New Deal Coalition Retained III: A New World
- Thread starter Redcoat
- Start date
- Status
1994 Midterms Individual Races (National Results Coming Later).
PA Governor
Pennsylvania featured a race that while pedestrian at the time, had consequences later on. Representative Rick Santorum, a rapidly growing figure in Pennsylvanian politics and close ally of Bob Casey in the House, defended the democratic incumbency as Governor Wofford moved on to the senate. He also had an intriguing opponent in ex-Senator Arlen Specter, now a member of the Progressive Party. Republican Dick Thornburgh had decent connections with moderate and women’s organizations and other traditionally Progressive groups as a congressman, (in the James Stockdale mold), but these were stunted in this race by such a strong progressive challenger to his left. Specter had issues of trust with Minaprogressive diehards, but his “brand name” was high, and after a series of gaffes from Thornburgh, it soon became a two-way race. In the end, middle class voters put Santorum over the top as a thanks to the Wofford administration’s successful deal with the Unions, with Santorum promising to not raise a state corporate income tax (which had drawn corporations from New York down to Pennsylvania). He emphasised his opposition to gun control, (though differences in approaches, would however, strain his relations with Bob Casey Sr.). Santorum’s political career looked promising, as he seemed to be the type of Democrat who could appeal to the new constituencies the party needed.
The Union issue, while alienating to non-Union middle class voters, helped drive up Democratic Turnout in key states. In Michigan for example, Iacocca recruited the ex-UAW Head Owen Bieber to run for the senate against notoriously anti-UAW Fred Upton. Upton had attacked the UAW for driving business out of the state, starting a trade war with Iacocca's new tariffs, and for not adequately representing black workers. However, the last charge was ridiculed in campaign ads when Al Sharpton was appointed head of the UAW on July 30th 1992. While other states were hurt by auto-tariffs, Michigan benefited as the growth of the Auto-Industry “trickled down” into service sectors.
Bieber hit all the right marks on the campaign trail, and he was perfect for the base, as there were many unionized workers in the state willing to put their trust behind him. That along with the endorsement of many important leaders like Al Sharpton, Jimmy Hoffa, and the president, meant Bieber would win handily as a result, and by the largest margins of the year. Upton failed to energize the black vote, and the Detroit political machine felt lukewarm as to his candidacy, leading to an interesting case where Democrats had won a majority of the black vote in a major election. Bieber would be a crusader in the name of “the working man”, promoting infrastructure projects, a progressive tax code, tariffs, and labor rights.
Virginia Senate
Pat Robertson, in return for promising to at least try to follow the Party Line on Economics, (which he ended up doing 80% of the time), was appointed the head of the Infrastructure Committee in 1992, which chose where new Maternity Clinics and Children’s Health Department Facilities would be for 1994. He had finally won the approval of the National Democratic Party with his courting of “Robertson Democrats” in favor of the pro-family policies suggested by Bob Casey and Iacocca. However, this had made him “The New Wallace” in the eyes of the African American Community, after Clarence Thomas publicly attacked Robertson. In Virginia, African Americans were notably wealthier, more church-going, and liberty conservative than in the rest of the country. Oddly, considering their relative affluence, they also had a heavy sense of resentment, as they received few of the positions in the federal or state jobs in Virginia, thanks to the remains of the old Harry Byrd Machine and its alliance with National Democrats. Meanwhile, they were disorganized, and had trouble winning primaries over Virginia Suburb Moderates and traditional rural, but economically and socially conservative, factions. That would change thanks to “This New Atrocity”. The African Americans in the Party built bridges with the rural/suburban conservatives and chose to nominate a “joint candidate”: Pat Buchanan.
Pat Buchanan, once a speechwriter for Spiro Agnew, then a political commentator, and now a Georgetown Professor, put his horse in the race, running for the Senate. He was famous in political science circles for his book “An American Foreign Policy for the Americans of the Twenty-First Century”, which advocated for America to return to a Coolidgeian Foreign Policy of disengagement in the Old World, a return to the Monroe Doctrine and closer ties to Cuba, abandoning NATO, and rejecting Freyism. Buchanan hated Freyism “more than any man in America” and even called it “Reheated Fascism” in one editorial. Buchanan believed that the “real Americans; those who loved God, Country and their neighbors [regardless of race] were sick of foreign wars and involvement. The rise of the Isolationist-Leaning Progressives seemed to illustrate this. Meanwhile, he felt, as Black Virginian Republicans did, that federal spending was a tool of a liberal white establishment who wanted to keep blacks, catholics (like himself), and working Americans poor and without a voice. Buchanan wanted to be this voice for those without one. After meeting with prominent black leaders, and making a partnership with his main potential opponent, the moderate Douglas Wilder. Douglas would run for Governor and they would mutually campaign and endorse one another. Both would easily win their respective primaries.
Buchanan Campaigning
The Progressives knew that victory in the South was unlikely, however, Virginia was now winnable thanks to the two major party candidates, both hated by the liberals of the Northern Virginia Suburbs. In addition, Perot knew that the party would have to field some more “sacrificial lambs” to win over donors who would only fund a party with national aspirations. Chuck Robb was the party’s pick at the party convention in June. While rather internationalist for a Progressive, this helped bring in donations to the party as a whole and it was hoped that this could lead to a surprise victory in November.
Robertson easily won his primary but the nastiest campaign of 94’ was just about to begin.
Buchanan discovered through old connections on talk radio that Robertson was not only a close ally of John G. Schmitz, but had connections to more fringe Freyists. While Freyism had been incubated in Virginia, a backlash had emerged against it within the state. This backlash was spearheaded by those who didn’t work in the Military Industrial Complex, who saw it as an excuse to fund the military, as a negative foreign influence, and as having fascistic roots. Buchanan hoped to ride this emerging backlash and build upon it. However, he couldn’t make Frey or Schmitz the chief target. Thankfully, Lyndon LaRouche, ex-Communist turned local fringe talk show radio host, gave Robertson the honor (if it could be called that), of his endorsement. LaRouche was the face of the Left-Freyist movement for Americans, (to the shame of Italian Free Democratic Left). He had endorsed a Worldwide one-world Freyist Government, making him the perfect figure to associate with Pat Robertson.
