Status
Not open for further replies.

Ficboy

Banned
However, Williamsburg is halfway between Richmond and the Hampton Roads, the most critical population centers of Virginia
Although to be honest those places were often threatened by the Union in OTL and faced some fierce fighting. Charlottesville has none of that and there is the historical connection as I mentioned.
 
Although to be honest those places were often threatened by the Union in OTL and faced some fierce fighting. Charlottesville has none of that and there is the historical connection as I mentioned.

The Union would target whatever town was the state Capitol, really. It’s not like Charlottesville isn’t easy to march to from the Shenandoah with Harpers Ferry and the Alleghenies firmly in Union control and their other logistical advantages in any future conflict
 

Ficboy

Banned
The Union would target whatever town was the state Capitol, really. It’s not like Charlottesville isn’t easy to march to from the Shenandoah with Harpers Ferry and the Alleghenies firmly in Union control and their other logistical advantages in any future conflict
Then again Williamsburg isn't safe from the Union either given how close the city is to the James River and especially Norfolk and Hampton Roads. Plus the Americans never made a serious attempt at even capturing Charlottesville and it remained unscathed compared to the rest of Virginia in OTL.
 
Then again Williamsburg isn't safe from the Union either given how close the city is to the James River and especially Norfolk and Hampton Roads. Plus the Americans never made a serious attempt at even capturing Charlottesville and it remained unscathed compared to the rest of Virginia in OTL.

Well, there was no strategic advantage to be had in C’ville at the time. There would if it was the stage capital of Virginia.

either way, I’ve settled upon Williamsburg
 

Ficboy

Banned
Well, there was no strategic advantage to be had in C’ville at the time. There would if it was the stage capital of Virginia.

either way, I’ve settled upon Williamsburg
So what will the North American rugby leagues look like. Plus since the sport is British, the Confederates are likely to adopt the game as their own and might go with a hybrid between the original and the Canadian versions. The American rugby league will have franchises in New York, Boston, Buffalo, a New Jersey city, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago, Detroit, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, St. Louis, Kansas City and Baltimore as well as Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Phoenix, Denver and Las Vegas in the later decades. while the Canadian rugby league has their own franchises in Toronto, Ottawa, Hamilton, Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton, Calgary, Halifax and Vancouver. The Confederate rugby league is likely to have franchises in Richmond, Norfolk, Louisville, Nashville, Memphis, Charleston, Atlanta, New Orleans, Jacksonville, Pensacola, Birmingham and North Carolina city with new teams in Dallas, Houston, Austin and one located in Sequoyah. The baseball leagues in America and the Confederacy will be similar as well.
 
Last edited:
So what will the North American rugby leagues look like. Plus since the sport is British, the Confederates are likely to adopt the game as their own and might go with a hybrid between the original and the Canadian versions. The American rugby league will have franchises in New York, Boston, Buffalo, a New Jersey city, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago, Detroit, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, St. Louis, Kansas City and Baltimore as well as Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle and Portland in the later decades. while the Canadian rugby league has their own franchises in Toronto, Ottawa, Hamilton, Winnipeg, Regina, Edmonton, Calgary, Halifax and Vancouver. The Confederate rugby league is likely to have franchises in Richmond, Norfolk, Louisville, Nashville, Memphis, Charleston, Atlanta, New Orleans, Jacksonville, Pensacola, Birmingham and North Carolina city with new teams in Dallas, Houston, Austin and one located in Sequoyah.

Haven’t thought that far ahead but probably more or less. Definitely won’t be one in Miami or Orlando, South Florida is going to have a very different trajectory in the 20th century without the retiree boom and Cuban expatriates
 

Ficboy

Banned
Haven’t thought that far ahead but probably more or less. Definitely won’t be one in Miami or Orlando, South Florida is going to have a very different trajectory in the 20th century without the retiree boom and Cuban expatriates
Miami and Orlando are unlikely to be prominent since OTL versions became major cities due to Northern and Cuban expatriates as well as investment from corporations. New Orleans, Louisiana on the other hand is likely going to resemble Miami: A cosmopolitan, diverse city known for its nightlife, lights and partying as well as a Romance Catholic language being commonly spoken alongside English (Spanish/French). It also helps that New Orleans is the site of Mardi Gras one of the biggest celebrations in America.
 
Miami and Orlando are unlikely to be prominent since OTL versions became major cities due to Northern and Cuban expatriates as well as investment from corporations. New Orleans, Louisiana on the other hand is likely going to resemble Miami: A cosmopolitan, diverse city known for its nightlife, lights and partying as well as a Romance Catholic language being commonly spoken alongside English (Spanish/French). It also helps that New Orleans is the site of Mardi Gras one of the biggest celebrations in America.

