The American System: A Henry Clay TL
- Thread starter TheHedgehog
- Start date
Hence I’m wondering why there hasn’t been a push toward removing the “first past the post” system in the US.
I remember when I was attending my mother's methodist church and people getting ready to leave Sunday service to get home before the football game started. So here are some football questions ?
1. Is state and college football as popular as professional football.
2. Do the states allow sports betting?
3. Are there ever fights between groups of fans or do celebrations get out if control?
1. Is state and college football as popular as professional football.
2. Do the states allow sports betting?
3. Are there ever fights between groups of fans or do celebrations get out if control?
Leftists aren't really a unified group TTL. Some hold their noses and vote for the Whigs because of economics, and others gravitate to the Greens, which sees some success at the local level in Louisiana and Florida.Good lord, I remember now.
I figured under this new system, the US would've tried pushing for a different electoral system by now. I imagine there's an untapped potential for the various leftists,
This is awesome! Consider it the official logo of the Chetniks
The Democrats aren't exactly socially progressive, as President Breathitt rolled back elements of the Whigs' law legalizing gay marriage, but they aren't particularly socially conservative either. Left wingers would probably still vote for the Whigs on social issues like gay marriage, unless immigration reform is a top priority for them.
Lol blursed how?
Mostly because both the Whigs and Democrats benefit a lot from FPTP.
1. Yeah, they're about as popular as pro football, but the South doesn't go as nuts for the Iron Bowl as they do for, say, a Tigers vs. Hawks game.
2. Sports betting is legalized nationwide and heavily regulated into two big cartels, kinda like Draft Kings and Fanduel.
3. Oh absolutely. TTL's US has its fair share of football hooliganism and drunken brawls.
Just the idea of a football team named after Chetniks is in an otl context wonderfully blursed. Certainly not something I’d ever have even begun to consider haha
Question to the writer: just thinking about the variety of alternate names in this TL, do you have any specific process behind their creation?
Lol true, true
For Anglo names I either make them up, smash together names from contemporary figures, or borrow them from books I've read or TV shows (Berryhill, for instance, was a name I'd heard somewhere on The West Wing). For foreign names, I use the fantasy name generator and the names of contemporary figures from that country.
108. The Interests of the People
108. The Interests of the People
“President Nelson’s four years were neither spectacularly bad nor particularly inspiring. The economy remained strong, but the early signs of stagnation were presenting themselves, and Nelson’s proposed liberal reforms led to icy relations with Congress and low approval ratings with the public. His administration had alienated parts of the Democratic party by concentrating cabinet appointments and, by extension, federal patronage, in the hands of east-coast liberals. Although this would help prevent the party’s complete takeover by anti-integrationists during the reunification with the National Democrats, it created icy relations between the national Democratic party and regional parties across the Midwest and west. The 1946 midterms had seen the Whigs strengthen their majorities amid a general sense that the country was adrift in the doldrums, solidifying the popular notion that Nelson was weak and ineffectual.
Even with these intra-party tensions, he did not face any challenges for the nomination, and was nominated for a second term by acclamation on the first ballot of the convention. In his acceptance speech, he vowed to continue the fight for liberalization, saying “the fearsome, faceless beast of bureaucracy and oppressive regulation must and shall be slain.” News that former president Cameron had received the Whig nomination elicited mixed feelings among the gathered delegates – while he was undoubtedly a popular figure, he was also a divisive one, so while some Democrats resigned themselves to a defeat, others hoped that Cameron’s reputation could be weaponized against him. The vocal anti-personalist opposition to Cameron within the Whig party also inspired hope that a faction of the party could form a coalition with the Democrats to deliver Nelson a second term of responsibility and anti-corruption.”
-From IN THE SHADOW OF JACKSON by Michelle Watts, published 2012
“...but the Howard Cameron of 1948 was very different from the Howard Cameron of 1936. Cameron was, after his bid for a third consecutive term ended in a humiliating defeat at the convention in '44, embittered, angry, and driven by what his wife Hallie described to me as "an all-encompassing obsession" with returning triumphantly to the presidency. The young, optimistic reformer of 1936 who transformed a nation, and who I devoted my whole career in government to, was gone. His face had become sharper and meaner with age, and he grew very reactionary and suspicious of disloyalty from his allies. He once confessed in a moment of surprising self-reflection that he was terrified of dying without “some last great success.”
