Plus France got the biggest advertising bonus ever, their missiles worked well,too Damn well
Exocet - the Effects of a different Falklands
- Thread starter Nevran
- Start date
I'd imagine the reaction would be more along the lines of dejection at the continued (relative) decline of Britain's place in the world. Losing the Falklands would just be a continuation of the blunders in British foreign policy since 1945 such as Suez, failure(s) to join the EEC, reliance on America for nuclear weapons, Rhodesia etc. And of course, there'd be those who would've seen the Naval taskforce as a risky and costly move which was always doomed to fail.
There would also be a lot more attention paid to the 1981 Defence Review, which proposed to withdraw the HMS Endurance from the Falklands, which was taken by the Argentinian junta as a sign of weakness. Rather than being a footnote in history, it would've become a hugely controversial issue and one of the main legacies of the Thatcher ministry.
Spitting Image
Spitting Image was a short-lived TV show which broadcast on ITV in 1984, which ran for two seasons before being cancelled due to its controversial characterisations and its prohibitively high cost.
Spitting Image faced heavy criticism for its lampooning of public figures such as celebrities, politicians and members of the royal family. The Independent Television Authority, fearful of the reaction and controversy caused by the show, demanded cuts. Regardless of these cuts, Spitting Image's most controversial element was its mockery of the royal family. By constitutional convention, the royals are forced to remain neutral, and so this form of mockery was seen as below the belt. Particular public scorn was directed at Spitting Image's characterisation of the Queen Mother as a commoner with a Brummie accent. Further, the royals were enjoying a period of popularity during the original airing of the show both because of the death of Prince Andrew and the arrival of heirs to the throne, Drew (Andrew's namesake) and William. Underestimating the anger that such mockery caused was a mistake on the part of the writers and producers of the show.
Despite Spitting Image receiving an audience of 7.9 million on its first night, it quickly began to see declining ratings. Alongside this, the show costing twice as much as a prime time sitcom, at around £2.6 million for each episode, did little to endear it to ITV executives. The show also suffered from lackluster and uneven scripting, with writers struggling to creating both convincing and humorous dialogue for the puppets. Whilst the show was renewed for a second six-episode season, it was pretty clear it was destined for cancellation. The final nail in Spitting Image's coffin was Thatcher’s assassination. Her assassination not only robbed the show of its greatest asset but made Spitting Image seem too controversial and too critical in a post-Brighton world. It was cancelled before it could make a third season.
Whilst some clips from the show are still available on the web, Spitting Image has been lost to obscurity.
Spitting Image faced heavy criticism for its lampooning of public figures such as celebrities, politicians and members of the royal family. The Independent Television Authority, fearful of the reaction and controversy caused by the show, demanded cuts. Regardless of these cuts, Spitting Image's most controversial element was its mockery of the royal family. By constitutional convention, the royals are forced to remain neutral, and so this form of mockery was seen as below the belt. Particular public scorn was directed at Spitting Image's characterisation of the Queen Mother as a commoner with a Brummie accent. Further, the royals were enjoying a period of popularity during the original airing of the show both because of the death of Prince Andrew and the arrival of heirs to the throne, Drew (Andrew's namesake) and William. Underestimating the anger that such mockery caused was a mistake on the part of the writers and producers of the show.
Despite Spitting Image receiving an audience of 7.9 million on its first night, it quickly began to see declining ratings. Alongside this, the show costing twice as much as a prime time sitcom, at around £2.6 million for each episode, did little to endear it to ITV executives. The show also suffered from lackluster and uneven scripting, with writers struggling to creating both convincing and humorous dialogue for the puppets. Whilst the show was renewed for a second six-episode season, it was pretty clear it was destined for cancellation. The final nail in Spitting Image's coffin was Thatcher’s assassination. Her assassination not only robbed the show of its greatest asset but made Spitting Image seem too controversial and too critical in a post-Brighton world. It was cancelled before it could make a third season.
Whilst some clips from the show are still available on the web, Spitting Image has been lost to obscurity.
1987 UK general election
Heseltine, now Prime Minister, initiated a dramatic shakeup of Cabinet, which saw Conservative heavyweights such as Lawson, Howe and Parkinson replaced by Leon Brittan as Chancellor, Tebbit at Home, Tom King at Foreign and Norman Fowler at Defence. The months which followed Brighton saw a government finding its feet, whilst promoting a return to a more consensual style of government. Thatcher’s planned convention speech, which decried the miners as the “enemies within”, was scrapped and the ideological rhetoric cooled. Heseltine’s first major achievement came from negotiating a settlement between the government and the miners. The Nottingham Agreement, mediated by TUC General Secretary Norman Willis, saw; economic stimulus in mining communities via job retraining schemes, John MacGregor retiring as the National Coal Board President by 1986 and, in a victory for the government, a ‘phasing out’ of unprofitable coal pits. It would be the first major ideological break from Thatcherism committed by Heseltine.
Meanwhile, the government, led by Home Secretary Tebbit, took a harder line on the IRA who were responsible for the Brighton Bombing. However, this harder approach did little to stop the violence in the region or the IRA’s terror campaign on the mainland. It would be moderates who suffered from this harder approach, with proposals such as those detailed in the New Ireland Forum, being dismissed out-of-hand. This also led to tentative moves towards an agreement between the British and Irish governments, on the status of Northern Ireland, being shelved. This approach proved unsustainable and would eventually be softened, both due to political necessity (both in Britain and Ireland) to counter Sinn Fein’s rising popularity and because of American pressure.
In foreign policy, unlike Thatcher and Reagan, Heseltine did not enjoy a close friendship with the American president. Tensions over Northern Ireland continued to harm relations, as did Reagan’s deteriorating mental acuity. However, Operation El Dorado, a joint Anglo-American mission saw successful missile strikes against Libya, killing Colonel Gaddafi. When a temporary military junta took control in the aftermath, it was seen as a great success of Heseltine and King.
