TLIAW(II):A Rigged Deck, for a Rigged System
- Thread starter Nofix
- Start date
Lost Angeles Herald-Examiner 1927 ranking list
The Hearst-owned LAHE sent out a poll to the leading historians of the nation, asking them to rank the Presidents from 1789 to 1925. This was their results tallied up :
1.) George Washington (Independent) [#1]
2.) John Quincy Adams (Federalist) [#7]
3.) Abraham Lincoln (Federalist) [#16]
4.) William Jennings Bryan (Reform)[#25]
5.) Eugene Victory Debs (Reform)[#27, 30]
6.) William Wirt (Whig) [#A, 9]
7.) John Adams (Federalist) [#3]
8.) Winfield Scott (Federalist) [#14]
9.) Henry Clay (Federalist) [#12]
10.) Green Clay Smith (Reform)[#20]
11.) Benjamin Harrison (Federalist) [#23]
12.) Chester Arthur (Federalist) [#A]
13.) Parley Parker Christensen (Reform)[#A]
14.) James Baird Weaver (Reform)[#24]
15.) DeWitt Clinton (Independent/Republican) [#5]
16.) James Monroe (Whig) [#6]
17.) Hugh Lawson White (Whig) [#10]
18.) Thomas Andrews Hendricks (Federalist) [#19]
19.) Theodore Roosevelt (Federalist) [#26, 28]
20.) Benjamin Franklin Butler (Reform)[#22]
21.) Andrew Jackson (Whig) [#8]
22.) Winfield Scott Hancock (Federalist) [#21]
23.) Charles Evan Hughes (Federalist) [#29]
24.) David Davis (Federalist) [#A, 18]
25.) Martin Van Buren (Whig) [#11, 13]
26.) C.C. Pinckney (Federalist) [#4]
27.) Thomas Jefferson (Republican) [#2]
28.) Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar II (Federalist) [#A]
The Hearst-owned LAHE sent out a poll to the leading historians of the nation, asking them to rank the Presidents from 1789 to 1925. This was their results tallied up :
1.) George Washington (Independent) [#1]
2.) John Quincy Adams (Federalist) [#7]
3.) Abraham Lincoln (Federalist) [#16]
4.) William Jennings Bryan (Reform)[#25]
5.) Eugene Victory Debs (Reform)[#27, 30]
6.) William Wirt (Whig) [#A, 9]
7.) John Adams (Federalist) [#3]
8.) Winfield Scott (Federalist) [#14]
9.) Henry Clay (Federalist) [#12]
10.) Green Clay Smith (Reform)[#20]
11.) Benjamin Harrison (Federalist) [#23]
12.) Chester Arthur (Federalist) [#A]
13.) Parley Parker Christensen (Reform)[#A]
14.) James Baird Weaver (Reform)[#24]
15.) DeWitt Clinton (Independent/Republican) [#5]
16.) James Monroe (Whig) [#6]
17.) Hugh Lawson White (Whig) [#10]
18.) Thomas Andrews Hendricks (Federalist) [#19]
19.) Theodore Roosevelt (Federalist) [#26, 28]
20.) Benjamin Franklin Butler (Reform)[#22]
21.) Andrew Jackson (Whig) [#8]
22.) Winfield Scott Hancock (Federalist) [#21]
23.) Charles Evan Hughes (Federalist) [#29]
24.) David Davis (Federalist) [#A, 18]
25.) Martin Van Buren (Whig) [#11, 13]
26.) C.C. Pinckney (Federalist) [#4]
27.) Thomas Jefferson (Republican) [#2]
28.) Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar II (Federalist) [#A]
I think it says a lot when George Washington is still regarded as the best President overall.
I mean, in OTL the no1 position generally switches between Lincoln and FDR.
I mean, in OTL the no1 position generally switches between Lincoln and FDR.
