingold and Nader both underperformed and Paul and Bush split the Republican-leaning vote.
Jeb Bush won the popular vote, and ran his campaign as if he would win the electoral vote. He was very close in many states, running second or a close third, but ultimately only won Ohio, Florida, Utah, and Massachusetts, certainly an unusual grouping of states. Ohio was the only state where Bush's style of campaign actually paid off. Florida could arguably be lumped in that category as well, but Bush was always at an advantage there due to his popularity as governor. Utah proved rather hostile to every candidate but Bush, while Massachusetts was the reverse: everyone did rather evenly there, and Bush happened to squeak through.
Ralph Nader's reputation completely changed as a result of the election. Based on his strong performance from 2000, the Green Party welcomed him back with open arms. He selected the Mayor of San Francisco as his running mate. He embarrassed Feingold by winning Washington, D.C. based on the promotion of DC statehood. Aside from this special focus on his main residence, Nader concentrated his campaign on the most populous states, to great success. Too much success. Nader was attacked for throwing the states, and the election to Paul. To the amazement of many of his own supporters, Nader not only refuted the allegations, but said he welcomed Paul's election based on his foreign policy and corporate welfare issues. Most disturbingly to Nader voters was the candidate's insistence that Paul was preferable to even Feingold on these issues. The Green Party had overcome that magic 5%, but they had lost their star forever. The Nader made famous by Unsafe at Any Speed was unrecognizable after 2004. President Paul would name Nader to head a special committee investigating corporate welfare. Nader had been hoping for the head of the EPA, or Secretary of Transportation, or even Ambassador to the United Nations, but President Paul left all of those positions vacant.
Keep up the good work our wonderful Canadian trio.
Always nice to have your old threads inspire new works
.In order I think I would support: Lieberman, Feingold, Bush, Nader, Paul.
Yeah, it got me rethinking about an old idea I had. I realized that Paul would be well-placed to beat Guliani. Lieberman neutralizes McCain, and Guliani is so weak.Always nice to have your old threads inspire new works
In order I think I would support: Lieberman, Feingold, Bush, Nader, Paul.
And you're the typical voter from Arizona ITTL! Well, close. You guys voted Lieberman/McCain, Paul/Johnson, Feingold/Cleland, Bush/Bloomberg, Nader/Biafra. Here's the obligatory map counterpart.
Well, Lieberman passed uniform election law standards in 2002, which made the recounting process in all fifty states rather smooth. The fact that Gore came out on top in the popular vote in 2000 ITTL but had to wait weeks to find out he actually won Florida by three votes caused Gore to speak out for an amendment to abolish the electoral college. Of course, Fox is basically going on about election fraud all throughout Gore's presidency, and it doesn't go anywhere. Now, based on this election, I could see the Bush family openly touting the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact
But President Paul and his supporters in the Republican Party would see such an assault on the electoral college as an attack to the very heart of the Republic itself. After all, the Founding Fathers created the electoral college. America is a republic, not a democracy. Veto everything! I think the NPVIC would become a bloody tool in the intra-Republican Party war that would be brewing throughout the Paul Presidency.I imagine that a lot of people are going to start talking about STV, PR, and the like, too. Had Feingold won, there probably would have been more talk of it, because he actually got even less votes than Paul. But I think the main talk is going to be about the reformation of the electoral college. I can very easily see one's position on that being an indicator of whether or not one supports President Paul. Perhaps an amendment even passes after the 2006 midterms! But I doubt it. Amendments are hard things to pass, and Ron Paul is going to defend the electoral college to the death.
Thande
Donor
Interesting work, I actually came up with something not dissimilar as the backstory to a setting but yours is much more nuanced. I like the "America for Lieberman" ticket in the vein of "Connecticut for Lieberman"...of course to fully parallel OTL they then need to fall out with him and threaten to run a different presidential candidate to him in 2008 against his wishes, without ever changing their name
I may end up stealing some of your ideas if that's OK (not the full thing as I have Gore die during his second term instead) because I've been concerned that my version of that election is a bit iffy and this multi-cornered one helps justify a Paul victory later.