Buchanan began his campaign with radio ads that identified Robertson as “a disciple of LaRouche”. Attention was brought to LaRouche’s politics, such as his intense Anglophobia, with the talk show host claiming that the King was a puppet master of the president, and oddly enough, that the United Kingdom was starting a drug crisis in the United States in an attempt to repeat the Opium Wars. (This would in the future help spread LaRouche’s publicity nationwide, and later on he won a seat in the House in his hometown of Leesburg, in Virginia’s 10th district). Robertson responded to these attacks in the worst possible form: by attacking Buchanan’s religion. He said “Buchanan prefers that the world be poor and stupid because that’s the only way the Pope and the Jesuits increase in Power, and Buchanan as a tool of his Jesuit friends in Georgetown. This lead to strong rebukes by the national Democrats, but sadly lead to a temporary bump in the polls. Even Chuck Robb was dragged into the fray, after accusing both candidates of having mistresses! However, the New York Times disproved these allegations, but throughout the night, the Virginia Senate Race stayed a nail biter, spectators commenting that it was one of the dirtiest in years…
In the end though, a combination of fatigue with American intervention abroad, disgust over Robertson’s anti-papist insults, and his personal charisma, led Buchanan to eek out a victory. He was also helped by Douglas Wilder's easy victory. The Progressives were not immune to mudslinging on the campaign trail, Chuck Robb’s accusation that both candidates were philanderers definitely didn’t help their cause, though compared to the previous race, their performance was a marked improvement, and proof to Progressive Party leaders later on that Virginia would be worth competing in, and that the Progressives may even gain success elsewhere in the South.
Pat Buchanan, and his association with such dirty politics, would critically hinder his presidential aspirations. However, that wouldn’t prevent him from having an intellectual impact into the 21st century. Buchanan would lead the intellectual reaction against Freyism and foreign adventurism in the United States. He added to this a strong anti-corporate welfare stance (like Stockdale or Dole, but with 10x the anger) and tirades against the “Racist Big Government policies” He also campaigned against “the increasing spread of filth in our small towns through pornography, hookers, and drugs”. He would moderate to win future elections by endorsing pro-tariff economics. However, he would never be moderate in anyone’s mind, but that didn’t matter to Pat. Pat campaigned to be the ideological head of a “New Liberty Conservatism” in the mold of Buckley, Goldwater, or McCloskey, although his flirting with the fringe hurt this. His path to power was through ideas not high office.
New York, next to Washington State, had been the most negatively impacted by the Union Troubles of ’94. Wall Street’s downward spike reverberated heavily through the entire state. In addition, some manufacturing firms around Buffalo decided to permanently move to friendlier territory rather than deal with more Union Issues, not to mention the corruption in Albany. In addition, the state, and more so the city, had a far smaller proportion of families and children. For many, Caseycare (as the family planning bill came to be known), represented a transfer of wealth from the career-focused and young go-getters who walked the streets of New York City or commuted from the suburbs, (in their own minds the reason behind America’s success), to Southern Rednecks who didn’t know how to use a condom. Feminists and Businessmen were united in their opposition. Moreover, the auto-tariffs had kept the stock market from recovering, as the first shots in a trade war were fired. The only reason the trade war didn’t cause a major recession was that WWIII had already crushed global trade previously, orcing many companies to work within their national borders or only with a few select neighbors.
Young Voters like these Wall Street Interns didn't particularly thrill at paid family leave
One would think that the Progressives stood a good chance of gaining heavily, however, internal divisions hindered their progress, if one would forgive the pun. Perot knew that to win in New York, he would have to run a left-winger, as the Rockefeller Republicans dominated the center-center-right in New York (though they had moved right somewhat in recent memory). If a series of left-wing Progressives won in New York, a major state, Pat Leahy and his wing of the Progressives would gain in power over his own more libertarian-leaning faction. As such, Perot would secretly recruit poor candidates in New York, helping to limit the chances his own party could win in the state. To deflect criticism, he would support other left-wingers likely to be more loyal to him, like Barbara Jordan running for the 21st Texas Seat in the House and Paul Wellstone in Minnesota.
For the race, the Republicans recruited two excellent candidates. Steven Clark Rockefeller ran for his father’s Gubernatorial seat. While Democrats complained about Nepotism, many had fond memories of Nelson Rockefeller. Steven also had had quite a successful run as the new chief of the Rockefeller family. He had also done incredible work as chairman of the Wounded Father’s Organization. He touted his leadership, problem solving abilities, and history of charity in his campaign for Governor. As Governor, he would act on these promises, with a centrist record that legalized same-sex unions, passed gun control, cut taxes, curbed the power of public sector unions, and “poached” manufacturing plants to New York from Ohio (leading to a fierce rivalry with Jim Traficant)
George Pataki, while not a diehard Liberty Conservative by any means, was to the right of Mr. Rockefeller. He had a career in the State Senate of attacking the Unions which had in his rants “abused our charitable instincts to help their fat union bosses” that appealled to centrists as well as liberty conservatives. Hugh Carey, once famous for cleaning up New York City, had secretly been ignoring corrupt activities in the area. The race became competitive as Pataki attacked Leo Azaferretti (the replacement for Carey, now the NYC Mayor), claiming that he had become corrupt and complacent, "he lets fat cats run New York dry”. While he had little to no name recognition throughout the state, he set off campaigning from every part of the state, visiting every county by the time of election day. It still seemed like a long shot, but the next morning, New Yorkers were surprised to see that indeed, Pataki had won by a one point margin against Leo. George Pataki focused on financial regulations. Pataki in particular focusing on increasing financial option for smaller firms and on building a “savings culture” in the United States through deregulation and education. He would also be a leader in national security, especially with regards to eliminating new threats that emerged from new technologies that increased interpersonal connectivity.