Meanwhile, the country experienced economic growth, thanks to privatisation of government assets and liberalisation of the financial services sector, the Big Bang. This resulted in a period of high employment, low inflation, and sustained wage gains, the Brittan Boom. Further, the passage of the Single European Act, which would establish, by 1993, a single market for goods and services within the European Community, began the process of opening up European markets to British businesses. Additionally, Heseltine and Brittan successfully sought entry into the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (E.E.R.M) prior to the 1987 election, justified as a method of controlling inflation by pegging the pound to the Deutsche Mark. While Conservative backbenchers and euroskeptics were concerned that the E.E.R.M was the precursor to the eventual introduction of a common European currency, the government paid little heed to their concerns.
In this light, Heseltine’s re-election was to be expected. A campaign between four charismatic and well-liked leaders led to a campaign without the extreme vitriol and negativity which characterised the previous two (at least in Great Britain). It saw Heseltine, the popular incumbent, favoured by voters who returned him to power with a majority of 64. Neil Kinnock maintained Labour’s position as the main centre-left party in Parliament, gaining seats and vote share. On top of this a more consolidated vote share for the SDP-Liberal Alliance, alongside co-leaders Shirley Williams' and David Steel's strong working relationship, saw the alliance maintain its position as a potential kingmaker.
Meanwhile, the government, led by Home Secretary Tebbit, took a harder line on the IRA who were responsible for the Brighton Bombing. However, this harder approach did little to stop the violence in the region or the IRA’s terror campaign on the mainland. It would be moderates who suffered from this harder approach, with proposals such as those detailed in the New Ireland Forum, being dismissed out-of-hand. This also led to tentative moves towards an agreement between the British and Irish governments, on the status of Northern Ireland, being shelved. This approach proved unsustainable and would eventually be softened, both due to political necessity (both in Britain and Ireland) to counter Sinn Fein’s rising popularity and because of American pressure.
In foreign policy, unlike Thatcher and Reagan, Heseltine did not enjoy a close friendship with the American president. Tensions over Northern Ireland continued to harm relations, as did Reagan’s deteriorating mental acuity. However, Operation El Dorado, a joint Anglo-American mission saw successful missile strikes against Libya, killing Colonel Gaddafi. When a temporary military junta took control in the aftermath, it was seen as a great success of Heseltine and King.
Meanwhile, the country experienced economic growth, thanks to privatisation of government assets and liberalisation of the financial services sector, the Big Bang. This resulted in a period of high employment, low inflation, and sustained wage gains, the Brittan Boom. Further, the passage of the Single European Act, which would establish, by 1993, a single market for goods and services within the European Community, began the process of opening up European markets to British businesses. Additionally, Heseltine and Brittan successfully sought entry into the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (E.E.R.M) prior to the 1987 election, justified as a method of controlling inflation by pegging the pound to the Deutsche Mark. While Conservative backbenchers and euroskeptics were concerned that the E.E.R.M was the precursor to the eventual introduction of a common European currency, the government paid little heed to their concerns.
In this light, Heseltine’s re-election was to be expected. A campaign between four charismatic and well-liked leaders led to a campaign without the extreme vitriol and negativity which characterised the previous two (at least in Great Britain). It saw Heseltine, the popular incumbent, favoured by voters who returned him to power with a majority of 64. Neil Kinnock maintained Labour’s position as the main centre-left party in Parliament, gaining seats and vote share. On top of this a more consolidated vote share for the SDP-Liberal Alliance, alongside co-leaders Shirley Williams' and David Steel's strong working relationship, saw the alliance maintain its position as a potential kingmaker.
1987 Canadian federal election
Jean Chrétien, like his fellow prime ministers who ruled Canada between the 1980s and 1990s, suffered from an increasingly indebted federal government and socio-cultural clashes between French-speaking Quebec and the English-speaking West, which suffered from ‘Western alienation’. Even Chrétien’s accent couldn’t escape this debate. French speakers would attack Chrétien for mangling the French language through (often clumsy) Anglicisation whilst English-speaking comedians would, paradoxically, make fun of his thick French accent.
Chrétien’s politics, now endorsed with an elected term of its own, could be boiled down to fervent federalism and small-town populism. Such a governing style explains the lack of progress made with both constitutional reform and the ‘wait-and-see’ approach on whether to enter negotiations for a free trade deal with the US. This approach was further exacerbated by Chrétien’s closest political advisors, Michel Fournier, his chief of staff and Eddie Goldenberg, his principal secretary. Having ill-conceived mandates meant the men would often clash, which led to paralysis both in the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) and in long-term government strategy.
This belt-buckling and pragmatic government was a far cry from the campaign which won Chrétien the party leadership in 1984. It also did little to calm tensions within his party. John Turner became a thorn in Chrétien's side, having been elected as an MP in 1984. Pierre Trudeau also remained in the public eye, continually using his bully pulpit to offer unpopular advice to his immediate successor and protégé.
Chrétien’s lack of a majority also meant that he would have to work closely with the NDP, who believed themselves to be only an election or two away from government. So, for political reasons, the NDP would stymie Chrétien's attempts to institute a national childcare program. Chrétien, a tried-and-tested political streetfighter and supremely self-confident, was minded to call a snap election and did, for September 1987, rather than see his government fall to a motion of no confidence.
Joe Clark’s unceremonious resignation saw the (Progressive) Conservatives enter a period of reflection which saw Newfoundland and Labrador premier John Crosbie win the leadership against Michael Wilson. A populist, Crosbie assembled a coalition of social liberals on the Eastern seaboard, fiscal conservatives in Ontario and conservatives in the East. His folksy and populist charm however had little impact in Quebec, who regarded the English-speaking Crosbie as unsympathetic to their demands for either sovereignty or independence.
Whilst the election always seemed to favour the PCs, which ran heavily on themes of change and renewal, it was in the English-speaking debate (the French debate saw Jean Charest, who was one of only 4 PC’s elected in Quebec in 1984, stand in for Crosbie), which saw the PC victory confirmed. Crosbie promised that a PC government would not be afraid to tackle the big issues of the day such as free trade and would “be ambitious, be bolder and be better”. By finding and tapping into the root of public discontent with the Liberals, Crosbie won the election.