I considered having Lieberman go for "National Union" (I also considered having Bush run as "Conservative"), but ultimately "America for Lieberman" is just too corny and tempting. And I too love that fact.Interesting work, I actually came up with something not dissimilar as the backstory to a setting but yours is much more nuanced. I like the "America for Lieberman" ticket in the vein of "Connecticut for Lieberman"...of course to fully parallel OTL they then need to fall out with him and threaten to run a different presidential candidate to him in 2008 against his wishes, without ever changing their name
I may end up stealing some of your ideas if that's OK (not the full thing as I have Gore die during his second term instead) because I've been concerned that my version of that election is a bit iffy and this multi-cornered one helps justify a Paul victory later.
But Lieberman wouldn't be able to run in 2008 even if he had won because he became President so early. But America for Lieberman does have federal funding in 2008, don't they... Perhaps he tries a comeback in 2008 and loses the America for Lieberman primary.Sure, feel free. Ah, I haven't even thought about a scenario where Gore actually lives. Gore is basically just a device to get Lieberman into the Presidency, he has no real legacy ITTL besides being used as a martyr and symbol for Lieberman's policies. I'd be interested in seeing what you have.
Thande
Donor
It was just an attempt to come up with backstory really. See, back in 2000 I was writing science fiction (which I'm now trying to reboot, but not posted here aside from the "Moonstruck" spinoff) and I had mapped out a nice if clichéd FH trajectory to get from here to 2350, and then 9/11 happened and all my ideas were suddenly outdated. So rather than start again, I decided to make it an AH-FH rather than a pure FH - in fact this is one of the things that got me into alternate history in the first place. Rather than it just being 'no 9/11', I decided to base it on the then-recent disputed presidential election going differently (I actually backdated the POD to 1980 but that was the first visible sign of the butterflies). At first I was thinking of America becoming involved in a bloody Middle East war (worse than Iraq, which actually hadn't even happened when I wrote this!) and then turn to an isolationist Democrat in 2008 based on the fact that I didn't know the Republicans were sometimes more isolationist back then, and the result of this isolation from the outside world is a Pearl Harbour-style attack in 2020 that kicks off the Third World War.I considered having Lieberman go for "National Union" (I also considered having Bush run as "Conservative"), but ultimately "America for Lieberman" is just too corny and tempting. And I too love that fact.
Sure, feel free. Ah, I haven't even thought about a scenario where Gore actually lives. Gore is basically just a device to get Lieberman into the Presidency, he has no real legacy ITTL besides being used as a martyr and symbol for Lieberman's policies. I'd be interested in seeing what you have.
Anyway, I recently realised that a figure like Ron Paul would make a lot more sense as the isolationist, and getting him to the presidency is tricky even under the circumstances where the war-weary public are receptive to an isolationist message, but you can get around that if it's an incumbent Lieberman running as an independent and an official Democratic ticket splitting the vote. You've just done it much more thoroughly and plausibly with the idea of a separate Republican splitoff ticket as well and Paul getting elected on a small plurality for an even more controversial presidency.
I'm re-posting the first few of these from the alternate electoral map thread since it seems they fit better here.
It's a series. The POD is that Teddy Roosevelt decides to run in 1908. Teddy dominates the north, running up large margins in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Ohio. These help to create a high popular vote win despite narrow Bryan wins in some border states.
In 1912 the democrats nominate Woodrow Wilson as in OTL. Meanwhile the republicans nominate Charles Evans Hughes. Eugene V. Debs does slightly better than OTL:
And in 1916 the popular President Hughes wins in a landslide over sacrificial lamb candidate former Governor Judson Harmon of Ohio:
Next up, the GOP nominate Major General Leonard Wood to replace Hughes, who did succeed in keeping the U.S. out of the Great War in Europe. However, with the GOP in control of the White House since 1896, party fatigue kicks in and Governor Charles W. Bryan - brother of William Jennings Bryan - is elected. Bryan ran for Governor of Nebraska several years early in this TL.
The dems nominate a relative unknown for V.P. in New York Congressman Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose polio is butterflied away after being elected V.P. here. Prohibition goes into effect as in OTL.
Just under a year into his term, President Bryan is tragically killed during a cross-country train trip to California when his train derails. The nation mourns his loss and the previously unknown FDR becomes President.