It was not only about ending on a high note for him. He told me often of how he wanted to punish those who had denied him the nomination in 1944. "They conspired against the movement," he would snarl whenever Ezra Stark's or Sam Wolcott's names were mentioned. And in Cameron's mind, he was the movement. The movement wouldn't exist -- couldn't exist -- without him. The idea of a betrayal from within the party had wounded him and left him unable to trust even his inner circle. His private denouncements of these erstwhile allies that he had considered friends boiled down to a simple theme: "They sacrificed the movement for their own petty ambitions. They had no concept of loyalty. They couldn't understand the great works that were incomplete.”
“I hope you're happy with your thirty pieces of silver” was Cameron's infamous declaration at the 1944 convention. He was widely criticized for it. Journalists couldn't understand how the man who had come to represent American Optimism could not only challenge the Washington Precedent, but be so bitter and unsportsmanlike in defeat. But those tendencies were already there, they simply became more dominant over time. Cameron had remade the political system: the south was more and more willing to vote for Whig candidates and he himself had been elected in impressive landslides both times -- why should he not seek a third term? As he began his re-entrance into presidential politics, "thirty pieces of silver" became a recurring theme. He had risen from the political dead to restore the Party to its rightful path and throw the sinful, self-serving Judas Iscariots out of power. I don't believe the association to Christ was a conscious one -- he had never been overtly self-serving, but it was revealing. It was clear to me and others in his inner circle that Cameron's political comeback was equally about settling scores and getting revenge on his enemies, both real and perceived, as it was about cementing a legacy that didn't end in failure, defeat, and humiliation. To Howard Cameron, the two goals were intertwined. And that's why the man I knew and considered a friend was so different -- so angry, bitter, and paranoid -- twelve years later."
-From THE TITAN OF HIS ERA: A PORTRAIT OF HOWARD CAMERON by David Cannon, published 1961
“Howard Cameron had not been idle during his four-year interregnum. He was still determined to return to office and had grown convinced that the Whig party depended on him to achieve success. Indeed, without him the party often squabbled among itself, with a bitter, factional battle over the party chairmanship in 1946 and an attempted deposition of Speaker Norris at the opening of congress in 1947 nearly split the party’s congressional caucus. In contrast, Cameron toured the country in support of Whiggish programs, drawing large crowds wherever he went. He particularly enjoyed speaking to the torchlight rallies of the Wide Awakes, where the same kind of radicalism that Cameron had brought with him to the Executive Mansion had originated.
Unlike in 1936 or 1940, Cameron faced fierce opposition from within the party as they sought to deny him a third nomination. While former vice president Fisher declined to challenge him again, the anti-personalist opposition coalesced behind the youthful Sam Wolcott, a former congressman from Brooklyn and the chair of the New York Whig party. Wolcott, still decades away from cementing his family as a dynasty that yielded, among others, three presidents, was well-connected and amiable. He had grown to despise Cameron on a personal level after their acrimonious meeting during the 1944 convention battle and saw an opportunity to exact revenge. However, while Wolcott was undoubtedly a talented politician and navigator of the smoke-filled rooms, Cameron could easily command the massed Whig faithful, and he had spent much of his presidency stacking state parties with friendly faces and people who owed him favors. Now, Cameron was calling in every favor owed and every friend he still had in the party as the convention loomed.
His personal popularity and the strong performance of his splinter party in 1944, which outperformed the convention Whig ticket, were powerful arguments for state party bosses who had received a flood of patronage and government contract money that had been shut off under the good-government auspices of President Nelson. Cameron’s loyal southern base produced a slate of delegates almost wholly pledged to his campaign, while Wolcott struggled to win over midwestern party bosses, though he did have the New York and New England state parties to fall back on. It was clear that the Whig party had seller’s remorse and wanted Cameron back. With each passing day before the convention, more and more local officials and lawmakers endorsed him, heaping praise upon him as the savior of the country for rescuing the economy.