The Progressive left would achieve a major senate victory in Minnesota thanks to one Paul Wellstone. Wellstone, a professor of Political Science in Carleton College, made his name known in the Progressive Party as a grassroots organizer in the Minneapolis area. He ran a campaign that highlighted his left-wing bonafides, especially in the social sphere. Both the Democrats and the Republicans ran a series of negative ads against each other that highlighted each other’s weaknesses, dragging both down into the mud. allowing Wellstone to sneak in with 35% of the vote. In future years Paul Wellstone would become an important leader in the party, and at times its face in the Senate. He would also become an minaprogressive ideological crusader for free speech.
Both the Progressive Left and Center had made a strong effort of building a base amongst Native Americans. Part of this effort included recruiting Native American Candidates. Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado was one of these candidates. Banking on the Popularity of Dick Lamm, the extremist social views of the Democratic challenger, and the corruption of the Republican incumbent, he won his race easily. Campbell’s Governorship would have a noticeable effect on the Progressive platform as he legalized medical marijuana, sports gambling, open carry, and expanded fishing licenses. He also tirelessly worked to better include Native Communities in the state at large through increased education funding and business incubating “communities” on reservations. In addition, he successfully sued mining corporations for polluting some of Colorado’s pristine wilderness, using the funds to lower taxes on the emerging renewable energy community in Colorado.
PA Governor
Pennsylvania featured a race that while pedestrian at the time, had consequences later on. Representative Rick Santorum, a rapidly growing figure in Pennsylvanian politics and close ally of Bob Casey in the House, defended the democratic incumbency as Governor Wofford moved on to the senate. He also had an intriguing opponent in ex-Senator Arlen Specter, now a member of the Progressive Party. Republican Dick Thornburgh had decent connections with moderate and women’s organizations and other traditionally Progressive groups as a congressman, (in the James Stockdale mold), but these were stunted in this race by such a strong progressive challenger to his left. Specter had issues of trust with Minaprogressive diehards, but his “brand name” was high, and after a series of gaffes from Thornburgh, it soon became a two-way race. In the end, middle class voters put Santorum over the top as a thanks to the Wofford administration’s successful deal with the Unions, with Santorum promising to not raise a state corporate income tax (which had drawn corporations from New York down to Pennsylvania). He emphasised his opposition to gun control, (though differences in approaches, would however, strain his relations with Bob Casey Sr.). Santorum’s political career looked promising, as he seemed to be the type of Democrat who could appeal to the new constituencies the party needed.
The Union issue, while alienating to non-Union middle class voters, helped drive up Democratic Turnout in key states. In Michigan for example, Iacocca recruited the ex-UAW Head Owen Bieber to run for the senate against notoriously anti-UAW Fred Upton. Upton had attacked the UAW for driving business out of the state, starting a trade war with Iacocca's new tariffs, and for not adequately representing black workers. However, the last charge was ridiculed in campaign ads when Al Sharpton was appointed head of the UAW on July 30th 1992. While other states were hurt by auto-tariffs, Michigan benefited as the growth of the Auto-Industry “trickled down” into service sectors.
Bieber hit all the right marks on the campaign trail, and he was perfect for the base, as there were many unionized workers in the state willing to put their trust behind him. That along with the endorsement of many important leaders like Al Sharpton, Jimmy Hoffa, and the president, meant Bieber would win handily as a result, and by the largest margins of the year. Upton failed to energize the black vote, and the Detroit political machine felt lukewarm as to his candidacy, leading to an interesting case where Democrats had won a majority of the black vote in a major election. Bieber would be a crusader in the name of “the working man”, promoting infrastructure projects, a progressive tax code, tariffs, and labor rights.
Virginia Senate
Pat Robertson, in return for promising to at least try to follow the Party Line on Economics, (which he ended up doing 80% of the time), was appointed the head of the Infrastructure Committee in 1992, which chose where new Maternity Clinics and Children’s Health Department Facilities would be for 1994. He had finally won the approval of the National Democratic Party with his courting of “Robertson Democrats” in favor of the pro-family policies suggested by Bob Casey and Iacocca. However, this had made him “The New Wallace” in the eyes of the African American Community, after Clarence Thomas publicly attacked Robertson. In Virginia, African Americans were notably wealthier, more church-going, and liberty conservative than in the rest of the country. Oddly, considering their relative affluence, they also had a heavy sense of resentment, as they received few of the positions in the federal or state jobs in Virginia, thanks to the remains of the old Harry Byrd Machine and its alliance with National Democrats. Meanwhile, they were disorganized, and had trouble winning primaries over Virginia Suburb Moderates and traditional rural, but economically and socially conservative, factions. That would change thanks to “This New Atrocity”. The African Americans in the Party built bridges with the rural/suburban conservatives and chose to nominate a “joint candidate”: Pat Buchanan.
Pat Buchanan, once a speechwriter for Spiro Agnew, then a political commentator, and now a Georgetown Professor, put his horse in the race, running for the Senate. He was famous in political science circles for his book “An American Foreign Policy for the Americans of the Twenty-First Century”, which advocated for America to return to a Coolidgeian Foreign Policy of disengagement in the Old World, a return to the Monroe Doctrine and closer ties to Cuba, abandoning NATO, and rejecting Freyism. Buchanan hated Freyism “more than any man in America” and even called it “Reheated Fascism” in one editorial. Buchanan believed that the “real Americans; those who loved God, Country and their neighbors [regardless of race] were sick of foreign wars and involvement. The rise of the Isolationist-Leaning Progressives seemed to illustrate this. Meanwhile, he felt, as Black Virginian Republicans did, that federal spending was a tool of a liberal white establishment who wanted to keep blacks, catholics (like himself), and working Americans poor and without a voice. Buchanan wanted to be this voice for those without one. After meeting with prominent black leaders, and making a partnership with his main potential opponent, the moderate Douglas Wilder. Douglas would run for Governor and they would mutually campaign and endorse one another. Both would easily win their respective primaries.