The GOP nominates progressive California Senator and former Governor Hiram Johnson, but with the economy on the upswing voters are content to stick with the relatively untested Roosevelt:
Roosevelt decides to run for a second term, despite having served 7 years as President. This proves to be a minor controversy for the man many voters, by now, view as a smooth-talker with little substance to back up his rhetoric. FDR still manages to put up a good fight, but in the end is defeated by New Jersey Senator and former Governor Walter Evans Edge:
It's a series. The POD is that Teddy Roosevelt decides to run in 1908. Teddy dominates the north, running up large margins in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Ohio. These help to create a high popular vote win despite narrow Bryan wins in some border states.
In 1912 the democrats nominate Woodrow Wilson as in OTL. Meanwhile the republicans nominate Charles Evans Hughes. Eugene V. Debs does slightly better than OTL:
And in 1916 the popular President Hughes wins in a landslide over sacrificial lamb candidate former Governor Judson Harmon of Ohio:
Next up, the GOP nominate Major General Leonard Wood to replace Hughes, who did succeed in keeping the U.S. out of the Great War in Europe. However, with the GOP in control of the White House since 1896, party fatigue kicks in and Governor Charles W. Bryan - brother of William Jennings Bryan - is elected. Bryan ran for Governor of Nebraska several years early in this TL.
The dems nominate a relative unknown for V.P. in New York Congressman Franklin D. Roosevelt, whose polio is butterflied away after being elected V.P. here. Prohibition goes into effect as in OTL.
Just under a year into his term, President Bryan is tragically killed during a cross-country train trip to California when his train derails. The nation mourns his loss and the previously unknown FDR becomes President.
The GOP nominates progressive California Senator and former Governor Hiram Johnson, but with the economy on the upswing voters are content to stick with the relatively untested Roosevelt:
Roosevelt decides to run for a second term, despite having served 7 years as President. This proves to be a minor controversy for the man many voters, by now, view as a smooth-talker with little substance to back up his rhetoric. FDR still manages to put up a good fight, but in the end is defeated by New Jersey Senator and former Governor Walter Evans Edge:
Next in my series is 1932, considered by most historians in this TL to be the most chaotic election in American history.
With the onset of the Great Depression, President Edge finds himself quite unpopular. The democratic convention produces a surprise result as Louisiana Governor Huey Long comes out of seemingly nowhere to capture the party's nomination despite limited experience.
However, many voters view Long as too radical and even dangerous. Former republican nominee Senator Hiram Johnson runs as the progressive party candidate, targeting voters who want a more progressive direction, but who also aren't comfortable with Long.
Complicating matters further is socialist candidate Norman Thomas, who receives just over 6% of the vote and carries 3 states out west. There is even a fifth semi-major candidate in communist party nominee William Z. Foster, who receives 3.9% of the vote as voters demand a more equitable distribution of wealth.
In the end, Huey Long is elected President with 42.6% of the vote and 268 electoral votes, two over the required number to clinch the Presidency. President Edge does quite a bit better than Herbert Hoover in the OTL, largely due to the anti-incumbent vote being split so many ways. He carries the entire northeast, but receives just 28.8% of the vote.
The progressive ticket proves quite popular for a third party, taking 18.1% of the vote, 10 states, and 108 electoral votes:
With the onset of the Great Depression, President Edge finds himself quite unpopular. The democratic convention produces a surprise result as Louisiana Governor Huey Long comes out of seemingly nowhere to capture the party's nomination despite limited experience.
However, many voters view Long as too radical and even dangerous. Former republican nominee Senator Hiram Johnson runs as the progressive party candidate, targeting voters who want a more progressive direction, but who also aren't comfortable with Long.
Complicating matters further is socialist candidate Norman Thomas, who receives just over 6% of the vote and carries 3 states out west. There is even a fifth semi-major candidate in communist party nominee William Z. Foster, who receives 3.9% of the vote as voters demand a more equitable distribution of wealth.
In the end, Huey Long is elected President with 42.6% of the vote and 268 electoral votes, two over the required number to clinch the Presidency. President Edge does quite a bit better than Herbert Hoover in the OTL, largely due to the anti-incumbent vote being split so many ways. He carries the entire northeast, but receives just 28.8% of the vote.
