New Retrospective United States Presidential Elections: Central Thread.

[Turquoise Blue]

Alright. This is my project, a new retrospective series, for I think views here has changed a fair bit since the first elections. And it will give new members an opportunity to vote. To prevent clutter, I'm doing only one election per week. The rules here are different. The limit for qualification is lowered to 0.01%, so more parties will be able to get your vote. BTW, I need a wikifier for this series. If you are willing to put the effort in, then I'll be eternally grateful. I need a good wikifier though...

CalBear has OKed this.

First election, 1789, will be up soon.

 

[serbrcq]

I'm guessing we're going to see a shift to the right in the results. The character of the board has moved in that direction slightly, and increasing the number of candidates usually splinters the left.

No more President Debs.

 

[papal duke]

How diffrent will this be from the last Retrospective Elections? aside form the 0.01% rule.

 

[Lyly]

BTW, I need a wikifier for this series. If you are willing to put the effort in, then I'll be eternally grateful. I need a good wikifier though...

I can make good maps, maybe can wikify things.

 

[Trotsky]

How diffrent will this be from the last Retrospective Elections? aside form the 0.01% rule.

It's different because it hasn't been 11 months since the last time this happened, and also someone else is doing it!

 

[Van555]

I'm guessing we're going to see a shift to the right in the results. The character of the board has moved in that direction slightly, and increasing the number of candidates usually splinters the left.

No more President Debs.

Oh I thought we only had worry about splitters!

 

[Turquoise Blue]

I can make good maps, maybe can wikify things.

You need to have understanding of the wiki code.

 

[serbrcq]

So what happened to this?

 

[Turquoise Blue]

Oh. Sorry. I was distracted. I'll put up 1900 soon... (We're alternating between those.)

 

[Turquoise Blue]

Bump. Next pair of elections (first next week, second after that) is 1792 and 1904.

1792
John Adams (Federalist)
Aaron Burr (Democratic-Republican)
George Clinton (Democratic-Republican)
Thomas Jefferson (Democratic-Republican)
George Washington (Independent)


1904
Charles Corregan (Socialist Labor)
Eugene V. Debs (Socialist)
Austin Holcomb (Continental) Only one to appear here and not in the Old Retro elections.
Alton B. Parker (Democratic)
Theodore Roosevelt (Republican)
Silas Swallow (Prohibition)
Thomas Watson (Populist)

 

[Turquoise Blue]

And because I want to have records...

1796
John Adams (Federalist)
Samuel Adams (Federalist)
Aaron Burr (Democratic-Republican)
George Clinton (Democratic-Republican)
Oliver Ellsworth (Federalist)
Thomas Jefferson (Democratic-Republican)
Thomas Pinckney (Federalist)

1908
William Jennings Bryan (Democratic)
Eugene Chafin (Prohibition)
Eugene V. Debs (Socialist)
Davidson Faction (Republican) If you vote for this, I'll find out who the hell was Davidson, and make him the President.
August Gillhaus (Socialist Labor)
Thomas Hisgen (Independence)
William Howard Taft (Republican)
Thomas Watson (Populist)

 

[serbrcq]

And because I want to have records...

Davidson Faction (Republican) If you vote for this, I'll find out who the hell was Davidson, and make him the President.

So are you going to be including slates of unpledged electors and the Texas Regulars and so on?

 

[Snowstalker]

We needed fewer options, not more. I'd have raised it to 0.5%.

 

[Turquoise Blue]

So are you going to be including slates of unpledged electors and the Texas Regulars and so on?

Hell, I'm not even sure if I should include the Faction or not...

We needed fewer options, not more. I'd have raised it to 0.5%.

Yeah, but 0.5 would result in a lot of predictable elections, TBH.

 

[serbrcq]

Hell, I'm not even sure if I should include the Faction or not...

I'm tempted to vote for them just to make you do some serious research, because no matter how hard I Google I can't find out what Davidson's first name was or what he looked like. He was the leader of the "lily white" faction in the Alabama GOP, apparently.

 

[Fleetlord]

I'm tempted to vote for them just to make you do some serious research, because no matter how hard I Google I can't find out what Davidson's first name was or what he looked like. He was the leader of the "lily white" faction in the Alabama GOP, apparently.

Still don't know who the hell Davidson is, but the "lily-whites" were the openly segregationist wing of the Republican Party.