New Orleans was already the biggest city in the CSA I see no reason for that to change substantially especially with the Mississippi being an international waterway now
 

Ficboy

Banned
New Orleans was already the biggest city in the CSA I see no reason for that to change substantially especially with the Mississippi being an international waterway now
Well I'm talking a composite version of it. New Orleans has the characteristics of OTL Miami and it could go this way to an extent.
 
US Election Results 1880
Full Results: US Elections 1880

169 electors needed to win

Samuel S. Cox of Ohio/Samuel J. Randall of Pennsylvania (Democrat) - 156 Electoral Votes, 46.4% of popular vote

Ohio 29
Missouri 20
Indiana 19
Michigan 14
Wisconsin 13
New Jersey 12
Maryland 10
California 8
Minnesota 7
West Virginia 6
Oregon 3
Delaware 3
Nebraska 3
New Mexico 3
Nevada 3
Colorado 3

James G. Blaine of Maine/John A. Logan of Illinois (Liberal) - 181 Electoral Votes, 46.0% of popular vote

New York 47
Pennsylvania 39
Illinois 28
Massachusetts 17
Iowa 14
Connecticut 8
Maine 8
Kansas 6
Vermont 5
New Hampshire 5
Rhode Island 4

Benjamin Butler of Massachusetts/Peter Cooper of New York [1] (Labor-Republican Fusion) - 0 Electoral Votes, 5.2% of popular vote

Newton Booth of California/Samuel Cary of Ohio (Anti-Monopolist) - 0 Electoral Votes, 2.4% of popular vote [2]

1880 US Senate Results

Despite the narrowness of the Presidential race, Liberals do very well in state legislatures, taking advantage of Democrats hemorrhaging working class and immigrant votes to left wing third parties and allowing them to narrowly seize some state houses and elevate a fresh new class of Liberal Senators. The Liberals net 5 Senators (seven new seats, but Democrats win two as well). By flipping two Republicans to join their party, it also gives Liberals control of the Senate - and the entire federal government, thanks to their performance in the US House.

CA: Newton Booth (Anti-Monopoly) RETIRED; George Hearts (Democrat) ELECTED (D+1) [3]
CT: William W. Eaton (Democrat) RETIRED; Joseph Roswell Hawley (Liberal) ELECTED (L+1)
DE: Thomas F. Bayard (Democrat) Re-Elected
IN: Joseph E. McDonald (Democrat) Re-Elected [4]
ME: Hannibal Hamlin (Republican) RETIRED; Eugene Hale (Liberal) ELECTED (L+1)
MD: William Pinkney Whyte (Democrat) Re-Elected
MA: Henry Dawes (Republican) Re-Elected as Liberal (L+1)
MI: Isaac Christiancy (Liberal) RETIRED; George A. Custer (Democrat) ELECTED (D+1) [5]
MN: Henry Mower Rice (Democrat) RETIRED; Samuel J. R. McMillan (Liberal) ELECTED (L+1)
MO: Francis Cockrell (Democrat) Re-Elected
NE: Thomas Tipton (Liberal) Retired; Charles Van Wyck (Liberal) ELECTED
NV: William Sharon (Democrat) RETIRED; James Graham Fair (Democrat) ELECTED
NJ: Theodore Fitz Randolph (Democrat) DEFEATED; William Joyce Sewell (Liberal) ELECTED (L+1)
NM: William Pile (Liberal) Re-Elected
NY: Francis Kernan (Democrat) DEFEATED; Thomas Platt (Liberal) ELECTED [6] (L+1)
OH: George Hoadly (Democrat) Re-Elected
PA: Charles Buckalew (Democrat) RETIRED; James I. Mitchell ELECTED (L+1)
RI: William Sprague (Liberal) Re-Elected
VT: George F. Edmunds (Liberal) Re-Elected
WV: Joseph Sprigg (Democrat) Re-Elected
WI: James R. Doolittle (Democrat) RETIRED; Philetus Sawyer (Liberal) ELECTED (L+1)

US House Elections

Democrats lose over thirty seats, including one to the Greenback Party in New York in an augur of future working class agitations, while the Republicans are reduced to only three seats in the House, all in Massachusetts. The Liberals swell to a substantial majority in the House for the first time despite the narrowness of the upballot results.