The progressive ticket proves quite popular for a third party, taking 18.1% of the vote, 10 states, and 108 electoral votes:
Wow, this thread really blew up overnight
Thanks for the kind words on the infoboxes! Phenomenal work with the infobox. Very well done, and unlike some other multi-party scenarios I've seen, pretty realistic. Is this a one-off or will you be continuing this? I'd love to see more.
These are phenomenal infoboxes. Charles W. Bryan! FDR in 1924! Huey Long! Very well done, hope to see more as well.
Keep up the good work our wonderful Canadian trio.
Thanks for the kind words on the infoboxes! Phenomenal work with the infobox. Very well done, and unlike some other multi-party scenarios I've seen, pretty realistic. Is this a one-off or will you be continuing this? I'd love to see more.
These are phenomenal infoboxes. Charles W. Bryan! FDR in 1924! Huey Long! Very well done, hope to see more as well.
Please tell me there were debates.
Also, was Paul cross-endorsed by the Libertarians and Constitution Party? I think the leaders of both those parties had planned on doing that had Paul won the Republican nomination in 2008 or 2012.
Last edited:
d32123
Banned
Keep up the good work our wonderful Canadian trio.
This is wild and I love it.
I'd be interested in seeing this scenario brought up to the present.
Plumber's scenario has two different Jewish candidates running for President and one running for Vice President and Ron Paul heading up the Republican ticket. I assume the Stormfront vote will be out in full force, and there's probably going to be a pretty apparent uptick in anti-semitic violence and anti-semitism in that United States.
A infobox for a friend of mine. Also happens to be my first infobox for alternate histories. Franz II, who in this reality is the German Emperor because of the critical roll that Bavaria had in uniting Germany.
I know I'm repeating myself, but I've got to say this last page has had some amazing infoboxes. Simply great.
Anyway, before I finish my series, I just wanted to go back in time a bit to the Liberals' and PC's leadership races at the beginning of the millennium.
Starting with the 2001 PC leadership race, Perrin Beatty was forced to call a leadership election after receiving only 65% approval from party members. He entered the race, but so did many others, most notably Kim Campbell and New Brunswick Premier Bernard Lord. Along with Beatty, Peter MacKay, and Jim Flaherty, they formed the top tier, with David Orchard, Brian Pallister, and Heward Grafftey being considered also-rans.
Beatty led on the first ballot, but endorsements proved to be his undoing. Pallister and Flaherty went to Campbell, while Grafftey and MacKay went to Bernard Lord, who quickly gained momentum. After MacKay's endorsement, Lord narrowly pushed Beatty to third, eliminating him from the race. Beatty declined to endorse either Campbell or Lord, and the party elected Campbell as leader.
Clark majority in '79
1979 election
Liberal leadership election, 1981
1983 election
PC leadership election, 1985
1987 election
1991 election
PC leadership election, 1993
1995 election
Liberal leadership election, 1996
2000 election
2002 election
2003 election
2007 election
2008 election
2010 election
2014 election
Anyway, before I finish my series, I just wanted to go back in time a bit to the Liberals' and PC's leadership races at the beginning of the millennium.
Starting with the 2001 PC leadership race, Perrin Beatty was forced to call a leadership election after receiving only 65% approval from party members. He entered the race, but so did many others, most notably Kim Campbell and New Brunswick Premier Bernard Lord. Along with Beatty, Peter MacKay, and Jim Flaherty, they formed the top tier, with David Orchard, Brian Pallister, and Heward Grafftey being considered also-rans.
Beatty led on the first ballot, but endorsements proved to be his undoing. Pallister and Flaherty went to Campbell, while Grafftey and MacKay went to Bernard Lord, who quickly gained momentum. After MacKay's endorsement, Lord narrowly pushed Beatty to third, eliminating him from the race. Beatty declined to endorse either Campbell or Lord, and the party elected Campbell as leader.