EDIT: Found him. Julius W. Davidson. No thanks.

 

[serbrcq]

Austin Holcomb (Continental)

This is apparently an alias or splinter of the Prohibition Party.

 

[Komodo]

Yeah, but 0.5 would result in a lot of predictable elections, TBH.

I think limiting the options would have made some elections a lot more interesting, as it would have forced a lot more of "lesser of two evils" decisions - for example, in the Gilded Age elections. Or 1840 - imagine having to pick between Tyler and Van Buren

 

[Turquoise Blue]

This is apparently an alias or splinter of the Prohibition Party.

Indeed! You shall have to inform people of that. BTW, first part of who's eligible here.

1900: William McKinley (Republican), William Jennings Bryan (Democratic), John Woolley (Prohibition), Eugene V. Debs (Socialist), Wharton Barker (Populist), Joseph Maloney (Socialist Labor) & Seth Ellis (United Reform)
1904: Theodore Roosevelt (Republican), Alton B. Parker (Democratic), Eugene V. Debs (Socialist), Silas Swallow (Prohibition), Thomas Watson (Populist), Charles Corregan (Socialist Labor) & Austin Holcomb (Continental)
1908: William Howard Taft (Republican), William Jennings Bryan (Democratic), Eugene V. Debs (Socialist), Eugene Chafin (Prohibition), Thomas Hisgen (Independence), Thomas Watson (Populist), August Gillhaus (Socialist Labor) & Julius W. Davidson (Davidson Republican)
1912: Woodrow Wilson (Democratic), Theodore Roosevelt (Progressive), William Howard Taft (Republican), Eugene V. Debs (Socialist), Eugene Chafin (Prohibition) & Arthur Reimer (Socialist Labor)
1916: Woodrow Wilson (Democratic), Charles Evans Hughes (Republican), Allan L. Benson (Socialist), James Hanly (Prohibition) & Arthur Reimer (Socialist Labor)
1920: Warren G. Harding (Republican), James M. Cox (Democratic), Eugene V. Debs (Socialist), Parley P. Christensen (Farmer-Labor), Aaron Watkins (Prohibition), James Ferguson (American), William Cox (Socialist Labor) & Robert Macaulay (Single Tax)
1924: Calvin Coolidge (Republican), John W. Davis (Democratic), Robert M. La Follette (Progressive), Herman Faris (Prohibition), William Z. Foster (Communist), Frank Johns (Socialist Labor), Gilbert Nations (American) & William Wallace (Commonwealth Land)
1928: Herbert Hoover (Republican), Al Smith (Democratic), Norman Thomas (Socialist), William Z. Foster (Communist), Verne Reynolds (Socialist Labor), William Varney (Prohibition) & Frank Webb (Farmer-Labor)
1932: Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democratic), Herbert Hoover (Republican), Norman Thomas (Socialist), William Z. Foster (Communist), William Upshaw (Prohibition), William Hope Harvey (Liberty), Verne Reynolds (Socialist Labor) & Jacob Coxey (Farmer-Labor)
1936: Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democratic), Herbert Hoover (Republican), William Lemke (Union), Norman Thomas (Socialist), Earl Browder (Communist), D. Leigh Colvin (Prohibition) & John Aiken (Socialist Labor)
1940: Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democratic), Wendell Willkie (Republican), Norman Thomas (Socialist), Roger Babson (Prohibition), Earl Browder (Communist) & John Aiken (Socialist Labor)
1944: Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democratic), Thomas E. Dewey (Republican), Norman Thomas (Socialist), Claude Watson (Prohibition) & Edward Teichert (Socialist Labor)
1948: Harry S. Truman (Democratic), Thomas E. Dewey (Republican), Strom Thurmond (Dixiecrat), Henry A. Wallace (Progressive), Norman Thomas (Socialist), Claude Watson (Prohibition), Edward Teichert (Socialist Labor) & Farrell Dobbs (Socialist Workers)

 

[Turquoise Blue]

I think limiting the options would have made some elections a lot more interesting, as it would have forced a lot more of "lesser of two evils" decisions - for example, in the Gilded Age elections. Or 1840 - imagine having to pick between Tyler and Van Buren

Nah. Someone else can do that. I like more options. And anyway, A Socialist in 1952 is available. I no longer have to vote for Stevenson!