Without a Civil War around, Abraham Lincoln didn't have a chance to fully flex his political muscles. He was still a good President, an early example of a corruption chasing Attorney General and a bipartisan leader who got things done (albeit with a crippled opposition and a very willing CongresS). Plus we still have about a hundred years to go, and a possible 6 term Norman Thomas-ocracy to get through.
As a side note I've been wanting to mention: here the biggest controversy regarding Washington would be over his "Independent" status: with Federalists trying to tie him to their party since immediately after his death, and others pointing out his disdain of political parties and how he was never really a member of the Federalists.
Yes it is. Hearst has a somewhat bigger media empire in the Federated States of Mexico given their bigger size and influence then OTL, with George Hearst having his own business connections down in Los Angeles. Young William Hearst originally misheard it as Lost Angeles when his father took him there the first time, something he later used as the name of his California based newspaper.
#31.) Robert Marion La Follette, Sr. - Reform
(1925-1929)
Vice-President:
Charles Wayland Bryan, Reform (1925-1929)
The La Follette Administration had one of the most successful lone terms in a long time, an idea that would have caused much confusion in his day. The establishment of a national antitrust office in the Attorney Generals office, which previous was dealt on a product to product basis, a national Farmer's Credit Bank, and the Government Railroad Office nationalized the railroads, to the bitter but useless protests of the Federalists. La Follette, despite his age and occasional sickness, worked day and night to eliminate the "interests' power in Government." Most agree he was successful nowadays, but in his time it was rather controversial.
The Federalists attacked him for "purging and persecuting" them and even opposition Reformers for just taking the occasional gift, like a free railroad ticket to meet someone, or an invitation to a high class luncheon. To La Follette, however, these were merely the early starts to addiction. One free gift here, another there, and before you know it a good man turned into a mindless and spineless tool of his corporate masters. Going with the idea of "addiction", he and Vice-President Bryan forced through the Prohibition Act of 1926. The Bryan brothers called this the "highlight of their political lives", as former President Bryan had to use much of his personal influence to convince wayward Reformers of the benefit of Prohibition. William Jennings Bryan died only 14 days after the act took effect, leaving Christensen as the only living Reformer ex-President.
Despite his many successes, La Follette alienated a lot of Congress and the public. He was convinced he was right, and he never gave up no matter how many opposed him on his measures. The Federalists nominated a popular man who's attacks on the La Follette "regime" let them put aside their many differences and scoop up even some disenchanted Reformers, many tired of La Follettes stubborn and fiercely partisan leadership. Despite some murmurs, no one rose to challenge La Follettes renomination, even the Vice-President turned down an offer by party higher ups to force La Follette to step down for someone less controversial. The ex-President died only a couple of months after leaving office, leaving Christensen again as the only Reformer ex-President for a long time
Nowadays President La Follette is considered a very successful man. Other then Prohibition, which was repealed in only a few short years, the popularity of his acts meant the next Administration had to keep them. There was the occasional attempt slim them down or try and make them more efficient, but never a widespread movement to repeal them. The lack of interest in foreign affairs can be chalked up to La Follette representing the isolationist and agrarian wing after so much domination by Debs and his urban wing. There was a desire to quick poking around outside, which many felt was the right thing to do at the time.
#32.) Herbert Hoover - Federalist
(1929-1937)
(1929-1937)
Vice-President:
John Nance Gardner, Federalist (1929-1933)
Alf Landon, Federalist - (1933-1937)
The first Presidency with two consecutive terms since Bryan, and the Federalist since Abraham Lincoln, Herbert Hoover is remembered as the great technocrat of the Federalist Party. Seeking to synthesize Rooseveltism with Old Federalism, Hoover came into power not by offering solutions or trying to gain ascendancy of one party wing, but instead of making the case for the Federalists as the party of "Good Government." He attacked La Follette as a divide partisan, overeager to punish and prosecute anyone whom he saw not fully behind him. Never having held a day of government office and very few knowing what he stood for, he won by a landslide on the back of a united Federalist Party and disgruntled Reformers.