Clark majority in '79
1979 election
Liberal leadership election, 1981
1983 election
PC leadership election, 1985
1987 election
1991 election
PC leadership election, 1993
1995 election
Liberal leadership election, 1996
2000 election
2002 election
2003 election
2007 election
2008 election
2010 election
2014 election
The Liberal convention, on the other hand, was even more chaotic. Although Paul Martin entered the race as the front-runner, he had pissed off many in the party through his attempts to oust Jean Chretien, and had stumbled on the campaign trail. Martin was still able to lead on the first ballot, as the anti-Martin vote failed to coalesce around a single candidate. Brian Tobin, however, placed second, and the second ballot saw many anti-Martin voters move to Tobin, with Martin failing to make any major gains.
After left-wing candidates Martin Cauchon and Sheila Copps were eliminated/withdrew after the second ballot, most of their supporters went to Allan Rock, seen as the closest ideologically. Rock was narrowly able to jump into the lead, with Tobin and Martin not far behind. John Manley was eliminated, and, despite the likeliehood that most of his supporters would go to Martin, Martin himself decided to withdraw, concluding that the anti-Martin voters were too strong and that it would be in the best interest of the party (this would prove not to be the case, as many Martin supporters would stay home in the election several months later). On the final ballot, Tobin was narrowly able to defeat Rock, as he was seen as acceptable to all wings of the party.
Clark majority in '79
1979 election
Liberal leadership election, 1981
1983 election
PC leadership election, 1985
1987 election
1991 election
PC leadership election, 1993
1995 election
Liberal leadership election, 1996
2000 election
PC leadership election, 2001
2002 election
2003 election
2007 election
2008 election
2010 election
2014 election
Whoa, lot of responses. I've thought about turning this into a TLIAD, so this is encouraging.
FDR being a boring 1920s president but but not making a Mackenzie King-esque comeback in favor of Huey Long. Whoo!
Yep, he was, and it ultimately leads to the erosion of both parties. Over the next four years, lots of Libertarian and Constitution Party members filter into the GOP. Specifically, they become part of the Tea Party movement, which started in 2001 ITTL over the issue of Gore stealing Florida via ACORN. The earlier radicalism of the GOP bites them hard in the ass in 2002, when Lieberman is riding high off a successful war record, but its they who have the last laugh in the 2004 election as they coalesce around Dr. Paul.
So would I! I'm not sure how things will go from here, but I'm trying to keep it interesting.
I thought about that, too. New York was almost a perfect four-way tie, more than any other state. The Stormfront factor becomes a slightly noticeable element of Ron Paul's support. You left out the part about a Jewish President invading several Middle Eastern countries, though. There's a lot more antisemitism abroad than OTL, as Lieberman is basically as popular as Bush was abroad.
Ah, interesting. It's really hard for me to imagine Ron Paul becoming President unless Lieberman does too. Lieberman is the key to Paul's success.
Ah, I'm liking where this is going.
FDR being a boring 1920s president but but not making a Mackenzie King-esque comeback in favor of Huey Long. Whoo!Thanks!
Ah, there were! I forgot about them. Nader wasn't in the debates, so it was a four-way. They were lively.
Yep, he was, and it ultimately leads to the erosion of both parties. Over the next four years, lots of Libertarian and Constitution Party members filter into the GOP. Specifically, they become part of the Tea Party movement, which started in 2001 ITTL over the issue of Gore stealing Florida via ACORN. The earlier radicalism of the GOP bites them hard in the ass in 2002, when Lieberman is riding high off a successful war record, but its they who have the last laugh in the 2004 election as they coalesce around Dr. Paul.
Thanks!This is wild and I love it.
I'd be interested in seeing this scenario brought up to the present.
So would I! I'm not sure how things will go from here, but I'm trying to keep it interesting.
Consider it done.
Plumber's scenario has two different Jewish candidates running for President and one running for Vice President and Ron Paul heading up the Republican ticket. I assume the Stormfront vote will be out in full force, and there's probably going to be a pretty apparent uptick in anti-semitic violence and anti-semitism in that United States.
I thought about that, too. New York was almost a perfect four-way tie, more than any other state. The Stormfront factor becomes a slightly noticeable element of Ron Paul's support. You left out the part about a Jewish President invading several Middle Eastern countries, though. There's a lot more antisemitism abroad than OTL, as Lieberman is basically as popular as Bush was abroad.
- Status