While Sam Wolcott fought hard at the convention, his campaign issuing dire warnings that Cameron was a strongman and a demagogue, Cameron had built up powerful momentum. His supporters booed anti-personalist speakers, sang the Cameronist March, and forcefully worked the floor to build more support. The former president easily secured the nomination on the first ballot with nearly two thirds of the delegates supporting him, a rousing endorsement of a man who the party had rejected just four years ago. His acceptance speech was triumphant, and gloating at times. “The movement continues,” he declared, “as this great party has returned to take up the banner of our crusade for the common man. The cause endures, and the work shall resume.”
It was exactly the coronation that Howard Cameron had dreamed of.”
-From THE DETROIT LION by John Philip Yates, published 2012
“Howard Cameron’s nomination silenced most of the anti-personalist murmuring in the party, but a splinter faction still formed. Though Sam Wolcott begrudgingly endorsed Cameron in the interest of party unity, other figures bolted the party. At a conference in New York City, a group of Whigs led by Thomas Foster founded the Labor Party, a moderate anti-corruption party. The Labor Party could not hope to defeat both Cameron and Nelson, so in states where the party had ballot access, fusion agreements with the Democrats were made for the presidential race. As a result, in states like Missouri, President Nelson appeared on both the Democratic and Labor ballot lines. A few Whig congressmen from Missouri and New Jersey defected to the Labor party, but overall, party unity was far stronger than it had been in 1944.
Cameron toured the nation, and his well-attended rallies forced President Nelson to follow suit. Nelson tried to make the case that his administration had grown the economy and that the nation had to “move on from” Cameron and Cameronism. However, the anemic economy and labor unrest that had dominated his presidency, while minor compared to the events of the second Cameron administration, tainted his popularity and weakened his arguments. While Nelson insisted on further liberalization and attacked the “do-nothing” Whig congress, Cameron mocked him for weak leadership and called for more stimulus spending and more populist projects. The promise of government spending excited not just workers, but also the businesses that had grown rich from friendly ties to Whig officials and the Cameron cabinet.
Nelson also lagged behind the Whigs in party organization and funding. Cameron’s return to the party brought with him the impressive campaign apparatus that he had built, including mailing lists, donor lists, and dedicated volunteers. The Wide Awakes came out in force during the 1948 campaign, having aided Clarence Dern’s third-party run in 1944. With these powerful campaign tools all united behind one candidate once more, Nelson’s anticipated campaign about Cameronism and corruption evaporated into mudslinging and populist oratory. Even Nelson’s attempts to steer the discourse towards a referendum on Cameron backfired as voters decided that they quite liked what he stood for. By election day, the Democrats were floundering, and most experts predicted a landslide win for the former president.
Howard Cameron was still returned to the Executive Mansion, but it surprised many, including Cameron himself, how close the election turned out to be. Though he won a majority of the popular vote, he only narrowly did so, notching 51.2 percent, a far cry from the nearly three quarters he won in 1940. He won 349 electoral votes, losing states like Illinois and New York to Nelson while sweeping almost the entire south. President Nelson, despite losing reelection, nearly swept New England, and won the solidly Whig state of Minnesota. Further, he won Missouri, largely due to the fusion ticket with Labor. It was a disappointing result for Cameron, as he was anticipating a triumphant landslide to embarrass his critics and rivals. He privately lashed out at the Labor splitters, insisting that Wolcott and Ezra Stark Jr had helped boost the Labor party’s prospects.