The first major victory of the Hoover Administration was the repeal of the Prohibition Act. Many ethnic Reformers were furious at that, seeing it as the old agrarians trying to force their Protestantism down their throats and a personal attack. The Federalists were able to use the repeal of it as far forward the 1970's as a reason to fear a Carter victory. Hoover, by choice, was one of the weaker Presidents. He saw the office of President as having grown far beyond it's constitutional reach, and saw to delegate much of his offices power to his cabinet and to Congress. Despite that line of thinking, he was more then comfortable keeping things like the Farmer's Credit Bank, and the nationalized Railroads after seeing how much better it was run by the government then under the rule of a few greedy men.
Business Federalists became his biggest enemy, ironic give how he came from their ranks. Hoover saw Government as the Biggest Business of all, one that ought to give the best services only if private business fail or are incapable of doing so. Giving credit so Farmers can make a living and not fall into never ending debt? Perfectly fine. Government ownership of the railroads after it has been proven that private ones would price discriminate against the populace and use their services to illegally influence politicians? An acceptable measure. But ideas like Prohibition and a national income were wholly impracticable and not to be pursued. One of the sops to the Roosevelt faction of the party, proposed by the old but still politically active Theodore Roosevelt to the President, was that of a national health insurance bill.
Internationally the situation started getting hot once more as the Russian Empire started to collapse. The minorities of the Empire quickly moved to secede after Moscow fell to Parliamentary and Socialist revolutionaries, who quickly fell in turn to a military government headed by Pyotr Nikolayevich Wrangel. New countries like Latvia, Estonia, and Ukraine moved into France's orbit, who promised to back them. When Russia emerged united under a military dictatorship and a puppet royal family, they demanded the return of Russian Territories or face war. The government of Napoléon V declared war. The German states became an unwilling ally to France, not wanting to have a bunch of hostile Russian territory on their borders.
Hoover decided now was the time for America to flex it's diplomatic muscles. The United States had a moral duty to assist other nations in times of need, and tasked Secretary of State Franklin Roosevelt with assembling an international organization dedicated to preventing war and resolving deputes. When 1932 came, isolationist Federalist Gardner challenged Hoover for the office of President. Taking him to task for his "near perfect adherence to Reformism," Gardner tried to play himself as a modern day Lincoln, as a Federalist challenging his irresponsible and incompetent President for the good of the nation. He failed, and was replaced with Kansas Senator Alf Landon. Hoover easily crushed Robert La Follette Jr., son of the previous Reform President, who was mocked as having been given the nomination because of his name rather then any real experience. An unfair and rather incorrect label, given how the Federalists had no problem running John Quincy Adams and Robert Lincoln, both very qualified sons of former Presidents, it stuck to La Follette Jr. throughout the campaign.
While Napoléon V was able to do in 1934 what Napoléon I couldn't ever, have France force Russia to heel, the idea of an international union of states was popular. The International Union of States was established March 16th, 1936 with the United States, Japan, and all of Southern America in attendance as founding members. India joined quickly there after, as did Ireland, still in a cold conflict with Britain, and various African states sent their emissaries to it. Most controversially, white-ruled British and French colonies in Africa submitted their applications via Independence committees as the true governments of these African states, and the white ruled ones as "illegal conquerors." France and Spain threatened war if the INS recognized the independence of their "sovereign territories." Given Frances recent reactions, no one regarded them as lying about their intentions.
War with Europe would come in the beginning of 1937, but it wouldn't get hot until after the start of next administration. Hoover is remembered very well by historians and the public. A modern and technocratic Federalist, he avoided the heavy handed and cutthroat partisanship of the last generation and sought he sought compromise, moderation, and consensus. Opposed by Isolationists, and the political far reaches, he worked to place American as the premier world power with help from all sides.
Last edited:
I'm glad to hear it.
Just because he happened to run on a party that shares a name with one of my main ones, and because he happened to run twice in a row rather successfully doesn't necessarily mean he'll win. For all you know I might give George H.W. Bush two terms, I might pick someone more obscure like Andre Marrou or Ralph Nader, I might have the United States conquered by Canada. YOU DON'T KNOW ME MAN!