47th Congress of the United States

Senate: 28L-26D

President of the Senate: John A. Logan (L)
Senate President pro tempore: Henry B. Anthony (Liberal) of Rhode Island

California
1. George Hearts (D) (1881-)
3. John S. Hager (D) (1873-)

Colorado

2. Henry M. Teller (L) (1876-)
3. Nathaniel Hill (D) (1879-)

Connecticut
1. Joseph R. Hawley (L) (1881-)
3. Orville Platt (L) (1879-)

Delaware
1. Thomas Bayard (D) (1869-)
2. Eli Saulsbury (D) (1871-)

Illinois
2. Shelby Moore Collum [7] (1881-)
3. Richard J. Oglesby (L) (1873-)

Indiana
1. Joseph E. McDonald (D) (1875-)
3. Daniel Voorhees (D) (1873-)

Iowa
2. Samuel Kirkwood (L) (1877-)
3. William Allison (L) (1873-)

Kansas
2. David P. Lowe (L) (1877-)
3. John Ingalls (L) (1873-)

Maine
1. Eugene Hale (L) (1881-)
2. William P. Frye (L) (1881-) [7]

Maryland
1. William Pinkney Whyte (D) (1869-)
3. James Black Groome (D) (1879-)

Massachusetts
1. Henry Dawes (L) (1875-)
2. George Frisbie Hoar (L) (1877-)

Michigan
1. George Armstrong Custer (D) (1881-)
2. Byron G. Stout (D) (1865-)

Minnesota
1. Samuel J.R. McMillan (L) (1881-)
2. Henry Hastings Sibley (D) (1865-)

Missouri
1. Francis Cockrell (D) (1875-)
3. David H. Armstrong (D) (1877-)

Nebraska
1. Charles Van Wyck (L) (1881-)
2. Experience Estabrook (D) (1871-)

Nevada
1. James Graham Fair (D) (1881-)
3. John P. Jones (D) (1873-)

New Hampshire
2. Aaron Cragin (L) (1865-)
3. Henry Blair (L) (1873-)

New Jersey
1. William Joyce Sewell (L) (1881-)
2. John R. McPherson (D) (1871-)

New Mexico

1. William A. Pile (L) (1875-)
2. Samuel Beach Axtell (D) (1875-)

New York
1. Thomas Platt (L) (1881-)
3. Wheeler Hazard Peckham (L) (1879-)

Ohio
1. George Hoadly (D) (1878 - )
3. George Pendleton (D) (1873-)

Oregon
2. La Fayette Grover (D) (1871-)
3. James H. Slater (D) (1879-)

Pennsylvania
1. John I. Mitchell (L) (1881-)
3. J. Donald Cameron (L) (1879-)

Rhode Island
1. William Sprague (L) (1863-)
2. Henry B. Anthony (L) (1859-)

Vermont
1. George F. Edmunds (L) (1866-)
3. Justin Morrill (L) (1867-)

West Virginia
1. Joseph Sprigg (D) (1869-)
2. Henry Gassaway Davis (D) (1871-)

Wisconsin
1. Philetus Sawyer (L) (1881-)
3. Matthew Carpenter (D) (1873-)

House: 164L-112D-3R-1GB

Speaker of the House: James A. Garfield (Liberal) of Ohio [8]

[1] You seriously need to check out this dude's fucking beard it is insane
[2] Booth of course declined in 1876 to run but the more dispersed fusion tickets of third-parties here - Republican, Labor, Greenback, Anti-Monopoly - leads to a few different packages of left-wing spoilers who sap from the Democrats in some critical states
[3] Same seat he would hold in OTL but earlier; this will be important
[4] Thus making Benjamin Harrison's career stillborn
[5] And so it begins...
[6] Sam Tilden declines a Senate seat once again
[7] Appointed to replace President-elect James G. Blaine and Vice President Elect John A. Logan
[8] An alternate destiny here for the unfortunate Mr. Garfield
 
Last edited:

Ficboy

Banned
I've got some ideas for what these American, Canadian and Confederate rugby leagues will look like:

The Rugby League of America (RLA):
Eastern Conference:
New York Giants
Brooklyn Titans
Buffalo Bills
Boston Shamrocks (given the city's substantial Irish population I figured that they would called that)
New Jersey Crew or New Jersey Whalers
Philadelphia Patriots (it is the home of American independence after all)
Pittsburgh Steelers
Cleveland Browns
Cincinnati Crusaders
Detroit Lions
Baltimore Clippers or Baltimore Colts

Western Conference:
Los Angeles Rams or Los Angeles Sabercats
San Diego Admirals
San Francisco 49ers
Seattle Seahawks
Portland Evergreens
Denver Broncos or Colorado Mountaineers
Arizona Blazers
Minnesota Vikings
Las Vegas Lights
Oakland Raiders


