TL-191 United States Presidential Election 1912

Vote in the TL-191 1912 United States Election!

  • Total voters
    41
  • Poll closed .
Turquoise Blue

Turquoise Blue

Well, we're going to vote for the person who will lead the United States through the First Great War...

Will you vote for the Democrat, Theodore Roosevelt and a spirited fight against the Rebs? If you do this, the Rebs get beaten, like OTL.

Will you vote for the Socialist, Eugene Victor Debs and a considerably less spirited fight against the Rebs, but they will still get beaten, although less then OTL.

Will you vote for the Republican, Gilbert Hitchcock and a decent fight against the Confederacy, but not as spirited as the Dems, but more then the Socialists.


And of course, their VPs are Walter McKenna, Douglas Steffens and James J. Couzens respectively.
 
Last edited:
Komodo

Komodo

I'd rather win the Great War as quickly and decisively as possible, please. If a "less spirited fight" means more months (if not a year or two) of brutal trench warfare and attrition, then I most certainly am for Roosevelt.
 
Turquoise Blue

Turquoise Blue

Komodo20 said:
Debs does have an early lead (which I find disappointing after 4 straight Socialist wins), but I wonder if it'll hold:
Click to expand...
Who knows? Maybe the moderate left and the conservatives would be split between Teddy and Hitchcock, after all, those elections had a lot of parties, while this one only has the Dems, Reps and Socialists.
 

CurlyGangster

Weren't the Socialists depicted as being less Pro-War than the Republicans (or at least, all of the Parties were Pro-War)? To quote the American Front: "If they'd [Socialists in Congress] voted to oppose the war budget, that would have been the end of the Socialist Party in the United States. Everyone is wild for this war, upper class and lower class alike. We'd lost half of our members to the Republicans, maybe more."

Anyway, go Teddy!
 
Last edited:
Turquoise Blue

Turquoise Blue

CurlyGangster said:
Weren't the Socialists depicted as being less Pro-War as the Republicans (or at least, all of the Parties were Pro-War)? To quote the American Front: "If they'd [Socialists in Congress] voted to oppose the war budget, that would have been the end of the Socialist Party in the United States. Everyone is wild for this war, upper class and lower class alike. We'd lost half of our members to the Republicans, maybe more."

Anyway, go Teddy!
Click to expand...
Hmm... I'll edit that...
 
Komodo

Komodo

Turquoise Blue said:
Your home state kind of borders the Confederacy at this point in time, do you really want a war?
Click to expand...

The Great War is inevitable, I think it might be in Abhakhazia's best interests to make sure the front line moves away from his home state as soon as possible - which means TR, because he'll put the most resources into seriously winning the war.

Of course, maybe I shouldn't talk, being a Californian and therefore quite far from any sort of front line (of course, in TL-191 I've probably already been conscripted into the Union Army by now)
 
Turquoise Blue

Turquoise Blue

Komodo20 said:
The Great War is inevitable, I think it might be in Abhakhazia's best interests to make sure the front line moves away from his home state as soon as possible - which means TR, because he'll put the most resources into seriously winning the war.

Of course, maybe I shouldn't talk, being a Californian and therefore quite far from any sort of front line (of course, in TL-191 I've probably already been conscripted into the Union Army by now)
Click to expand...
California borders Mexico, which supports the Confederacy, although I'm not sure if there were an attempted invasion there or not...
 

GeorgeUK

Will a Socialist/Republican administration mean a more lenient peace on the CSA, and therefore no Featherston?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top