How did I miss this gem?! This is amazing work Nofix. I'm so, so, SO happy I found it.
Oh, believe me, I fully expect a Nader presidency.
...Or, you know, you could just go all out and do a two-term Lyndon LaRouche presidency...
#33.) Franklin Delano Roosevelt - National Union (Federalist)
(1937-1945)
(1937-1945)
Vice-President:
Alben William Barkley, National Union (Reform) - (1937-1945)
The Secretary of State under Hoover, someone who shared his bipartisan nature and internationalist outlook, Franklin Roosevelt personally asked the Reform Party caucus in Congress to submit him a Reformer as Vice-President to run together under a "National Union" ticket. Old, liberal Alben William Barkley was the man to take the charge after the caucus began warring with itself, fighting on whether or not to submit him anyone. Roosevelt made his appointments across the political field, calling on Federalists, Reformers, nonpartisans, even the odd Isolationist to help out the country regardless of how they felt about him.
The World War did not come easy to America. Many still distrusted the INS as well as the need for the US to arm themselves. Attempts to frame this as a far for Democracy, Freedom, and anti-colonialism struck a nerve with Negro and ethnic Americans, but very little among middle class or laboring whites. Businesses were willing to cooperate for the federal funds, but many were hesitant in participating further. The Canadian border states were generally the most wary during the "Phony War" stage, as the idea of the British Empire staging an attack from Canada and the east was a real concern. Eventually, the Canadian government of W.L.M. King claimed neutrality, much to the ire of it's pro-British and anti-American factions. Mobs broke out, and Parliament Hill was literally burned down as dozens of man died protecting it.
The decision to declare neutrality came in the face of one very good reason, they could not win nor last very long against America, who had many times it's livable landmass, population, and economy. Even if the Canadians fought many times above their weight, it would likely be a Pyrrhic victory in the end. The Governor General agreed, even Britain's leadership agreed, but the decision would cause a great split between that country and the mother country. A great propaganda battle was won, as nearly all of America would be united on the issue of freedom and liberty.
With the issue of Canada mostly removed from the equation, the French government realized it would need to act quickly to pacify the Americans. War fever hadn't broken out yet, and the plan was to snap the back of the Roosevelt government, and thus the driving force behind the INS: leaving France as top dog in Europe and Africa. A surprise attack was made on the city of New Orleans, chosen more for the symbolism then it's purpose in the upcoming war. The French Government hoped it would ignite anti-war fervor and Roosevelt would back down.
They were wrong, Americans, and Southerners in particular, went supernova at this display of cowardice and repulsive behavior. The idea for a draft went unfulfilled as suddenly too many men and women were signing up to help in the war. The Japanese Prime Minister, Makino Nobuaki, sent his condolences to the people of New Olreans, denouncing the "dogs and other assorted animals" who would do such a thing. The lines became quickly drawn: The American Continent sans Canada, Japan, the Chinese Free Army, India, and Free Africa (as was popularly called), vs. the Pan-European Alliance of France, Britain, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Denmark, Netherlands, and their colonies. The German states, Russia, and European countries not colonizing Africa either played neutral or assisted the European Alliance in some ways.
Much like the Liberation Wars in American decades ago, the actual battles were fought on the seas and in where the liberated areas were. The Japanese, Chinese, and Indians had to deal mostly with Australia and the Asian colonies, while the All-American-Army dealt with Africa and Europe. Starting from Southern and Eastern Africa (which made the easiest fronts to fight due to their proximity to Brazil) and working inward. The A3 had the advantage over Europe in many regards. Materials, no wars in recent memory that tore apart their nations and their populace, no need to worry about fighting both invaders and the local populace, and, as some called it, the "moral right" in the win the war.