In a landslide, voters rewarded Crosbie with the first secure Conservative majority government since 1962. Liberals lost once-safe seats in both Ontario and along the Atlantic Seaboard, to the Conservatives. Even in Quebec, the Conservatives overperformed mostly thanks to the forceful campaigning of Charest and because of splits in the left-wing vote between the Liberals and NDP (with the NDP beginning to enjoy the support of sovereigntists and socialists in Quebec).
Crosbie, now PM and a noted advocate of free trade, almost immediately began negotiations towards an North American Free Trade Zone (NAFTZ).
Chrétien’s politics, now endorsed with an elected term of its own, could be boiled down to fervent federalism and small-town populism. Such a governing style explains the lack of progress made with both constitutional reform and the ‘wait-and-see’ approach on whether to enter negotiations for a free trade deal with the US. This approach was further exacerbated by Chrétien’s closest political advisors, Michel Fournier, his chief of staff and Eddie Goldenberg, his principal secretary. Having ill-conceived mandates meant the men would often clash, which led to paralysis both in the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) and in long-term government strategy.
This belt-buckling and pragmatic government was a far cry from the campaign which won Chrétien the party leadership in 1984. It also did little to calm tensions within his party. John Turner became a thorn in Chrétien's side, having been elected as an MP in 1984. Pierre Trudeau also remained in the public eye, continually using his bully pulpit to offer unpopular advice to his immediate successor and protégé.
Chrétien’s lack of a majority also meant that he would have to work closely with the NDP, who believed themselves to be only an election or two away from government. So, for political reasons, the NDP would stymie Chrétien's attempts to institute a national childcare program. Chrétien, a tried-and-tested political streetfighter and supremely self-confident, was minded to call a snap election and did, for September 1987, rather than see his government fall to a motion of no confidence.
Joe Clark’s unceremonious resignation saw the (Progressive) Conservatives enter a period of reflection which saw Newfoundland and Labrador premier John Crosbie win the leadership against Michael Wilson. A populist, Crosbie assembled a coalition of social liberals on the Eastern seaboard, fiscal conservatives in Ontario and conservatives in the East. His folksy and populist charm however had little impact in Quebec, who regarded the English-speaking Crosbie as unsympathetic to their demands for either sovereignty or independence.
Whilst the election always seemed to favour the PCs, which ran heavily on themes of change and renewal, it was in the English-speaking debate (the French debate saw Jean Charest, who was one of only 4 PC’s elected in Quebec in 1984, stand in for Crosbie), which saw the PC victory confirmed. Crosbie promised that a PC government would not be afraid to tackle the big issues of the day such as free trade and would “be ambitious, be bolder and be better”. By finding and tapping into the root of public discontent with the Liberals, Crosbie won the election.
In a landslide, voters rewarded Crosbie with the first secure Conservative majority government since 1962. Liberals lost once-safe seats in both Ontario and along the Atlantic Seaboard, to the Conservatives. Even in Quebec, the Conservatives overperformed mostly thanks to the forceful campaigning of Charest and because of splits in the left-wing vote between the Liberals and NDP (with the NDP beginning to enjoy the support of sovereigntists and socialists in Quebec).
Crosbie, now PM and a noted advocate of free trade, almost immediately began negotiations towards an North American Free Trade Zone (NAFTZ).
1988 French presidential election
The 1986 legislative elections saw the right gain a majority of the seats in the National Assembly in a clear repudiation of the socialist President François Mitterrand. This created a constitutional crisis, with the legislature in direct opposition to the executive. Some right-wing figures, such as former Prime Minister Raymond Barre, argued that Mitterrand should step down, both in light of the results and because France lacked a constitutional procedure to impeach a president.
Instead, a solution was found which saw the legislature enter a period of cohabitation with the executive. This saw Jacques Chirac becoming Prime Minister, controlling domestic policy, whilst Mitterrand retained certain executive powers such as control of foreign policy and military affairs. Chirac, however, introduced an unpopular program of economic reforms while Prime Minister which was seen to strengthen Mitterrand's hand in the upcoming presidential election.
However, the sensationalist leaking of Mitterrand's so-called ‘second family’ by Jean-Edern Hallier saw internal rivals in the Socialist Party (PS), led by party heavyweight Michel Rocard, force the incumbent to bow out the race in March 1988. At this late stage, and in the resulting chaos, Rocard outmanoeuvred pro-Mitterrand candidates such as Lionel Jospin and Laurent Fabius to claim the PS nomination. On the right, Chirac easily dispatched Barre who had focused his campaign and his efforts against Mitterrand. With Mitterrand having dropped out, Chirac took this momentum to advance to the second round.
Rocard’s kin-slayer image and the obvious apathy towards his candidacy from President Mitterrand did little to endear him to voters. Chirac also faced voter apathy due to his term as Prime Minister, meaning that both candidates engaged in bitter and divisive campaigning in the second round to win. It was in a nasty debate, wherein Chirac made multiple allusions to Mitterrand's absence, that Rocard’s fate was sealed.
Jacques Chirac made the move from Prime Minister to President, ending the Mitterrand era.
Instead, a solution was found which saw the legislature enter a period of cohabitation with the executive. This saw Jacques Chirac becoming Prime Minister, controlling domestic policy, whilst Mitterrand retained certain executive powers such as control of foreign policy and military affairs. Chirac, however, introduced an unpopular program of economic reforms while Prime Minister which was seen to strengthen Mitterrand's hand in the upcoming presidential election.
However, the sensationalist leaking of Mitterrand's so-called ‘second family’ by Jean-Edern Hallier saw internal rivals in the Socialist Party (PS), led by party heavyweight Michel Rocard, force the incumbent to bow out the race in March 1988. At this late stage, and in the resulting chaos, Rocard outmanoeuvred pro-Mitterrand candidates such as Lionel Jospin and Laurent Fabius to claim the PS nomination. On the right, Chirac easily dispatched Barre who had focused his campaign and his efforts against Mitterrand. With Mitterrand having dropped out, Chirac took this momentum to advance to the second round.