The Canadian Rugby League (CRL):
East Division:
Toronto Argonauts
Ottawa Rough Riders
Hamilton Tigercats
Montreal Alouettes
Halifax Schooners

West Division:
Winnipeg Blue Bombers
Saskatchewan Eskimos
Edmonton Empire
Calgary Mustangs
BC Lions

The Confederate Professional Rugby League (CPRL):
Eastern Conference:
Richmond Rivermen
Norfolk Cottonclads
Charlotte Monarchs or Wilmington Pirates
Kentucky Thoroughbreds
Charleston Cannons
Atlanta Railers
Pensacola Barracudas
Jacksonville Generals


Western Conference:
Nashville Spartans
Memphis Riverboats
Birmingham Iron
New Orleans Bourbons
Dallas Rangers
Houston 1836
Austin Texans
Sequoyah Warriors

This is just a suggestion and I'm planning on using most of it for my timeline which is set in an early Civil War that breaks out in the early to mid 1850s.
 
Full Results: US Elections 1876

Unfortunately I was having a heck of a time finding some of the footnotes. Skimmed over them on the first read-through, and then had to go back and hunt for the numbers. Perhaps you could bold them in the text to make them stand out a little better? (Or change them to red; I've seen a couple other authors do that, too.)
 
Unfortunately I was having a heck of a time finding some of the footnotes. Skimmed over them on the first read-through, and then had to go back and hunt for the numbers. Perhaps you could bold them in the text to make them stand out a little better? (Or change them to red; I've seen a couple other authors do that, too.)

Of course, went back and bolded them! I’ve been trying to make sure my footnotes are not italicized like the text is in the narrative updates but of course technical updates like these don’t get italicized

also thanks for catching that it still read “1876”
 
Of course, went back and bolded them! I’ve been trying to make sure my footnotes are not italicized like the text is in the narrative updates but of course technical updates like these don’t get italicized

Umm, sorry, I guess I wasn't clear. I meant the inline numbers in the text, not the footnotes themselves.
 

Ficboy

Banned
D’oh totally misread your post 😂
I can expect that Confederate English will start to resemble British English and its offshoots Australian English and New Zealander English as well as borrow a loan word or two from French both the European and Cajun varieties. Given the Confederacy's affinity for Britain and France they would want their culture to be as culturally different from the United States as possible by adapting dialects of English and French as well as having the theatre scene based off the former. This mean words such as lorry and chips will become common in Confederate dictionaries.

Also given that this timeline is quite extensive how about you convert this to PDF novel form like @Red_Galiray has done with Until Every Drop of Blood Is Paid: A More Radical American Civil War. Afterwards you can publish it to a wider audience when you're finished.
 
Last edited:
I can expect that Confederate English will start to resemble British English and its offshoots Australian English and New Zealander English as well as borrow a loan word or two from French both the European and Cajun varieties. Given the Confederacy's affinity for Britain and France they would want their culture to be as culturally different from the United States as possible by adapting dialects of English and French as well as having the theatre scene based off the former. This mean words such as lorry and chips will become common in Confederate dictionaries.

Also given that this timeline is quite extensive how about you convert this to PDF novel form like @Red_Galiray has done with Until Every Drop of Blood Is Paid: A More Radical American Civil War. Afterwards you can publish it to a wider audience when you're finished.

I might do that eventually. We're only 20 years in to the TL though there's plenty of wild ride left haha
 
Titan: The Life and Presidency of James G. Blaine
"...as the telegram dispatches rolled in to Blaine's palatial new mansion in Washington, the tension was high deep into the night. Wisconsin and Missouri were within 1,000 votes each, both with Cox narrowly leading. Pennsylvania, the opposite - despite Randall on the Democratic ticket it looked like the Liberals would net her substantial prize of electoral votes by a margin of 700. In all, eleven of twenty-seven states were decided by less than 1% of the vote; four others were decided by less than 2%. All eyes landed on New York, where Blaine would only carry the day by the narrowest of margins, 6,000 votes out of 1.2 million. The Liberals won the state's 47 electoral votes and thus the election; it had been broadly predicted that whoever carried that state would carry the day. In the Cox camp there were recriminations galore; as the first Democratic ticket since 1860 not to feature a New Yorker on the ticket, the decision to place Randall as the running mate was totued as the reason for the defeat.