The Europeans, however, had experience and cutting edge weaponry. The early battles on the high seas and in Mozambique and the Congo were terrible losses for the Allie. But the European soon learned just how much damage the Allies could take, at the siege of Chabahar. 17 days went before the Persian city fell, with wave after wave of American vessels attack it. However many people Europe would be able to supply, they would always, always, be outnumbered. It soon feel on the colonial empires just how little they stood to win. Even if they could retain their empires, then what? Would those who spent the last year fighting them be ready to just accept their rule, or would they return to fighting under a new flag.
At home the wars steadily became less and less popular, to the point of near civil war in some countries. Britain's informal harassment of Ireland meant that she couldn't support the INS, despite being an early member, but also that the British economy was sinking fast due to war fatigue and over extension, with labor strikes needing military involvement to break. France's attempts to retain her formal European empire and extract "help" from her "neighbors" meant they had to watch all of her fronts for fear of infiltration. Spain and Porutgal faced a near constant guerrilla campaign on their Southern borders. Most embarrassingly, Italy's southernmost island of Lampedusa was taken by Ethiopian troops, until then viewed as a nuance, not a real danger to Europe. Something had to be done or Europe would end up as the battlefield itself. A general surrender was agreed on by the Septuple Alliance, and in almost a snap all became calm.
It took nearly 3 years of war on land, sea, and even air, but eventually Africa was cleared of it's colonizers. The battle to end empire had been won.
After that everything quickly became much more complicated. At least in war, you know who you are fighting and what you need to do. Afterwards, the battle to establish democracy, fix border arrangements between countries, settle the now no longer ruling whites either in their home countries or as equal residents in the new African Republics. And, what of Europe itself? Were not many of the people their disenchanted with their ruling elites? Will she stay peaceful for the years to come, or remain in her shell?
The second Roosevelt Term, some argued, didn't need Barkley on the ticket. The need for a "National Union" party was over. But Barkley started on nonetheless. He viewed it his moral obligation to help settle Africa through the INS. "After all," he said, "war isn't over when the generals tell us to stop shooting." It was their moral duty to not just go and kill the enemy, but help establish peace where they were fighting.
The US foreign policy changed once again. From the time of Washington to the time of Van Buren it had been to avoid dealing with outside countries. From Clay to Bryan, it had been offer moral and economic support to countries who want to be free. And from Hoover onward it would be direct dealing in establishing freedom, democracy, and a worldwide capitalism. War was the easy part, now came rebuilding
Roosevelt is rated very highly, as are most war leaders who end up winning. The American "moral need" to fight against colonialism and exploitation is something that is challenged nowadays by revisionists as the new world leaders like Roosevelt attempting to overthrow Europeans as the world bosses and see themselves as such. But by most, Roosevelt is a man who fought to bring life into the theories and words brought out by those who spoke of freedom. Domestically he did little new, building on the previous administrations and allowing Barkley near unparalleled power to help decided how to regulate the economy. The early post-war rebuilding of Africa started off good, but was squandered under the next few American administrations as the economy came crashing down and the American taste for internationalism became sour.
guinazacity
Banned
This world looks like a gigantic clusterfuck.
I like it, specially the part about the US not being an ass with it's american neighbors, it's almost like you were the nice guys or something.
I like it, specially the part about the US not being an ass with it's american neighbors, it's almost like you were the nice guys or something.
Alright, the Mayor of Toronto likes my work!
But in all seriousness I'm glad, ever update I'm wondering if people like it, or if I've jumped off the deep edge and no one will take it seriously anymore.
I promise you nothing, mostly because there are too many opportunities that I can't use in one story.
Lord save my soul.
I'm sorry The Very Ghost of Nelson Rockefeller, not this time.
Not just a different history, but a different historiography to boot!