Rocard’s kin-slayer image and the obvious apathy towards his candidacy from President Mitterrand did little to endear him to voters. Chirac also faced voter apathy due to his term as Prime Minister, meaning that both candidates engaged in bitter and divisive campaigning in the second round to win. It was in a nasty debate, wherein Chirac made multiple allusions to Mitterrand's absence, that Rocard’s fate was sealed.
Jacques Chirac made the move from Prime Minister to President, ending the Mitterrand era.
1988 US presidential election
The winner of the 1988 Democratic presidential primary, was long-time frontrunner Gary Hart, who easily dispatched other candidates in the field such as Michael Dukakis, Joe Biden, and Al Gore for the nomination. A McGovern ’72 alumni and a Colorado Senator, Hart had spent his time, since his near-miss in 1984, preparing for both the primary and general. Accusations about his ‘womanizing’ aside, he was able to unite both activists and the party establishment behind his campaign.
Hart was a self-described “Atari Democrat” and a “New Ideas” man, one who accepted that free trade, economic liberalism, and balanced budgets were the cornerstones of good government. To these ‘New (Ideas) Democrats’, in order to win power, the party had to embrace these principles. If not, voters would reject the party of ‘big government’ as they did before with both Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale. Picking Lloyd Bentsen, a respected Senator, seemed to show that Hart ‘meant business’, which soon became the unofficial slogan of Hart’s presidential campaign.
Republicans, in an far more competitive primary to succeed Reagan, chose Vice President George Bush. Whilst the selection of Jack Kemp as Bush’s running mate was well-recieved, a provocative speech by former candidate Pat Robertson at the convention saw right-wing splinters and sores return, which forced Bush to talk less about his ideas for a “thousand points of light” and more about the threat posed by Democrats.
With polling showing Hart to be the firm favourite, Republicans went on the attack. Led by Bush’s campaign manager Lee Atwater, Republicans attacked Hart’s so-called radicalism alongside making claims that Hart lacked the moral character to be President. Democrats countered, hitting Bush on Iran-Contra and those who had been ‘left behind’ by the Reagan Revolution. Debate draws between the two men did little to turn the tide of public opinion against the more popular Hart and despite Bush’s best efforts, it was always Hart's race to lose.
So, when polls closed, Gary Hart was elected President with the largest victory for a Democrat since 1964. Winning virtually every region outside of the South (with the exception of Louisiana and Texas), Hart had built a coalition of liberals, minorities, farmers, and blue-collar workers to the White House. Democrats, jubilant, simultaneously expanded their congressional majorities, in both the House and the Senate.
Hart was a self-described “Atari Democrat” and a “New Ideas” man, one who accepted that free trade, economic liberalism, and balanced budgets were the cornerstones of good government. To these ‘New (Ideas) Democrats’, in order to win power, the party had to embrace these principles. If not, voters would reject the party of ‘big government’ as they did before with both Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale. Picking Lloyd Bentsen, a respected Senator, seemed to show that Hart ‘meant business’, which soon became the unofficial slogan of Hart’s presidential campaign.
Republicans, in an far more competitive primary to succeed Reagan, chose Vice President George Bush. Whilst the selection of Jack Kemp as Bush’s running mate was well-recieved, a provocative speech by former candidate Pat Robertson at the convention saw right-wing splinters and sores return, which forced Bush to talk less about his ideas for a “thousand points of light” and more about the threat posed by Democrats.
With polling showing Hart to be the firm favourite, Republicans went on the attack. Led by Bush’s campaign manager Lee Atwater, Republicans attacked Hart’s so-called radicalism alongside making claims that Hart lacked the moral character to be President. Democrats countered, hitting Bush on Iran-Contra and those who had been ‘left behind’ by the Reagan Revolution. Debate draws between the two men did little to turn the tide of public opinion against the more popular Hart and despite Bush’s best efforts, it was always Hart's race to lose.
So, when polls closed, Gary Hart was elected President with the largest victory for a Democrat since 1964. Winning virtually every region outside of the South (with the exception of Louisiana and Texas), Hart had built a coalition of liberals, minorities, farmers, and blue-collar workers to the White House. Democrats, jubilant, simultaneously expanded their congressional majorities, in both the House and the Senate.
It would've been either red and blue [with each network choosing which party was red and blue itself] until the 1996 election, when CBS made the Democrats gold (to be different) because the as of yet unnamed nominee (*spoilers*) comes from a sun belt state and was running on a 'sun-belt strategy'. Further, without a TTL 2000 election, the red-blue dynamic doesn't fully hardened in the public's mind so America and so the media reverts to a liberal = yellow, conservative = blue dynamic.
It's probably ASB as it defies American historical convention since the 1800s but to be honest, it was more for me to experiment with a different colour scheme for the parties rather than use red and blue. Plus, it looks cool.
1991 UK general election
Heseltine’s second ministry opened auspiciously with a sudden stock market crash, “Black Monday” in October 1987. From then on, the economy entered a prolonged period of economic recession culminating in Black Thursday and the realignment crisis. Until this culmination in September 1992, the economy would continue to suffer, with the spectre of stagflation having returned. The early 1990s recession hit the middle classes hard, and it hurt those who had directly benefited from the economic growth of the late 1980s. Whilst calling it the 'white-collar recession' is a misnomer, the harm caused to the government's popularity from these once-loyal voters is hard to understate.
Heseltine also struggled with his backbenchers, who grew increasingly agitated at government policy, despite ‘red-meat’ bills like the Local Government Act 1987 which both abolished the Greater London Council and contained the socially conservative and anti-gay Section 28. Compounding this agitation was Norman Tebbit leaving Cabinet in 1989, meaning these agitated backbenchers soon gained a leader with a national profile.
A brief respite for Heseltine came with European integration slowing after the election of Jacques Chirac as French President and Delors’ departure as EC Commission President. Yet, the Florence Treaty which modified the European Community into the European Union proved a bitter pill for backbenchers to swallow. Alongside negotiations towards the creation of a ‘common currency’ progressing, which Heseltine refused to rule out British entry of, forceful criticism from euroskeptics like Tebbit and Norman Lamont did little to help Heseltine's position.