The Whigs also lost eleven seats in the House, including three to Labor candidates. Democrats made modest gains in the northeast, defeating vulnerable Cameronist incumbents facing fusion tickets. In the Senate, the party fared better, picking up seven seats, primarily in the south, but losing three northern ones. While the party still enjoyed commanding majorities, it was widely expected that Cameron’s victory would generate sufficient coattails to expand them. Indeed, much of the contemporary narrative surrounding the 1948 election centers on Cameron’s underperformance of expectations. Though he entered his second presidency with high approval ratings and a friendly congress, he would, with time, come to face the public’s wrath as a whole host of factors – inflation, labor unions, civil rights, and foreign wars emerged as thorns in his side. As the saying goes, you either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain. William McGovern, the other great progressive reformer of his age, died in office, but Howard Cameron still lived…”
-From THE LONG TWENTIETH CENTURY: AMERICA 1940-2003 by Greg Carey, published 2009
“President Nelson’s four years were neither spectacularly bad nor particularly inspiring. The economy remained strong, but the early signs of stagnation were presenting themselves, and Nelson’s proposed liberal reforms led to icy relations with Congress and low approval ratings with the public. His administration had alienated parts of the Democratic party by concentrating cabinet appointments and, by extension, federal patronage, in the hands of east-coast liberals. Although this would help prevent the party’s complete takeover by anti-integrationists during the reunification with the National Democrats, it created icy relations between the national Democratic party and regional parties across the Midwest and west. The 1946 midterms had seen the Whigs strengthen their majorities amid a general sense that the country was adrift in the doldrums, solidifying the popular notion that Nelson was weak and ineffectual.
Even with these intra-party tensions, he did not face any challenges for the nomination, and was nominated for a second term by acclamation on the first ballot of the convention. In his acceptance speech, he vowed to continue the fight for liberalization, saying “the fearsome, faceless beast of bureaucracy and oppressive regulation must and shall be slain.” News that former president Cameron had received the Whig nomination elicited mixed feelings among the gathered delegates – while he was undoubtedly a popular figure, he was also a divisive one, so while some Democrats resigned themselves to a defeat, others hoped that Cameron’s reputation could be weaponized against him. The vocal anti-personalist opposition to Cameron within the Whig party also inspired hope that a faction of the party could form a coalition with the Democrats to deliver Nelson a second term of responsibility and anti-corruption.”
-From IN THE SHADOW OF JACKSON by Michelle Watts, published 2012
“...but the Howard Cameron of 1948 was very different from the Howard Cameron of 1936. Cameron was, after his bid for a third consecutive term ended in a humiliating defeat at the convention in '44, embittered, angry, and driven by what his wife Hallie described to me as "an all-encompassing obsession" with returning triumphantly to the presidency. The young, optimistic reformer of 1936 who transformed a nation, and who I devoted my whole career in government to, was gone. His face had become sharper and meaner with age, and he grew very reactionary and suspicious of disloyalty from his allies. He once confessed in a moment of surprising self-reflection that he was terrified of dying without “some last great success.”
It was not only about ending on a high note for him. He told me often of how he wanted to punish those who had denied him the nomination in 1944. "They conspired against the movement," he would snarl whenever Ezra Stark's or Sam Wolcott's names were mentioned. And in Cameron's mind, he was the movement. The movement wouldn't exist -- couldn't exist -- without him. The idea of a betrayal from within the party had wounded him and left him unable to trust even his inner circle. His private denouncements of these erstwhile allies that he had considered friends boiled down to a simple theme: "They sacrificed the movement for their own petty ambitions. They had no concept of loyalty. They couldn't understand the great works that were incomplete.”
“I hope you're happy with your thirty pieces of silver” was Cameron's infamous declaration at the 1944 convention. He was widely criticized for it. Journalists couldn't understand how the man who had come to represent American Optimism could not only challenge the Washington Precedent, but be so bitter and unsportsmanlike in defeat. But those tendencies were already there, they simply became more dominant over time. Cameron had remade the political system: the south was more and more willing to vote for Whig candidates and he himself had been elected in impressive landslides both times -- why should he not seek a third term? As he began his re-entrance into presidential politics, "thirty pieces of silver" became a recurring theme. He had risen from the political dead to restore the Party to its rightful path and throw the sinful, self-serving Judas Iscariots out of power. I don't believe the association to Christ was a conscious one -- he had never been overtly self-serving, but it was revealing. It was clear to me and others in his inner circle that Cameron's political comeback was equally about settling scores and getting revenge on his enemies, both real and perceived, as it was about cementing a legacy that didn't end in failure, defeat, and humiliation. To Howard Cameron, the two goals were intertwined. And that's why the man I knew and considered a friend was so different -- so angry, bitter, and paranoid -- twelve years later."