Really, though, there were dozens of reasons for Cox losing the electoral college narrowly while carrying the popular vote by only 22,000 votes [1]. The economy had improved substantially in Hendricks' day, but farmers still struggled and many Democrats found appeal in the reformism promised by the Liberals. Cox's own campaign had lacked clear stances on the issues, running rather on his experience, while Blaine's surrogates laid out a bold package of civil service reform, demagogued against an expanded money supply, promised to expand funding for the Navy and for public schools, and pledged to lower a number of tariffs. Cox was also hurt by not one but two left-wing campaigns, the first time that the rump Republican Party hemorrhaged Democratic rather than Liberal voters, as the Republican-Labor ticket peeled off voters in working class districts and the Anti-Monopoly Party led by California Senator Newton Booth spoke to Westerners. It may not have kept Cox from losing much of the Western bulwark, but it prevented him from peeling away states like Iowa or Kansas that were in the offing, and almost certainly cost him in states such as Pennsylvania and New York where Democrats lost by less than the R-L and A-M margins. [2]

If anything, skepticism about Blaine's coziness to railroad companies and his spending plans may have made him underrun the Liberal ticket more generally, which of course was also augmented by both Republican-Labor and Anti-Monopoly running a surprisingly broad slate of candidates in the industrial heartland as well as the West. The Liberals promised a new day and a new decade emerging out of the doldrums of the Great Depression - of a Protestant middle class ascendancy, of shopkeepers and entrepreneurs, founded in piety and prudence, rather than the corruption of the Tweed Ring or the tired Jacksonian imitators who made up the other wing of the opposition. Despite the perilously narrow results where a handful of votes the other way in but one or two states would have dramatically changed history, Blaine and his Liberals were now in charge in Washington..."

- Titan: The Life and Presidency of James G. Blaine (University of Ohio, 1980) [3]


[1] I'm sort of spitballing numbers here, I'm not doing actual state by state math on percentages and results
[2] Third parties doing what they do
[3] Date chosen to coincide with Blaine's 150th birthday
 

Ficboy

Banned
"...as the telegram dispatches rolled in to Blaine's palatial new mansion in Washington, the tension was high deep into the night. Wisconsin and Missouri were within 1,000 votes each, both with Cox narrowly leading. Pennsylvania, the opposite - despite Randall on the Democratic ticket it looked like the Liberals would net her substantial prize of electoral votes by a margin of 700. In all, eleven of twenty-seven states were decided by less than 1% of the vote; four others were decided by less than 2%. All eyes landed on New York, where Blaine would only carry the day by the narrowest of margins, 6,000 votes out of 1.2 million. The Liberals won the state's 47 electoral votes and thus the election; it had been broadly predicted that whoever carried that state would carry the day. In the Cox camp there were recriminations galore; as the first Democratic ticket since 1860 not to feature a New Yorker on the ticket, the decision to place Randall as the running mate was totued as the reason for the defeat.

Really, though, there were dozens of reasons for Cox losing the electoral college narrowly while carrying the popular vote by only 22,000 votes [1]. The economy had improved substantially in Hendricks' day, but farmers still struggled and many Democrats found appeal in the reformism promised by the Liberals. Cox's own campaign had lacked clear stances on the issues, running rather on his experience, while Blaine's surrogates laid out a bold package of civil service reform, demagogued against an expanded money supply, promised to expand funding for the Navy and for public schools, and pledged to lower a number of tariffs. Cox was also hurt by not one but two left-wing campaigns, the first time that the rump Republican Party hemorrhaged Democratic rather than Liberal voters, as the Republican-Labor ticket peeled off voters in working class districts and the Anti-Monopoly Party led by California Senator Newton Booth spoke to Westerners. It may not have kept Cox from losing much of the Western bulwark, but it prevented him from peeling away states like Iowa or Kansas that were in the offing, and almost certainly cost him in states such as Pennsylvania and New York where Democrats lost by less than the R-L and A-M margins. [2]

If anything, skepticism about Blaine's coziness to railroad companies and his spending plans may have made him underrun the Liberal ticket more generally, which of course was also augmented by both Republican-Labor and Anti-Monopoly running a surprisingly broad slate of candidates in the industrial heartland as well as the West. The Liberals promised a new day and a new decade emerging out of the doldrums of the Great Depression - of a Protestant middle class ascendancy, of shopkeepers and entrepreneurs, founded in piety and prudence, rather than the corruption of the Tweed Ring or the tired Jacksonian imitators who made up the other wing of the opposition. Despite the perilously narrow results where a handful of votes the other way in but one or two states would have dramatically changed history, Blaine and his Liberals were now in charge in Washington..."

- Titan: The Life and Presidency of James G. Blaine (University of Ohio, 1980) [3]


[1] I'm sort of spitballing numbers here, I'm not doing actual state by state math on percentages and results
[2] Third parties doing what they do
[3] Date chosen to coincide with Blaine's 150th birthday
So what is the Liberal Party anyway?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top