Labour, meanwhile, had spent its time in opposition wisely. The party which was both modernizing and growing in popularity, proven by both a failed leadership challenge from Tony Benn in 1988 and the presence of Bryan Gould as Chancellor (who had replaced John Smith after his fatal heart attack in the same year), started to seem like a real threat to the Conservatives.
The SDP-Liberal Alliance saw Steel and Jenkins retire on a high, merging the two parties into one - the Alliance. Paddy Ashdown was elected as its first leader but could never match the highs of past leaders and past results. Struggling from internal divisions caused by David Owen, alongside Ashdown himself having been caught in a lurid sex scandal with his secretary, was an ill omen for the Alliance.
It seemed from the outset that Heseltine would delay holding an election until 1992, with the economy in the midst of a biting recession and a consistent polling lead for Labour. Then Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. President Gary Hart, a committed internationalist met force with force and sent US troops to liberate Kuwait. Heseltine, seeing an opportunity to revitalise the Anglo-American relationship, pledged support, sending British troops to assist. Despite predictions of the war being long and drawn-out, Iraq was quickly repelled, and Saddam humiliated.
Compared to the abject failure of the Falklands, British military might and prestige had been vindicated and so, once British troops returned home in April 1991, Heseltine called a snap election for June. The feel-good spirit which followed the war was ruthlessly exploited by the Conservatives, especially when compared to Kinnock’s personal and past advocation for unilateral disarmament (despite Labour policy against such a move). The right-wing press also ran a ruthless media campaign against Kinnock, with the Sun tabloid famously stating “Vote Neil, get Kinnfocked” in its editorial. These short-term advantages contrasted to the long-term weakness of the Conservatives who marked their 12th year in office in 1991, fighting a confident Labour party, in a country marred by recession.
The exit poll predicted a Labour majority, but as the votes were counted it seemed that the Conservative vote share was holding steady, even if Labour was gaining seats at their expense. By 1:00AM, it was clear that the Conservatives had hung on, even if Britain had elected a hung parliament, the first since 1974.
Heseltine quickly pressed the advantage: by being both the incumbent and by leading the largest party in Parliament. In talks with the Ulster Unionist Party, Heseltine negotiated a loose confidence and supply deal which would see him remain in Downing Street as Prime Minister. Kinnock having come so close to victory and dejected by his second consecutive loss against Heseltine, resigned shortly thereafter as Labour leader.
Heseltine also struggled with his backbenchers, who grew increasingly agitated at government policy, despite ‘red-meat’ bills like the Local Government Act 1987 which both abolished the Greater London Council and contained the socially conservative and anti-gay Section 28. Compounding this agitation was Norman Tebbit leaving Cabinet in 1989, meaning these agitated backbenchers soon gained a leader with a national profile.
A brief respite for Heseltine came with European integration slowing after the election of Jacques Chirac as French President and Delors’ departure as EC Commission President. Yet, the Florence Treaty which modified the European Community into the European Union proved a bitter pill for backbenchers to swallow. Alongside negotiations towards the creation of a ‘common currency’ progressing, which Heseltine refused to rule out British entry of, forceful criticism from euroskeptics like Tebbit and Norman Lamont did little to help Heseltine's position.
Labour, meanwhile, had spent its time in opposition wisely. The party which was both modernizing and growing in popularity, proven by both a failed leadership challenge from Tony Benn in 1988 and the presence of Bryan Gould as Chancellor (who had replaced John Smith after his fatal heart attack in the same year), started to seem like a real threat to the Conservatives.
The SDP-Liberal Alliance saw Steel and Jenkins retire on a high, merging the two parties into one - the Alliance. Paddy Ashdown was elected as its first leader but could never match the highs of past leaders and past results. Struggling from internal divisions caused by David Owen, alongside Ashdown himself having been caught in a lurid sex scandal with his secretary, was an ill omen for the Alliance.
It seemed from the outset that Heseltine would delay holding an election until 1992, with the economy in the midst of a biting recession and a consistent polling lead for Labour. Then Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. President Gary Hart, a committed internationalist met force with force and sent US troops to liberate Kuwait. Heseltine, seeing an opportunity to revitalise the Anglo-American relationship, pledged support, sending British troops to assist. Despite predictions of the war being long and drawn-out, Iraq was quickly repelled, and Saddam humiliated.
Compared to the abject failure of the Falklands, British military might and prestige had been vindicated and so, once British troops returned home in April 1991, Heseltine called a snap election for June. The feel-good spirit which followed the war was ruthlessly exploited by the Conservatives, especially when compared to Kinnock’s personal and past advocation for unilateral disarmament (despite Labour policy against such a move). The right-wing press also ran a ruthless media campaign against Kinnock, with the Sun tabloid famously stating “Vote Neil, get Kinnfocked” in its editorial. These short-term advantages contrasted to the long-term weakness of the Conservatives who marked their 12th year in office in 1991, fighting a confident Labour party, in a country marred by recession.
The exit poll predicted a Labour majority, but as the votes were counted it seemed that the Conservative vote share was holding steady, even if Labour was gaining seats at their expense. By 1:00AM, it was clear that the Conservatives had hung on, even if Britain had elected a hung parliament, the first since 1974.
Heseltine quickly pressed the advantage: by being both the incumbent and by leading the largest party in Parliament. In talks with the Ulster Unionist Party, Heseltine negotiated a loose confidence and supply deal which would see him remain in Downing Street as Prime Minister. Kinnock having come so close to victory and dejected by his second consecutive loss against Heseltine, resigned shortly thereafter as Labour leader.
Last edited:
I don't think it's ASB at all. In 1976, they used yellow for Republicans and blue for Democrats on CBS IOTL. It was either red/blue or yellow/blue through the 2000 election because there were still black and white sets and networks needed colors that looked sufficiently different shades for those televisions. In 1992, NBC was still using Red for Democrats, Blue for Republicans. ABC used the reverse color scheme.
So, red/blue was more likely but if there's a desire for standardization earlier when black and white sets were more prevalent, yellow/blue could get used
Ah that’s good then.