-From THE TITAN OF HIS ERA: A PORTRAIT OF HOWARD CAMERON by David Cannon, published 1961
“Howard Cameron had not been idle during his four-year interregnum. He was still determined to return to office and had grown convinced that the Whig party depended on him to achieve success. Indeed, without him the party often squabbled among itself, with a bitter, factional battle over the party chairmanship in 1946 and an attempted deposition of Speaker Norris at the opening of congress in 1947 nearly split the party’s congressional caucus. In contrast, Cameron toured the country in support of Whiggish programs, drawing large crowds wherever he went. He particularly enjoyed speaking to the torchlight rallies of the Wide Awakes, where the same kind of radicalism that Cameron had brought with him to the Executive Mansion had originated.
Unlike in 1936 or 1940, Cameron faced fierce opposition from within the party as they sought to deny him a third nomination. While former vice president Fisher declined to challenge him again, the anti-personalist opposition coalesced behind the youthful Sam Wolcott, a former congressman from Brooklyn and the chair of the New York Whig party. Wolcott, still decades away from cementing his family as a dynasty that yielded, among others, three presidents, was well-connected and amiable. He had grown to despise Cameron on a personal level after their acrimonious meeting during the 1944 convention battle and saw an opportunity to exact revenge. However, while Wolcott was undoubtedly a talented politician and navigator of the smoke-filled rooms, Cameron could easily command the massed Whig faithful, and he had spent much of his presidency stacking state parties with friendly faces and people who owed him favors. Now, Cameron was calling in every favor owed and every friend he still had in the party as the convention loomed.
His personal popularity and the strong performance of his splinter party in 1944, which outperformed the convention Whig ticket, were powerful arguments for state party bosses who had received a flood of patronage and government contract money that had been shut off under the good-government auspices of President Nelson. Cameron’s loyal southern base produced a slate of delegates almost wholly pledged to his campaign, while Wolcott struggled to win over midwestern party bosses, though he did have the New York and New England state parties to fall back on. It was clear that the Whig party had seller’s remorse and wanted Cameron back. With each passing day before the convention, more and more local officials and lawmakers endorsed him, heaping praise upon him as the savior of the country for rescuing the economy.
While Sam Wolcott fought hard at the convention, his campaign issuing dire warnings that Cameron was a strongman and a demagogue, Cameron had built up powerful momentum. His supporters booed anti-personalist speakers, sang the Cameronist March, and forcefully worked the floor to build more support. The former president easily secured the nomination on the first ballot with nearly two thirds of the delegates supporting him, a rousing endorsement of a man who the party had rejected just four years ago. His acceptance speech was triumphant, and gloating at times. “The movement continues,” he declared, “as this great party has returned to take up the banner of our crusade for the common man. The cause endures, and the work shall resume.”
It was exactly the coronation that Howard Cameron had dreamed of.”
-From THE DETROIT LION by John Philip Yates, published 2012
“Howard Cameron’s nomination silenced most of the anti-personalist murmuring in the party, but a splinter faction still formed. Though Sam Wolcott begrudgingly endorsed Cameron in the interest of party unity, other figures bolted the party. At a conference in New York City, a group of Whigs led by Thomas Foster founded the Labor Party, a moderate anti-corruption party. The Labor Party could not hope to defeat both Cameron and Nelson, so in states where the party had ballot access, fusion agreements with the Democrats were made for the presidential race. As a result, in states like Missouri, President Nelson appeared on both the Democratic and Labor ballot lines. A few Whig congressmen from Missouri and New Jersey defected to the Labor party, but overall, party unity was far stronger than it had been in 1944.
Cameron toured the nation, and his well-attended rallies forced President Nelson to follow suit. Nelson tried to make the case that his administration had grown the economy and that the nation had to “move on from” Cameron and Cameronism. However, the anemic economy and labor unrest that had dominated his presidency, while minor compared to the events of the second Cameron administration, tainted his popularity and weakened his arguments. While Nelson insisted on further liberalization and attacked the “do-nothing” Whig congress, Cameron mocked him for weak leadership and called for more stimulus spending and more populist projects. The promise of government spending excited not just workers, but also the businesses that had grown rich from friendly ties to Whig officials and the Cameron cabinet.