Last edited:
#34.) Norman Thomas - Reform
(1945-1953)
Vice-President:
Jeannette Rankin, Reform (1945-1953)
Despite the modern appreciation of the internationalism of the 1930's and 1940's, Americans quickly grew tired of it after the war ended. The two main issues were as such, nothing was extracted of from France, whom Roosevelt thought they needed good relations after the war, and the idea that too much money was being wasted subsidizing foreigners, which in truth only made up a fraction of the budget, an even a fraction of the money spend on the war. There was also the idea that Americans were taking much of the casualties and the rest of the alliance profiting from their death without giving them amble respect for it. the Isolationists won back control of the Reform Party alongside the public conscious.
Norman Thomas was the first Reform Party President elected since La Follette 20 years ago. He was also the first to pick a woman as his Vice-President: Isolationist stalwart Jeannette Rankin of Absaroka appealed to the rural and pacifistic masses while the charming Thomas won over the urban voters. Despite heavy lobbing by Presidents Hoover and Roosevelt, the United States withdrew from the INS. In the latter's memoirs, he laments how the chance to truly change how nations and war worked. Alas, it would not be in their lifetimes.
President Thomas was first and foremost a domestic policy President. Rapid industrialization and internationalization of the economy had changed the way American bought and spent in ways no one man could reverse. Despite much teeth gnawing from the rank and file, changes were made to the benefits and subsidies given by the government. Representing the idea that the government should do for the people what they can't do for themselves, something that had caught on from the last 16 years of Federalist government, reforms were placed on Reformer programs like the Farmers Credit Bank.
Some positives came to the forefront of Reformism, following the Japanese model, the United States Congress voted to nationalize the countries healthcare, expanding it like with the power plants a generation ago to cover millions of Americans who were unable to get quality assistance due to their lack of funds or ability to get a loan. New colleges and universities were built, and with the help of Missouri Senators Truman and McFarland many veterans were able to receive funding to go there. He left office very popular and content with the work he had done.
Norman Thomas is remembered either very well for his domestic policies, or damned as a backwards fool for his old timey isolationism. Political scholars near unanimously agree his decision to take the United States out of the INS kicked back the idea of a global community back a generation, as it fell apart without them. While more popular then either of the Federalists before him, nowadays he is known very poorly for his intransigent position on international relations, that the United States was a "Fortress from the sins and evils of the world."
Colorful Cast of Characters
I have read all of this except the Franklin Roosevelt presidency and I have to say this is a very entertaining story. Your arcane set of rules for this "Shuffle" has allowed you to sprinkle in some of the more radical and even unstable personalities into the presidency but anchored them with many of the solid men from OTL. It has made the United States an exciting place to live certainly. As a more serious comment on your alternate history I thought the way you handled the consequences of peaceful emancipation and no "Jacksonian Democracy" movement was very interesting.
My google-fu failed to show LQP Lamar II as a recipient of votes in OTL 1880. How did he end up a choice for President when you were writing?
I have read all of this except the Franklin Roosevelt presidency and I have to say this is a very entertaining story. Your arcane set of rules for this "Shuffle" has allowed you to sprinkle in some of the more radical and even unstable personalities into the presidency but anchored them with many of the solid men from OTL. It has made the United States an exciting place to live certainly. As a more serious comment on your alternate history I thought the way you handled the consequences of peaceful emancipation and no "Jacksonian Democracy" movement was very interesting.
My google-fu failed to show LQP Lamar II as a recipient of votes in OTL 1880. How did he end up a choice for President when you were writing?
Thank you, much of what happened in the story changed on an hour to hour basis, but I knew I wanted a different historiography as well as a different history. I didn't just want to copy paste a few names here and there, and leave the world mostly static. I personally think I've gone leaps and bounds ahead of what I expected to do.
About Lamar: I only allowed the men who gained popular or electoral votes to be elected President in that year, I consider the Vice-Presidency (and thus the Acting Presidency) to be fair game for anyone. Acting Presidents are merely that in-universe, Vice-Presidents (or President Pro Tempore's) who also have the powers of the President but are not really the President. It's a bit complicated as it's all based on precedent and the thoughts and theories of the men at the time. There has yet to been a constitutional amendment officially explaining everything, and no Supreme Court cases deciding anything about it. It's basically a mess as it is.