I didn’t know that the yellow/blue colour scheme was used by CBS for the 1976 election, but it makes complete sense that networks had to choose a colour scheme with the greatest colour contrast. I did know that Blue and red only really became a thing post-1980 and even then, it was pretty interchangeable (i.e., red for Reagan, blue for Bush), so that’s why I thought it wouldn’t be that much of a leap to have blue/yellow. I guess I should be sending a letter of thanks to CBS instead.
In OTL, Dukakis preformed better in Texas than in almost all the Deep South States (even if he lost them all anyway). Whilst this was probably because of Bentsen on the ticket, it stands to reason that in a more Democratic leaning environment, with Bentsen still on the ticket and with more right-wing splinters then they could pull off a close victory in the state. Hart would've been far more popular than Dukakis to socially conservatives without the whole 'Massachusetts Liberal' angle as well.
The state was also suffering from a banking crisis from 1984- and the aftereffects of the 1980s oil price crash so the more effective economic message of Hart would've been more appealing to the state.
Doing a really simple calculation, if Dukakis' vote share as an OTL baseline, then he would've got he would've received 49.1% of the vote, for 51.3% nationwide. Even though Dukakis wouldn't have won, it would've been close.
I don't think it would've been that much of a leap for them to win, but I'll admit it would've been close.
1991 Canadian federal election
The Progressive Conservative return to office, with a landslide majority, was a historic moment for a party which had spent decades in opposition. In this light, Crosbie’s greatest ambition was to negotiate and agree a free trade zone between the US and Canada. Opening negotiations, he had both the support of his caucus and the majority of the provincial premiers. However, political circumstances saw and end to this ambition. Progress towards a trade deal, made during Reagan’s last year of office, hit a roadblock after President Hart’s election. Despite Hart being in favour of a free trade zone between the US and Canada, divisions within the Democratic party meant that NAFTZ would be heavily scrutinized and delayed until after the 1990 Midterms. When these midterms saw Democrats lose control of the House and saw Republicans focusing their attention on getting rid of Hart, the deal was further delayed. Alongside, the Canadian Senate being controlled by the Liberal party, the eventual deal would have been heavily scrutinised and would have become a political landmine for the government, in time for the next election. Free trade was thus shelved until after the next election.
Crosbie instead chose to dedicate his time in office to help heal the divisions between; the East and the West; French and English; Quebec and the rest. This was seen with the ratification of the Gatineau Accords, which established Quebec as a distinct society within Canada and reformed the Senate to give Quebec more of a say in the federal matters. Crosbie’s insistence on learning French signified his attempts to speak to both sides of the debate. The Accords, however, would not placate the Quebec sovereigntists nor would it stop the growing Western alienation.
This alienation began to weigh on Crosbie, who would find more hostile audiences in the West than in Quebec. Preston Manning’s populist vehicle, the ‘Reform Party’ would see a rise in support, which seemed to threaten Crosbie’s majority in the opinion polls. He and his party, however, would be saved by John Turner.
John Turner, the leader of the opposition, ran a terrible campaign. Alongside internal divisions with the Liberal party courteous of Trudeau and Chrétien, Turner’s botched national childcare policy (itself an extension of Chrétien’s) made the party seem incompetent and lacking in credibility. Compounding these challenges was a debate performance in which when asked about his policies, both struggled to explain and proved irritable from then on.
The NDP, still led by Ed Broadbent, who polled as the most popular political figure in Canada, took his party from strength to strength and built the momentum which had been generated for his party during the 1987-1991 parliament. This momentum was generated by the NDP being the loudest voice in Parliament against free trade alongside a successful convention in Quebec. The party seemed both on the verge of a breakthrough and more credible than Turner’s Liberals.
The real shock of election night was Quebec. Despite the province being a Liberal stronghold, when the votes had been counted the PCs had gained a solid plurality of the seats in the region This was because of two main reasons. Firstly, Quebec being one of the only regions in Canada to enthusiastically support free trade, allowed Crosbie to leverage the issue against the anti-free trade Liberals and NDP . Secondly, the NDP experienced its much-vaunted breakthrough which saw the party elect, for the first time, 7 MPs in Quebec. The rising vote share for the NDP came at a cost to the Liberals. Without Quebec, Crosbie would not have won his majority.
In another shock, and by only 3 seats, the NDP had gained the mantle of becoming the second-largest party in parliament and the official opposition. Broadbent jubilant, argued for immediate voting reform. Turner resigned his position almost immediately after the election and was replaced by Paul Martin.
Crosbie instead chose to dedicate his time in office to help heal the divisions between; the East and the West; French and English; Quebec and the rest. This was seen with the ratification of the Gatineau Accords, which established Quebec as a distinct society within Canada and reformed the Senate to give Quebec more of a say in the federal matters. Crosbie’s insistence on learning French signified his attempts to speak to both sides of the debate. The Accords, however, would not placate the Quebec sovereigntists nor would it stop the growing Western alienation.
This alienation began to weigh on Crosbie, who would find more hostile audiences in the West than in Quebec. Preston Manning’s populist vehicle, the ‘Reform Party’ would see a rise in support, which seemed to threaten Crosbie’s majority in the opinion polls. He and his party, however, would be saved by John Turner.
John Turner, the leader of the opposition, ran a terrible campaign. Alongside internal divisions with the Liberal party courteous of Trudeau and Chrétien, Turner’s botched national childcare policy (itself an extension of Chrétien’s) made the party seem incompetent and lacking in credibility. Compounding these challenges was a debate performance in which when asked about his policies, both struggled to explain and proved irritable from then on.
The NDP, still led by Ed Broadbent, who polled as the most popular political figure in Canada, took his party from strength to strength and built the momentum which had been generated for his party during the 1987-1991 parliament. This momentum was generated by the NDP being the loudest voice in Parliament against free trade alongside a successful convention in Quebec. The party seemed both on the verge of a breakthrough and more credible than Turner’s Liberals.
