Miscellaneous >1900 (Alternate) History Thread

'ATL 1984 Election: George HW Bush Vs. Walter Mondale'.

Say Reagan resigns due to health issues (and still isn't assassinated in '81), making HW the incumbent here.
I going to bet that this one is still a blowout for bush just because the same factors that worked in Reagan’s favor will still be working in Bushes favor perhaps even more so.
 
I going to bet that this one is still a blowout for bush just because the same factors that worked in Reagan’s favor will still be working in Bushes favor perhaps even more so.

Well, yeah, we can still bet on an easy landslide for Bush.

But even more so than Reagan '84? That’s the question here, especially because Bush lacks his boss's charisma and wittiness on the fly, if you recall Reagan's "youth and inexperience" joke lighting up the room. More icing on the cake than anything decisive, I suppose, but still.
 
Well, yeah, we can still bet on an easy landslide for Bush.

But even more so than Reagan '84? That’s the question here, especially because Bush lacks his boss's charisma and wittiness on the fly, if you recall Reagan's "youth and inexperience" joke lighting up the room. More icing on the cake than anything decisive, I suppose, but still.
But you have to keep in mind that an assassination will naturally spark a rally around the leader effect for Bush. I also think that Bush might much better portray himself as an experienced veteran who was going to take the nation in the 'right sensible' direction. Though I do agree that he wouldn't have Reagen's charisma and charm.
 
But you have to keep in mind that an assassination will naturally spark a rally around the leader effect for Bush. I also think that Bush might much better portray himself as an experienced veteran who was going to take the nation in the 'right sensible' direction. Though I do agree that he wouldn't have Reagen's charisma and charm.

I literally just said there'd be no assassination here. Just Reagan having health issues (say, his dementia setting in earlier) and resigning in time for Bush to have the incumbent power heading into election season.

Might be helpful to read the OP more carefully from now on. ;)
 
I literally just said there'd be no assassination here. Just Reagan having health issues (say, his dementia setting in earlier) and resigning in time for Bush to have the incumbent power heading into election season.

Might be helpful to read the OP more carefully from now on. ;)
Ha, my bad must have mis read that somehow.
 
I realize that this may sound ludicrous given the two individuals in question but hypothetically speaking if George Wallace somehow miraculously won the Presidency in 1968 and Martin Luther King, Junior was not assassinated, could it be possible - although it may be a stretch and even far-fetched hence why I’m inquiring - that the two could somehow collaborate despite their different stances? I have been reading more about George Wallace lately (who ironically was endorsed by the NAACP for his unsuccessful first run for Governor of Alabama in 1958) and he apparently wanted to establish additional trade schools among other alternative means to alleviate poverty.

I completely understand that this question is controversial but I think the prospect could have been interesting to put it lightly.
 
Last edited:
More of a normal history rather than althist question but still- between Austria-Hungary's breakup and Yugoslavia's formation (i.e. a month or so), was any sort of independent authority established in Bosnia, by Bosnians, before being absorbed into Yugoslavia? Was it already occupied by Allied South Slavs, or the Austrians & Hungarians- or did the Condominium there transform into a brief political unit of its own?

I've scoured the Internet for quite a bit and found no answer to this question, an issue slightly exacerbated by the fact that I don't know much about the end of WW1 save for being able to name some select short-lived polities that formed for ~4 seconds during the chaos Europe was in immediately post-WW1
 
On the occasion of the 67th anniversary of the Hungarian Revolution of 1956:

What if the revolution succeeded and Hungary managed to leave the Warsaw Pact without triggering Soviet intervention?
 
Could anyone help me with a potential President Disney TL told in the point of view of his Press Secretary, Jimmie Dodd as a sort of movie format detailing Disney's 1952 Campaign and two term presidency?
 
Last edited:
On the occasion of the 67th anniversary of the Hungarian Revolution of 1956:

What if the revolution succeeded and Hungary managed to leave the Warsaw Pact without triggering Soviet intervention?
I assume Hungary would have better chances opening towards West leaving behind the shackles of the Soviet world.
 
Make a detailed and plausible timeline of this world from this map:


CqrqVIy9xJyuwIrX1-5XQDeCoEZO5OrmJwjvEZAKl5LCRJTLj6tCtFL_-oGgskrCiPyj9_X1jBT3rKb0bMY54oujWFjb_-BZOYae5AgZlwhHeQM9REwtlb9KL4D9211ETcE5LVXVyneNwjw8Qu9nJSk



BTW this is not mine.
 
'Herbert Hoover Assassinated'.

Doesn't have to be immediately, but some time after the 1929 Crash makes the most obvious sense. Really, I'm surprised things didn't end that way IOTL, given how much hate he got for all the Hoovervilles and shit.
 
Russia's geography explains its tendency for authoritarianism? (Basically, the way Russia is made geographically means strong central government control is needed to avoid rebellions?) Or is this too simple and there is more than this.
 
'Herbert Hoover Assassinated'.

Doesn't have to be immediately, but some time after the 1929 Crash makes the most obvious sense. Really, I'm surprised things didn't end that way IOTL, given how much hate he got for all the Hoovervilles and shit.
Some Argentine Anarchists actually did try and assassinate him in 1928 during his visit to the nation during a good will tour of 10 South America nations. They planned to blow up his train with explosions but the man who was meant to set the charges was arrested by Argentine police before he could do so.
 
Russia's geography explains its tendency for authoritarianism? (Basically, the way Russia is made geographically means strong central government control is needed to avoid rebellions?) Or is this too simple and there is more than this.
Russia's geography, particularly the open plains to its west, can explain some of its rulers' decisions in history (the first chapter of Prisoners of Geography by Tim Marshall covers this well). But it being a cause of authoritarianism specifically? I don't see that link.
(As an aside, I know you know this, but there's a danger a discussion about this could stray into current politics, which would need the discussion to move into the Pol Chat forum. If you don't want to limit yourself/us to historical examples only, then you may wish to ask this question again there.)
 
Russia's geography, particularly the open plains to its west, can explain some of its rulers' decisions in history (the first chapter of Prisoners of Geography by Tim Marshall covers this well). But it being a cause of authoritarianism specifically? I don't see that link.
(As an aside, I know you know this, but there's a danger a discussion about this could stray into current politics, which would need the discussion to move into the Pol Chat forum. If you don't want to limit yourself/us to historical examples only, then you may wish to ask this question again there.)
I'm going to limit myself to historical examples only, and thank you for your input.
 
drafting a timeline where the rwandan, ugandan, sudanese, and congolese wars are all merged into one horrible mess, and i found some combat footage of the early stages of the first congo war that goes hard

just mentioning that, i might drop it in there somewhere
 
Top