Buchanan Campaigning
The Progressives knew that victory in the South was unlikely, however, Virginia was now winnable thanks to the two major party candidates, both hated by the liberals of the Northern Virginia Suburbs. In addition, Perot knew that the party would have to field some more “sacrificial lambs” to win over donors who would only fund a party with national aspirations. Chuck Robb was the party’s pick at the party convention in June. While rather internationalist for a Progressive, this helped bring in donations to the party as a whole and it was hoped that this could lead to a surprise victory in November.
Robertson easily won his primary but the nastiest campaign of 94’ was just about to begin.
Buchanan discovered through old connections on talk radio that Robertson was not only a close ally of John G. Schmitz, but had connections to more fringe Freyists. While Freyism had been incubated in Virginia, a backlash had emerged against it within the state. This backlash was spearheaded by those who didn’t work in the Military Industrial Complex, who saw it as an excuse to fund the military, as a negative foreign influence, and as having fascistic roots. Buchanan hoped to ride this emerging backlash and build upon it. However, he couldn’t make Frey or Schmitz the chief target. Thankfully, Lyndon LaRouche, ex-Communist turned local fringe talk show radio host, gave Robertson the honor (if it could be called that), of his endorsement. LaRouche was the face of the Left-Freyist movement for Americans, (to the shame of Italian Free Democratic Left). He had endorsed a Worldwide one-world Freyist Government, making him the perfect figure to associate with Pat Robertson.
Buchanan began his campaign with radio ads that identified Robertson as “a disciple of LaRouche”. Attention was brought to LaRouche’s politics, such as his intense Anglophobia, with the talk show host claiming that the King was a puppet master of the president, and oddly enough, that the United Kingdom was starting a drug crisis in the United States in an attempt to repeat the Opium Wars. (This would in the future help spread LaRouche’s publicity nationwide, and later on he won a seat in the House in his hometown of Leesburg, in Virginia’s 10th district). Robertson responded to these attacks in the worst possible form: by attacking Buchanan’s religion. He said “Buchanan prefers that the world be poor and stupid because that’s the only way the Pope and the Jesuits increase in Power, and Buchanan as a tool of his Jesuit friends in Georgetown. This lead to strong rebukes by the national Democrats, but sadly lead to a temporary bump in the polls. Even Chuck Robb was dragged into the fray, after accusing both candidates of having mistresses! However, the New York Times disproved these allegations, but throughout the night, the Virginia Senate Race stayed a nail biter, spectators commenting that it was one of the dirtiest in years…
In the end though, a combination of fatigue with American intervention abroad, disgust over Robertson’s anti-papist insults, and his personal charisma, led Buchanan to eek out a victory. He was also helped by Douglas Wilder's easy victory. The Progressives were not immune to mudslinging on the campaign trail, Chuck Robb’s accusation that both candidates were philanderers definitely didn’t help their cause, though compared to the previous race, their performance was a marked improvement, and proof to Progressive Party leaders later on that Virginia would be worth competing in, and that the Progressives may even gain success elsewhere in the South.
Pat Buchanan, and his association with such dirty politics, would critically hinder his presidential aspirations. However, that wouldn’t prevent him from having an intellectual impact into the 21st century. Buchanan would lead the intellectual reaction against Freyism and foreign adventurism in the United States. He added to this a strong anti-corporate welfare stance (like Stockdale or Dole, but with 10x the anger) and tirades against the “Racist Big Government policies” He also campaigned against “the increasing spread of filth in our small towns through pornography, hookers, and drugs”. He would moderate to win future elections by endorsing pro-tariff economics. However, he would never be moderate in anyone’s mind, but that didn’t matter to Pat. Pat campaigned to be the ideological head of a “New Liberty Conservatism” in the mold of Buckley, Goldwater, or McCloskey, although his flirting with the fringe hurt this. His path to power was through ideas not high office.
New York, next to Washington State, had been the most negatively impacted by the Union Troubles of ’94. Wall Street’s downward spike reverberated heavily through the entire state. In addition, some manufacturing firms around Buffalo decided to permanently move to friendlier territory rather than deal with more Union Issues, not to mention the corruption in Albany. In addition, the state, and more so the city, had a far smaller proportion of families and children. For many, Caseycare (as the family planning bill came to be known), represented a transfer of wealth from the career-focused and young go-getters who walked the streets of New York City or commuted from the suburbs, (in their own minds the reason behind America’s success), to Southern Rednecks who didn’t know how to use a condom. Feminists and Businessmen were united in their opposition. Moreover, the auto-tariffs had kept the stock market from recovering, as the first shots in a trade war were fired. The only reason the trade war didn’t cause a major recession was that WWIII had already crushed global trade previously, orcing many companies to work within their national borders or only with a few select neighbors.
Young Voters like these Wall Street Interns didn't particularly thrill at paid family leave
One would think that the Progressives stood a good chance of gaining heavily, however, internal divisions hindered their progress, if one would forgive the pun. Perot knew that to win in New York, he would have to run a left-winger, as the Rockefeller Republicans dominated the center-center-right in New York (though they had moved right somewhat in recent memory). If a series of left-wing Progressives won in New York, a major state, Pat Leahy and his wing of the Progressives would gain in power over his own more libertarian-leaning faction. As such, Perot would secretly recruit poor candidates in New York, helping to limit the chances his own party could win in the state. To deflect criticism, he would support other left-wingers likely to be more loyal to him, like Barbara Jordan running for the 21st Texas Seat in the House and Paul Wellstone in Minnesota.