The real shock of election night was Quebec. Despite the province being a Liberal stronghold, when the votes had been counted the PCs had gained a solid plurality of the seats in the region This was because of two main reasons. Firstly, Quebec being one of the only regions in Canada to enthusiastically support free trade, allowed Crosbie to leverage the issue against the anti-free trade Liberals and NDP . Secondly, the NDP experienced its much-vaunted breakthrough which saw the party elect, for the first time, 7 MPs in Quebec. The rising vote share for the NDP came at a cost to the Liberals. Without Quebec, Crosbie would not have won his majority.
In another shock, and by only 3 seats, the NDP had gained the mantle of becoming the second-largest party in parliament and the official opposition. Broadbent jubilant, argued for immediate voting reform. Turner resigned his position almost immediately after the election and was replaced by Paul Martin.
1991 Labour Party leadership election
The results of the 1991 election left Labour dejected and angry. With the party having enjoyed a; consistent polling lead; a charismatic leader; and an unpopular government, 1991 seemed set to return Labour to power. A swift upsurge in government fortunes with the successful Gulf War and a hostile press saw fit to these advantages. Even the exit poll overestimated Labour’s chances and Neil Kinnock resigned as leader shortly after, having been unable to kick Heseltine out of Downing Street after two consecutive elections. The resulting leadership contest was a free-for-all, and highlighted the divisions present in the Labour Party.
Frontrunner and Shadow Chancellor Bryan Gould, arguably the stand-out campaigner from the election struggled in trying to turn this goodwill into a solid base within the party. With the left of the party backing Michael Meacher and the right split between stay-the-course Robin Cook and modernizer Gordon Brown, Gould found himself without a reliable base in the party. Thus, his campaign aimed for the middle, appealing to soft-left. His economic proposals, whilst radical and inkeeping with Labour traditions, harmed his campaign. Gould’s refusal to countenance an independent central bank (either in London or Frankfurt) would become wedge issue in the party, splitting Gould from both Europhiles and the modernizers who accepted the economic changes seen under Thatcher and Heseltine. His campaign wasn’t helped by outgoing leader Neil Kinnock, who publicly admitted the party needed a “fresh face” as Leader.
The campaign also saw the rise of Robin Cook, an able parliamentarian and effective campaigner in his own right. He had seen his stock rise in the party since 1988, by taking Gould’s former position as Shadow Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. Cook also received goodwill thanks to political pressure he exerted on his government opposite, John Major, in part leading to Major’s dramatic resignation from Cabinet. Whilst it would be more due to the press catching wind of Major’s affair, Cook enjoyed the reputation of bringing down a leading light of the Conservative Party. His political vision, in essence, ‘stay the course’ which won him the support of those in favour of continuing the status quo. Whilst this was derided by the media and right of the party as ‘one last heave’, it proved palatable to a party which had been convulsed by decades-long division.
Gordon Brown never seemed to capture the imagination of the Labour Party. His private fallout with Tony Blair (who himself had leadership aspirations) saw Brown run in 1991 without the backing of his closest ally and friend. His pledge to ‘modernize’ Labour, to make it ‘fit’ for the next election rattled many MPs and party members, who struggled to see the need for such a radical change, especially with an election due anytime with the nature of the parliamentary arithmetic. Brown was talented, no doubt, but he lacked media-savvy needed to effectively campaign in the leadership contest.
It would be a meeting in Cook’s parliamentary office which ended the campaign. Brown proposed a pact in which he would withdraw from the race and back Cook, for the price of Brown becoming Chancellor, alongside having a large say in economic matters. Cook, jubilant, agreed to the deal, which has become known as the Cloakroom Pact. Shortly afterwards, David Clark would do the same, although his campaign never truly seemed viable and was more of a way of boosting his standing within the party.
Gould, furious at the stitch-up, reportedly went to convince Meacher to do the same. Even if he succeeded in doing so, as the contest proved, in a straight fight between the left(wing) and the right(wing) of the party, the right would win.
In the concurrent Deputy Leadership election, Jack Straw won the job handily. Beating John Prescott and Ann Taylor, Straw established himself as an upcomer in the party.
Cook, now Leader of the Labour Party and the opposition, made good on his promise, appointing Brown as Shadow Chancellor. Other heavyweights moved around the Shadow Cabinet with David Clark as Foreign Secretary and Frank Dobson becoming Shadow Home Secretary. Bryan Gould was given Environment and in later years would become an internal critic within the party at the direction taken by Cook/Brown.
Frontrunner and Shadow Chancellor Bryan Gould, arguably the stand-out campaigner from the election struggled in trying to turn this goodwill into a solid base within the party. With the left of the party backing Michael Meacher and the right split between stay-the-course Robin Cook and modernizer Gordon Brown, Gould found himself without a reliable base in the party. Thus, his campaign aimed for the middle, appealing to soft-left. His economic proposals, whilst radical and inkeeping with Labour traditions, harmed his campaign. Gould’s refusal to countenance an independent central bank (either in London or Frankfurt) would become wedge issue in the party, splitting Gould from both Europhiles and the modernizers who accepted the economic changes seen under Thatcher and Heseltine. His campaign wasn’t helped by outgoing leader Neil Kinnock, who publicly admitted the party needed a “fresh face” as Leader.
The campaign also saw the rise of Robin Cook, an able parliamentarian and effective campaigner in his own right. He had seen his stock rise in the party since 1988, by taking Gould’s former position as Shadow Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. Cook also received goodwill thanks to political pressure he exerted on his government opposite, John Major, in part leading to Major’s dramatic resignation from Cabinet. Whilst it would be more due to the press catching wind of Major’s affair, Cook enjoyed the reputation of bringing down a leading light of the Conservative Party. His political vision, in essence, ‘stay the course’ which won him the support of those in favour of continuing the status quo. Whilst this was derided by the media and right of the party as ‘one last heave’, it proved palatable to a party which had been convulsed by decades-long division.
Gordon Brown never seemed to capture the imagination of the Labour Party. His private fallout with Tony Blair (who himself had leadership aspirations) saw Brown run in 1991 without the backing of his closest ally and friend. His pledge to ‘modernize’ Labour, to make it ‘fit’ for the next election rattled many MPs and party members, who struggled to see the need for such a radical change, especially with an election due anytime with the nature of the parliamentary arithmetic. Brown was talented, no doubt, but he lacked media-savvy needed to effectively campaign in the leadership contest.