Nelson also lagged behind the Whigs in party organization and funding. Cameron’s return to the party brought with him the impressive campaign apparatus that he had built, including mailing lists, donor lists, and dedicated volunteers. The Wide Awakes came out in force during the 1948 campaign, having aided Clarence Dern’s third-party run in 1944. With these powerful campaign tools all united behind one candidate once more, Nelson’s anticipated campaign about Cameronism and corruption evaporated into mudslinging and populist oratory. Even Nelson’s attempts to steer the discourse towards a referendum on Cameron backfired as voters decided that they quite liked what he stood for. By election day, the Democrats were floundering, and most experts predicted a landslide win for the former president.
| Howard Cameron | Richard Nelson | |
| Electoral Vote | 361 | 177 |
| Popular Vote | 22,527,164 | 19,139,290 |
| Percentage | 51.2 | 43.5 |
Howard Cameron was still returned to the Executive Mansion, but it surprised many, including Cameron himself, how close the election turned out to be. Though he won a majority of the popular vote, he only narrowly did so, notching 51.2 percent, a far cry from the nearly three quarters he won in 1940. He won 349 electoral votes, losing states like Illinois and New York to Nelson while sweeping almost the entire south. President Nelson, despite losing reelection, nearly swept New England, and won the solidly Whig state of Minnesota. Further, he won Missouri, largely due to the fusion ticket with Labor. It was a disappointing result for Cameron, as he was anticipating a triumphant landslide to embarrass his critics and rivals. He privately lashed out at the Labor splitters, insisting that Wolcott and Ezra Stark Jr had helped boost the Labor party’s prospects.
The Whigs also lost eleven seats in the House, including three to Labor candidates. Democrats made modest gains in the northeast, defeating vulnerable Cameronist incumbents facing fusion tickets. In the Senate, the party fared better, picking up seven seats, primarily in the south, but losing three northern ones. While the party still enjoyed commanding majorities, it was widely expected that Cameron’s victory would generate sufficient coattails to expand them. Indeed, much of the contemporary narrative surrounding the 1948 election centers on Cameron’s underperformance of expectations. Though he entered his second presidency with high approval ratings and a friendly congress, he would, with time, come to face the public’s wrath as a whole host of factors – inflation, labor unions, civil rights, and foreign wars emerged as thorns in his side. As the saying goes, you either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain. William McGovern, the other great progressive reformer of his age, died in office, but Howard Cameron still lived…”
-From THE LONG TWENTIETH CENTURY: AMERICA 1940-2003 by Greg Carey, published 2009
Last edited:
Howard Cameron is gonna go all Richard Nixon, I feel… This will be interesting
Cameron, based on a wikibox that can be found on page 68, looks like the arch-segregationist Homer Martin Adkins, the 32nd Governor of Arkansas who was derisively called "Holy Homer" by his critics.
Cameron's personality and politics on the other hand, is broadly based on Juan Perón, who I'm sure you are familiar with. There are some influences of FDR and other American politicians, but Cameron's grandiose self-importance, authoritarianism and ... interesting economic ideas is based off of everyone's favorite sort-of-leftist, kind-of-fascist Argentine dictator.
ive decided he looks like Howard Hamlin from better call Saul and no one can dissuade me of this
If Cameron will not ban a Democratic Party, rewrite Constitution and became President-For-Live, he will be not-so-villian))
Oh yeah, they might have to drag him out of the White House, kicking in screaming. He barely eeked out a win this time.
It will be interesting, I can assure you
Lol thanks!
So tricky...Ah! Good old Richard Nixon....
Indeed he will, like the later years of Juan Peron, but no military coup
He still won a pretty convincing victory, but it was more like Bill Clinton in 1996 than Ronald Reagan in 1984
The 1948 Presidential election:
Credit to @traveller76 for his fantastic AI-generated portrait of Howard Cameron
Credit to @traveller76 for his fantastic AI-generated portrait of Howard Cameron
What has been the third party political scene been like outside of the Democrat and Whig coalitions?