For the race, the Republicans recruited two excellent candidates. Steven Clark Rockefeller ran for his father’s Gubernatorial seat. While Democrats complained about Nepotism, many had fond memories of Nelson Rockefeller. Steven also had had quite a successful run as the new chief of the Rockefeller family. He had also done incredible work as chairman of the Wounded Father’s Organization. He touted his leadership, problem solving abilities, and history of charity in his campaign for Governor. As Governor, he would act on these promises, with a centrist record that legalized same-sex unions, passed gun control, cut taxes, curbed the power of public sector unions, and “poached” manufacturing plants to New York from Ohio (leading to a fierce rivalry with Jim Traficant)
George Pataki, while not a diehard Liberty Conservative by any means, was to the right of Mr. Rockefeller. He had a career in the State Senate of attacking the Unions which had in his rants “abused our charitable instincts to help their fat union bosses” that appealled to centrists as well as liberty conservatives. Hugh Carey, once famous for cleaning up New York City, had secretly been ignoring corrupt activities in the area. The race became competitive as Pataki attacked Leo Azaferretti (the replacement for Carey, now the NYC Mayor), claiming that he had become corrupt and complacent, "he lets fat cats run New York dry”. While he had little to no name recognition throughout the state, he set off campaigning from every part of the state, visiting every county by the time of election day. It still seemed like a long shot, but the next morning, New Yorkers were surprised to see that indeed, Pataki had won by a one point margin against Leo. George Pataki focused on financial regulations. Pataki in particular focusing on increasing financial option for smaller firms and on building a “savings culture” in the United States through deregulation and education. He would also be a leader in national security, especially with regards to eliminating new threats that emerged from new technologies that increased interpersonal connectivity.
The Progressive left would achieve a major senate victory in Minnesota thanks to one Paul Wellstone. Wellstone, a professor of Political Science in Carleton College, made his name known in the Progressive Party as a grassroots organizer in the Minneapolis area. He ran a campaign that highlighted his left-wing bonafides, especially in the social sphere. Both the Democrats and the Republicans ran a series of negative ads against each other that highlighted each other’s weaknesses, dragging both down into the mud. allowing Wellstone to sneak in with 35% of the vote. In future years Paul Wellstone would become an important leader in the party, and at times its face in the Senate. He would also become an minaprogressive ideological crusader for free speech.
Both the Progressive Left and Center had made a strong effort of building a base amongst Native Americans. Part of this effort included recruiting Native American Candidates. Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado was one of these candidates. Banking on the Popularity of Dick Lamm, the extremist social views of the Democratic challenger, and the corruption of the Republican incumbent, he won his race easily. Campbell’s Governorship would have a noticeable effect on the Progressive platform as he legalized medical marijuana, sports gambling, open carry, and expanded fishing licenses. He also tirelessly worked to better include Native Communities in the state at large through increased education funding and business incubating “communities” on reservations. In addition, he successfully sued mining corporations for polluting some of Colorado’s pristine wilderness, using the funds to lower taxes on the emerging renewable energy community in Colorado.
Last edited:
The Progressives are making some serious headway. I like that.
Though I'm curious what it meant when it said that Santorum's race would have consequences later on.
Though I'm curious what it meant when it said that Santorum's race would have consequences later on.
Progressive growth will be explained soon. It will also have serious impact on government's ability to function.
As far as Santorum's race...
Problem with that is those are WI politicians, not MN politicians
Author's Note
Buchanan was all about resentment OTL, while he has changed his views a lot throughout his life, he has made a living off of destructive, resentful, and angry politics. ITL, Instead of fueling White Working Class Anger in the 1990's he chooses Middle Class African American Resentment as his personal crusade. (One should note that him being some sort of Black Crusader is meant to be as ridiculous as him being an OTL Populist Hero/Media Fighter considering he worked in DC nearly all his life and was a TV Commentator)
Note: He's not some sort of civil rights hero ITL. He is still a destructive, personal, and extreme. A lot of these personality/character traits are pretty ingrained by the POD, its just that his application is warped from OTL since we are so far from the POD. Some things, like him being a post-Cold War Isolationist, stay the same, some are different.
Also, even though Republicans ITL are the party of civil rights, that doesn't make them immune from destructive politics as the political incentives are still there. Buchanan is an example of that.
As far as his "anti-fascist stance" is concerned, its meant to be an ironic "wink and nod" at his OTL very favorable writing about Putin and other Authoritarians that's also consistent with his isolationist views. He never said anything bad yet about Germany having a King...
Buchanan was all about resentment OTL, while he has changed his views a lot throughout his life, he has made a living off of destructive, resentful, and angry politics. ITL, Instead of fueling White Working Class Anger in the 1990's he chooses Middle Class African American Resentment as his personal crusade. (One should note that him being some sort of Black Crusader is meant to be as ridiculous as him being an OTL Populist Hero/Media Fighter considering he worked in DC nearly all his life and was a TV Commentator)
Note: He's not some sort of civil rights hero ITL. He is still a destructive, personal, and extreme. A lot of these personality/character traits are pretty ingrained by the POD, its just that his application is warped from OTL since we are so far from the POD. Some things, like him being a post-Cold War Isolationist, stay the same, some are different.
Also, even though Republicans ITL are the party of civil rights, that doesn't make them immune from destructive politics as the political incentives are still there. Buchanan is an example of that.
As far as his "anti-fascist stance" is concerned, its meant to be an ironic "wink and nod" at his OTL very favorable writing about Putin and other Authoritarians that's also consistent with his isolationist views. He never said anything bad yet about Germany having a King...
Remember Perots operation to Sabtoge the left wing of the party? Roundtrees candadicy can be seen as a very big part of it
Last edited:
National Election Summary
House: 182 (R.) 174 (D.) 79 (P.)
Republicans won the House on the back of a poor economy, Union troubles, and just a general want for new leadership that Midterms bring. Charismatic Representative Nick Modi was rather young for a house speaker, but had built a reputation for effective policymaking, as head of the House Republican “Idea Labs”. He had a close relationship with Roy Cohn, which he leveraged into convincing moderates to vote for his candidacy. Many worried that such a hardcore Liberty-Conservative would alienate voters, but this would be moderated with a more moderate Senate Majority Leader. In addition, Modi’s historic position as the first non-white speaker, helped blunt any attacks on his viewpoints.