Gould, furious at the stitch-up, reportedly went to convince Meacher to do the same. Even if he succeeded in doing so, as the contest proved, in a straight fight between the left(wing) and the right(wing) of the party, the right would win.
In the concurrent Deputy Leadership election, Jack Straw won the job handily. Beating John Prescott and Ann Taylor, Straw established himself as an upcomer in the party.
Cook, now Leader of the Labour Party and the opposition, made good on his promise, appointing Brown as Shadow Chancellor. Other heavyweights moved around the Shadow Cabinet with David Clark as Foreign Secretary and Frank Dobson becoming Shadow Home Secretary. Bryan Gould was given Environment and in later years would become an internal critic within the party at the direction taken by Cook/Brown.
End of the Soviet Union
Boris Yeltsin’s victory in the first Russian presidential election marked a clear sign of the increasing discontent within the Soviet Union. Gorbachev, who was seen as both too conservative and too reformist, saw his proxy candidate in Nikolai Ryzhkov resoundingly defeated. Yeltsin, the first directly elected Russian head of state, seemed to represent the natural endpoint of perestroika and glasnost and, to many hardliners, the fall of the Union seemed imminent. Along with the increasing call for self-determination from many constituent republics of the Soviet Union and the threat of the New Union Treaty, hardliners sprung into action.
Led by Gennady Yanayev, Vladimir Kryuchkov and Valentin Pavlov, the so called ‘Gang of Eight’ took over Moscow and declared Yanayev the Acting President of the Soviet Union for a 6-month emergency term. The detention of both Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin (who had inadvertently landed at Chkalovksy military airport, under control of the Emergency Committee). While controversial, the detentions were justified by the Committee under the guise of Gorbachev being ‘ill’ and Yeltsin being a ‘fraudster’. With both men detained at their respective dachas’, other prominent figures such as Vice President Ruslan Khasbulatov and Gennady Burbulis went into hiding, fearing a similar fate. Despite fears of an impending civil war within the Union, 70% of oblasts supported the coup and calls for action fizzled out without clear leadership. However, the nations which did plan to leave the Union, such as republics in the Baltics and other nations such as Moldova and Georgia, which had declared their independence prior to the New Union Treaty (which would've recognise their independence and legitimacy) expected an invasion and began to arm citizens and militias.
On August 26, the Emergency Committee announced Yeltsin had died seven days prior, to a fatal heart attack, caused by excessive drinking and as a consequence of his ill health. Rumours and conspiracy theories continue to this day, not helped by this seven-day silence from the Emergency Committee. Whilst three official and independent investigations have confirmed that Yeltsin did indeed die from a heart attack, some believe the Emergency Committee had him poisoned. This theory was made more believable with testimonies showing Yeltsin attempted, on multiple occasions, to leave his dacha after being detained by the Emergency Committee.
Western outrage at Yeltsin's death and the shaky Yanayev who announced it led to a wave of anger and protestors on the streets. By the 29th, a million protestors had flooded Moscow and most of the city’s businesses and industry were forced to close because of strike action. When the protestors marched into the Red Square, the Emergency Committee ordered the army to fire, but General Alexander Lebed refused and saw his troops join the protests. Khasbulatov simultaneously returned from hiding and declared himself the constitutionally legitimate President of Russia to the crowds gathered in the Red Square. The coup found itself outnumbered and fled the city. Gorbachev, still in his dacha, had lost the initiative, his power, and the country.
Khasbulatov went on to organise the peaceful dissolution of the Soviet Union and called for an election in 1992, rather than continue in the constitutionally ambiguous position of serving the remainder of Yeltsin’s term of office. The Communist Party, now disgraced by both the coup’s actions and Gorbachev’s inaction, chose not to run a candidate in the presidential election. Instead they supported the independent candidacy of General Alexander Rutskoy, whose war hero credentials, (and lack of ideological platform) appealed to those seeking a return to the status quo. The result was never in doubt. Khasbulatov and Democratic Russia won in a landslide.
Led by Gennady Yanayev, Vladimir Kryuchkov and Valentin Pavlov, the so called ‘Gang of Eight’ took over Moscow and declared Yanayev the Acting President of the Soviet Union for a 6-month emergency term. The detention of both Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin (who had inadvertently landed at Chkalovksy military airport, under control of the Emergency Committee). While controversial, the detentions were justified by the Committee under the guise of Gorbachev being ‘ill’ and Yeltsin being a ‘fraudster’. With both men detained at their respective dachas’, other prominent figures such as Vice President Ruslan Khasbulatov and Gennady Burbulis went into hiding, fearing a similar fate. Despite fears of an impending civil war within the Union, 70% of oblasts supported the coup and calls for action fizzled out without clear leadership. However, the nations which did plan to leave the Union, such as republics in the Baltics and other nations such as Moldova and Georgia, which had declared their independence prior to the New Union Treaty (which would've recognise their independence and legitimacy) expected an invasion and began to arm citizens and militias.
On August 26, the Emergency Committee announced Yeltsin had died seven days prior, to a fatal heart attack, caused by excessive drinking and as a consequence of his ill health. Rumours and conspiracy theories continue to this day, not helped by this seven-day silence from the Emergency Committee. Whilst three official and independent investigations have confirmed that Yeltsin did indeed die from a heart attack, some believe the Emergency Committee had him poisoned. This theory was made more believable with testimonies showing Yeltsin attempted, on multiple occasions, to leave his dacha after being detained by the Emergency Committee.
Khasbulatov went on to organise the peaceful dissolution of the Soviet Union and called for an election in 1992, rather than continue in the constitutionally ambiguous position of serving the remainder of Yeltsin’s term of office. The Communist Party, now disgraced by both the coup’s actions and Gorbachev’s inaction, chose not to run a candidate in the presidential election. Instead they supported the independent candidacy of General Alexander Rutskoy, whose war hero credentials, (and lack of ideological platform) appealed to those seeking a return to the status quo. The result was never in doubt. Khasbulatov and Democratic Russia won in a landslide.