Post-election, the democrats chose to respond to the 1st Republican Asian Speaker by appointing Marcy Kaptur, the vociferously pro-tariff Congresswoman of Ohio as their speaker. Her socially liberal views made her acceptable to the “Kennedy Liberals”, (still enough of a force in the Democratic party to play kingmaker), thus healing any potential divides.
The Progressives made minor gains, but vote splitting hurt their progress in many races. However, they had kept nearly all of their 1992 seats, which no analysts had predicted. Donations from Big Agriculture, as Perot had predicted, had saved the day.
Speaker: Nick Modi (R-TX9)
Majority Leader: George W. Bush (R-TX19)
Majority Whip: David Dreier (R-CA33)
Minority Leader: Marcy Kaptur (D-OH9)
Minority Whip: Edward Boland (D-MA3)
Opposition Leader: Ross Perot (TX)
Opposition Whip: Byron Dorgan (P-ND)
Speaker Modi in Traditional Indian Garb at a Cultural Celebration
Senate: 51 (R.) 35 (D.) 14 (P.)
Majority Leader: Richard Lugar (D-IN)
Minority Leader: Strom Thurmond (R-SC)
Opposition Leader: Dick Lamm (P-CO)
For the 1st time since the 1988 elections and the beginning of the war, the Republicans were able to secure an absolute majority in the Senate. This was due in part to massive success in the numerous special elections held after the death or retiring of many older Senators who had stayed on during WWIII. Moderates and Liberty Conservatives alike drove the party forward. New Senators like Mrs. Agnew (Part of the Agnew Machine run by James Rand Agnew "The Guv"), Al Salvi ("The New Chuck Percy"), and more brought a new sense of excitement to the party.
In addition, the Progressives, thanks to their narrow focus on smaller states, were able to secure 14 senate seats, establishing themselves firmly in the institution. Perot and Lamm now moved to “Phase II”: Disrupt Bills to Force Progressive Priorities, whilst using televised congressional debates/theatrics to persuade voters back home. Their obstructionist policies won them the ire of diehard liberty conservatives, Wallace-Worshipping commune nationalists, and centrists trying to pass to-be tripartisan legislation.
"The Senate Pest" Dick Lamm
Democrats, as of now, were hammered as they lost nearly all support from non-unionized workers and states without major automobile manufacturing thanks to the tariffs and labor strikes. Iacocca had a stellar foreign policy reputation, and while this saved some seats vs. isolationist P’s and R’s in the senate, it wasn’t enough. Republicans chose Richard Lugar, a right-leaning moderate who voted against Democratic “CaseyCare” proposals, to unite their party. While Liberty Conservatives had hoped for a more supportive leader, they understood that someone with deep moderate connections could help sway some key votes in passing important legislation. Strom Thurmond and Dick Lamm both kept their Iron grips over their senate caucus.
In all, while Iacocca had achieved foreign policy success, he, as well as his party, looked “old”. This was symbolized by Thurmond’s continued position as minority leader. While Progressives had the ultimate edge with “change voters”, Republicans had stemmed the tide by appointing new leaders, bringing in young blood along with it.
"The Damm Bastard Won't Die" - Mario Cuomo
The country had no major foreign enemies for the first time and decades, and while chaos reigned in South America, Iacocca had effectively contained it. (Though some would disagree, as Iacocca had let in middle class refugees from South America. While they were of course screened for Marburg, far-right extremists began to claim this was part of a false-flag attempt to bring the epidemic into America. Spanish and Portuguese Americans were often discriminated, though luckily not to the same effect as Russian Americans). The economy was incredible “stagnant”, and inflation continued unabated. Drug use had slowly started to rise, but was not a major issue on anyone's mind for the moment. Issues like the drug crisis for now stayed on the underside. While the country was united culturally, politically the House and Senate was gridlocked. One political cartoon described the situation as Iacocca stuck in a Traffic Jam, not bad, but not really great either. The question remained: could Iacocca get us out of the Traffic Jam in time? Would something come out of the rearview mirror? Was there a light at the end of the tunnel? Time would tell.
House: 182 (R.) 174 (D.) 79 (P.)
Republicans won the House on the back of a poor economy, Union troubles, and just a general want for new leadership that Midterms bring. Charismatic Representative Nick Modi was rather young for a house speaker, but had built a reputation for effective policymaking, as head of the House Republican “Idea Labs”. He had a close relationship with Roy Cohn, which he leveraged into convincing moderates to vote for his candidacy. Many worried that such a hardcore Liberty-Conservative would alienate voters, but this would be moderated with a more moderate Senate Majority Leader. In addition, Modi’s historic position as the first non-white speaker, helped blunt any attacks on his viewpoints.
Post-election, the democrats chose to respond to the 1st Republican Asian Speaker by appointing Marcy Kaptur, the vociferously pro-tariff Congresswoman of Ohio as their speaker. Her socially liberal views made her acceptable to the “Kennedy Liberals”, (still enough of a force in the Democratic party to play kingmaker), thus healing any potential divides.
The Progressives made minor gains, but vote splitting hurt their progress in many races. However, they had kept nearly all of their 1992 seats, which no analysts had predicted. Donations from Big Agriculture, as Perot had predicted, had saved the day.
Speaker: Nick Modi (R-TX9)
Majority Leader: George W. Bush (R-TX19)
Majority Whip: David Dreier (R-CA33)
Minority Leader: Marcy Kaptur (D-OH9)
Minority Whip: Edward Boland (D-MA3)
Opposition Leader: Ross Perot (TX)
Opposition Whip: Byron Dorgan (P-ND)
Speaker Modi in Traditional Indian Garb at a Cultural Celebration
Senate: 51 (R.) 35 (D.) 14 (P.)
Majority Leader: Richard Lugar (D-IN)
Minority Leader: Strom Thurmond (R-SC)
Opposition Leader: Dick Lamm (P-CO)
For the 1st time since the 1988 elections and the beginning of the war, the Republicans were able to secure an absolute majority in the Senate. This was due in part to massive success in the numerous special elections held after the death or retiring of many older Senators who had stayed on during WWIII. Moderates and Liberty Conservatives alike drove the party forward. New Senators like Mrs. Agnew (Part of the Agnew Machine run by James Rand Agnew "The Guv"), Al Salvi ("The New Chuck Percy"), and more brought a new sense of excitement to the party.
In addition, the Progressives, thanks to their narrow focus on smaller states, were able to secure 14 senate seats, establishing themselves firmly in the institution. Perot and Lamm now moved to “Phase II”: Disrupt Bills to Force Progressive Priorities, whilst using televised congressional debates/theatrics to persuade voters back home. Their obstructionist policies won them the ire of diehard liberty conservatives, Wallace-Worshipping commune nationalists, and centrists trying to pass to-be tripartisan legislation.
"The Senate Pest" Dick Lamm
Democrats, as of now, were hammered as they lost nearly all support from non-unionized workers and states without major automobile manufacturing thanks to the tariffs and labor strikes. Iacocca had a stellar foreign policy reputation, and while this saved some seats vs. isolationist P’s and R’s in the senate, it wasn’t enough. Republicans chose Richard Lugar, a right-leaning moderate who voted against Democratic “CaseyCare” proposals, to unite their party. While Liberty Conservatives had hoped for a more supportive leader, they understood that someone with deep moderate connections could help sway some key votes in passing important legislation. Strom Thurmond and Dick Lamm both kept their Iron grips over their senate caucus.
In all, while Iacocca had achieved foreign policy success, he, as well as his party, looked “old”. This was symbolized by Thurmond’s continued position as minority leader. While Progressives had the ultimate edge with “change voters”, Republicans had stemmed the tide by appointing new leaders, bringing in young blood along with it.
"The Damm Bastard Won't Die" - Mario Cuomo
The country had no major foreign enemies for the first time and decades, and while chaos reigned in South America, Iacocca had effectively contained it. (Though some would disagree, as Iacocca had let in middle class refugees from South America. While they were of course screened for Marburg, far-right extremists began to claim this was part of a false-flag attempt to bring the epidemic into America. Spanish and Portuguese Americans were often discriminated, though luckily not to the same effect as Russian Americans). The economy was incredible “stagnant”, and inflation continued unabated. Drug use had slowly started to rise, but was not a major issue on anyone's mind for the moment. Issues like the drug crisis for now stayed on the underside. While the country was united culturally, politically the House and Senate was gridlocked. One political cartoon described the situation as Iacocca stuck in a Traffic Jam, not bad, but not really great either. The question remained: could Iacocca get us out of the Traffic Jam in time? Would something come out of the rearview mirror? Was there a light at the end of the tunnel? Time would tell.
Last edited:
Senate Map
Senators List
Alabama-
2. Fob James (D)
3. Richard Shelby (D)
Alaska-
2. Steve Cowper (D)
3. Ray Metcalf (P)
Arizona-
1. John Shadegg (R) R Gain (special election)
3. Jon Kyl (R) R Gain
Arkansas-
3. Dale Bumpers (D)
2. Bill Alexander (D)
California-
1. Edwin Meese (R) R Hold
3. James Stockdale (R)
Colorado-
2. Dick Lamm (P)
3. William Armstrong (R)
Connecticut-
1. Prescott Bush Jr. (R) R Hold
3. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. (P)
Delaware-
1. Pete DuPont (R) R Hold
2. Joe Biden (I)
Florida-
1. Bob Martinez (D)
3. Buddy McKay (D) D Hold
Georgia-
2. John Lewis (R)
3. Larry MacDonald (D)
Hawaii-
1. William F. Quinn (R) R Hold
3. Patsy Mink (P)
Idaho-
3. Butch Otter (R)
2. David H. Leroy (R)
Illinois-
3. Phil Crane (R) R Gain, Special election.
2. Al Salvi (R) R Hold Special Election
Indiana-
1. Richard Lugar (R) R Hold
3. Evan Bayh (D)
Iowa-
2. Terry Branstad (R)
3. Tom Harkin (P)
Kansas-
2. Sam Brownback (R)
3. Bob Dole (R)
Kentucky-
2. Walter Huddleston (D)
3. Steve Beshear (D)
Louisiana-
2. Edwin Edwards (D)
3. David Treen (R)
Maine-
2. Susan Collins (P) P Gain
1. William Cohen (R)
Maryland-
1. John Glenn Beall Jr. (R)
3. Susan Scott Agnew (R) R Hold
Massachusetts-
1. John Kerry (D) D Hold
2. Mitt Romney (R)
Michigan-
2. Dave Bonior (R)
1. Owen Bieber (D) D Gain
Minnesota-
2. Rudy Boschwitz (R)
1. Paul Wellstone (P) P Gain
Mississippi-
2. Medgar Evers (R)
1. Thad Cochran (R) R Hold
Missouri-
1. John Danforth (R) R Hold
3. Mel Carnahan (D)
Montana-
1. Pat Williams (D)
2. Conrad Burns (R) R Gain
Nebraska-
1. Bob Kerry (D) D Hold
2. J. James Exon (D)
Nevada-
3. Jim Santini (R)
1. Paul Laxalt (R) R Hold
New Hampshire-
3. Bob Smith (R)
2. Alan Shepard (R)
New Jersey-
2. Frank Lautenberg (D)
1. Ruth Bader Ginsburg (P) P Hold
New Mexico-
2. Art Trujillo (D)
1. Harrison Schmitt (R) R Hold
New York-
1. George Pataki (R) R Gain
2. James L. Buckley (R) (C)
North Carolina-
3. Jim Broyhill (R)
2. Jesse Helms (D)
North Dakota-
3. Kent Conrad (P) P Hold
1. Byron Dorgan (P) (NPL)
Ohio-
1. Jerry Springer (D) D Hold
3. Bernadine Haley (D)
Oklahoma-
2. Dewey F. Bartlett (R)
3. Wes Watkins (D)
Oregon-
2. Ron Wyden (D)
3. Mark Hatfield (R)
Pennsylvania-
1. Bob Casey Sr. (D)
2. Harris Wofford (D) D Gain
Rhode Island-
1. Fernand St. Germain (D)
2. Lincoln Chafee (R) R Hold
South Carolina-
2. Strom Thurmond (D)
3. Carroll Campbell Jr. (R) R Hold
South Dakota-
2. James Abdnor (R)
3. Larry Pressler (P)
Tennessee-
1. Al Gore Jr. (D) D Hold
2. Lamar Alexander (R)
Texas-
1. Phil Gramm (R) R Gain
2. Antonin Scalia (R)
Utah-
1. Orrin Hatch (R) R Hold
3. Jon Huntsman Jr. (R)
Vermont-
3. Jim Jeffords (P) P Gain (Special Election)
1. Patrick Leahy (P)
Virginia-
1. Pat Buchanan (R) R Gain
2. John Warner (R)
Washington-
3. Linda Smith (R)
1. Slade Gorton (R) R Hold
West Virginia-
2. Ken Hechler (D)
1. Robert Byrd (D)
Wisconsin-
1. Dave Obey (P) P Hold
3. Russ Feingold (D)
Wyoming-
2. Teno Roncalio (D)
1. Jim Geringer (R) R Gain
Senators List
Alabama-
2. Fob James (D)
3. Richard Shelby (D)
Alaska-
2. Steve Cowper (D)
3. Ray Metcalf (P)
Arizona-
1. John Shadegg (R) R Gain (special election)
3. Jon Kyl (R) R Gain
Arkansas-
3. Dale Bumpers (D)
2. Bill Alexander (D)
California-
1. Edwin Meese (R) R Hold
3. James Stockdale (R)
Colorado-
2. Dick Lamm (P)
3. William Armstrong (R)
Connecticut-
1. Prescott Bush Jr. (R) R Hold
3. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. (P)
Delaware-
1. Pete DuPont (R) R Hold
2. Joe Biden (I)
Florida-
1. Bob Martinez (D)
3. Buddy McKay (D) D Hold
Georgia-
2. John Lewis (R)
3. Larry MacDonald (D)
Hawaii-
1. William F. Quinn (R) R Hold
3. Patsy Mink (P)
Idaho-
3. Butch Otter (R)
2. David H. Leroy (R)
Illinois-
3. Phil Crane (R) R Gain, Special election.
2. Al Salvi (R) R Hold Special Election
Indiana-
1. Richard Lugar (R) R Hold
3. Evan Bayh (D)
Iowa-
2. Terry Branstad (R)
3. Tom Harkin (P)
Kansas-
2. Sam Brownback (R)
3. Bob Dole (R)
Kentucky-
2. Walter Huddleston (D)
3. Steve Beshear (D)
Louisiana-
2. Edwin Edwards (D)
3. David Treen (R)
Maine-
2. Susan Collins (P) P Gain
1. William Cohen (R)
Maryland-
1. John Glenn Beall Jr. (R)
3. Susan Scott Agnew (R) R Hold
Massachusetts-
1. John Kerry (D) D Hold
2. Mitt Romney (R)
Michigan-
2. Dave Bonior (R)
1. Owen Bieber (D) D Gain
Minnesota-
2. Rudy Boschwitz (R)
1. Paul Wellstone (P) P Gain
Mississippi-
2. Medgar Evers (R)
1. Thad Cochran (R) R Hold
Missouri-
1. John Danforth (R) R Hold
3. Mel Carnahan (D)
Montana-
1. Pat Williams (D)
2. Conrad Burns (R) R Gain
Nebraska-
1. Bob Kerry (D) D Hold
2. J. James Exon (D)
Nevada-
3. Jim Santini (R)
1. Paul Laxalt (R) R Hold
New Hampshire-
3. Bob Smith (R)
2. Alan Shepard (R)
New Jersey-
2. Frank Lautenberg (D)
1. Ruth Bader Ginsburg (P) P Hold
New Mexico-
2. Art Trujillo (D)
1. Harrison Schmitt (R) R Hold
New York-
1. George Pataki (R) R Gain
2. James L. Buckley (R) (C)
North Carolina-
3. Jim Broyhill (R)
2. Jesse Helms (D)
North Dakota-
3. Kent Conrad (P) P Hold
1. Byron Dorgan (P) (NPL)
Ohio-
1. Jerry Springer (D) D Hold
3. Bernadine Haley (D)
Oklahoma-
2. Dewey F. Bartlett (R)
3. Wes Watkins (D)
Oregon-
2. Ron Wyden (D)
3. Mark Hatfield (R)
Pennsylvania-
1. Bob Casey Sr. (D)
2. Harris Wofford (D) D Gain
Rhode Island-
1. Fernand St. Germain (D)
2. Lincoln Chafee (R) R Hold
South Carolina-
2. Strom Thurmond (D)
3. Carroll Campbell Jr. (R) R Hold
South Dakota-
2. James Abdnor (R)
3. Larry Pressler (P)
Tennessee-
1. Al Gore Jr. (D) D Hold
2. Lamar Alexander (R)
Texas-
1. Phil Gramm (R) R Gain
2. Antonin Scalia (R)
Utah-
1. Orrin Hatch (R) R Hold
3. Jon Huntsman Jr. (R)
Vermont-
3. Jim Jeffords (P) P Gain (Special Election)
1. Patrick Leahy (P)
Virginia-
1. Pat Buchanan (R) R Gain
2. John Warner (R)
Washington-
3. Linda Smith (R)
1. Slade Gorton (R) R Hold
West Virginia-
2. Ken Hechler (D)
1. Robert Byrd (D)
Wisconsin-
1. Dave Obey (P) P Hold
3. Russ Feingold (D)
Wyoming-
2. Teno Roncalio (D)
1. Jim Geringer (R) R Gain
Last edited:
Small error - the Republicans are the Senate majority, yet the Majority Leader is mentioned as being a Democrat.
- Status