Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 09, 2016, 07:41:12 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 46
276  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: DNC software breach gave Sanders campaign confidential Clinton Data on: December 18, 2015, 10:18:34 pm
Welp. Sanders wanted some news coverage. Looks like he got it.

Might as well go out in a blaze of glory anyway. Makes it more fun.
277  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: Fox - TRUMP surges to 39%! on: December 18, 2015, 07:44:07 pm
It finally happened! Rand and Jeb are tied!
278  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Spanish Election, 2015: pick your poison. on: December 18, 2015, 06:43:34 pm
Podemos or bust
279  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: DNC software breach gave Sanders campaign confidential Clinton Data on: December 18, 2015, 05:51:59 pm
I wonder if Hillary will say "I don't give a damn about your damn hacking!"

Was thinking this exact thing earlier today.
280  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-) on: December 18, 2015, 05:43:49 pm

President Fitzgerald Speaking before a Joint Session of Congress

  By summer, the president had already started to deliver on his economic stabilization legislation and his infrastructure bill. Judging by opinion polling and newspaper headlines, the public mainly agreed with the president's policies and approved of his diligence. However, while this slow-yet-steady direction may have satisfied the nation eight years ago, this was an entirely new era.

  The war had demoralized so many against the federal government and the system as a whole, and the consistent, global uprisings shook confidence in the market. The rise of socialist and communist tendencies in the United States marked a sense of desired change from workers who, many coming home from European war, could barely afford to feed themselves or their families. President Fitzgerald was no radical, and not once in his entire campaign did he mention Socialism nor the national unrest of years past. Believing chiefly in laissez faire economics, the president stated that lowering the tariff and steadily reducing the national debt would lead to a greater number of jobs (in addition to his infrastructure proposals).

  On August 21st, a collection of radical groups and war veterans conducted a "People's March" on Washington. Composing of tens of thousands, the goal of this move appeared to be persuading the president and Congress to immediately work on some sort of jobs program and, more so, have TR's health legislation passed. The event lasted four days, and White House guards closely observed as the demonstrations went on and on. Upton Sinclair and John Reed briefly spoke at the march, as did Eugene Debs in his first public appearance since the SNC. While some in the crowd advocated revolution and others reform, the overall message of urgency was real.

  President Fitzgerald did not publicly address the demonstrators, but would release a statement expressing understanding with their goals and promising to work on easing the "plight of the wounded warrior". It did little to quell the tension of the moment, but the March would end on its own. Fitzgerald himself was, in reality, balancing this unrest with a rather dangerous foreign policy situation in the latter part of 1921. Just when the upheavals and revolutions of 1917-1919 seemed to die down, a new wave appeared to break out.

  Pan-Germanic Nationalists had risen up in Poland, sparking another conflict in that region. In Portugal, an insurrection dubbed "Bloody Night" occurred where numerous government leaders were murdered. A massive strike had kicked off in London, leading to hundreds of arrests by the leading Tories. Throughout early autumn, planted bombs exploded in various parts of northern Ireland, provoking anti-British conspiracy. Finally, the rising cost of food in France resulted in enormous riots in Paris against the ruling SFIO government, again leading to major arrests.

  Fitzgerald was fortunate not to have another May Uprising on his hands, but did want to ensure the public that, unlike his predecessors, he would not ignore the problem nor move too drastically in the reaction. Instead, on October 12th, made an address to a Joint Session of Congress, one broadcast over radio, where he stressed the need for a federal health law. The line which became repeated most often in the press was, "We sent scours of our young men to die for a cause many did not comprehend. For those returning injured or otherwise traumatized, we owe them a home worth fighting for."

  At last, Congress was swayed on the merits of such a law. On November 1st, the Senate, following a speedy House vote, ratified the Theodore Roosevelt Health Law in an easy 75-to-21 vote. This law would mandate two points. One, the federal government was granted the power to form a National Health Board, similar to the one TR had in mind, which could solve medical crises and orchestrate new health codes should they be needed. Second, it formed the Veterans Affairs Bureau, which would work as a federal military benefit system, headed by a designated member of the Cabinet of the United States.

  This law was absolutely welcomed by the demoralized veterans of the Great War, but later deeply criticized by conservatives for allocated too much power in the Executive Branch and by Socialists for doing so little in actually taking care of veterans' lives (ie; the workplace, pensions, food prices, etc.) Even some Southern Democrats decried Fitzgerald's signing of the bill as a step too far. Senator Underwood (D-AL) stated that although the president was a Democrat, he was "stepping meticulously away from the core of the party" and, as thus, would be difficult to trust. Other Democrats condemned Underwood's statement, with Speaker Wilson suggesting, "Perhaps if [Senator Underwood's son] returned from France incapacitated he would sing a different tune."
281  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Democratic nominee distances from Obama..... on: December 18, 2015, 04:31:13 pm
Just ask Al Gore how distancing himself from Clinton turned out.
282  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: A whole new war...A new fantastic point of view... on: December 18, 2015, 04:28:43 pm
Brilliant.
283  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: DNC software breach gave Sanders campaign confidential Clinton Data on: December 18, 2015, 04:23:00 pm
It doesn't really matter much, since Bernie Sanders is not going to win the nomination anyway.
284  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-) on: December 17, 2015, 03:34:10 pm

Champ Clark, 29th Vice President. Known for Serving the Shortest Term of any VP.

  President Fitzgerald had only been in office for a few short hours before his Vice President Champ Clark suddenly passed away at the age of seventy. Clark was privately inaugurated in a building nearby the formal inauguration site, reportedly because he had not been feeling well. He had experienced gradually deteriorating health, but did not make this public. He died on March 4th, 1921, just three hours after being inaugurated. Whether or not Fitzgerald knew of Clark's condition became the topic of much speculation.

  Fitzgerald had carefully selected a cabinet made up moderate, experienced Democrats to make up for his image of being less experienced than most of his predecessors. Among these choices were former vice chairman of the DNC William Gibbs McAdoo for Secretary of the Treasury and Senator Claude A. Swanson for Secretary of War. Most notable was the president's decision to nominate Alfred E. Smith, the Governor of New York, as the country's new Secretary of State. Smith, a left-leaning anti-Prohibition governor, was nearly rejected by Congress, but passed through after endorsement by the Progressives.

The Fitzgerald Cabinet

President                          John F. Fitzgerald
Vice President                   Champ Clark, then Vacant
Secretary of State             Alfred E. Smith
Secretary of Treasury         William G. McAdoo
Secretary of War                Claude Swanson
Attorney General                Thomas W. Gregory
Postmaster General             Albert B. Burleson
Secretary of the Navy         Josephus Daniels
Secretary of the Interior      John B. Payne
Secretary of Agriculture       David F. Houston
Secretary of Com & Lab       William B. Wilson

  Unlike Roosevelt and Johnson, Fitzgerald made it clear that the nation's number one goal ought not to be another "new chapter" of politics or radical, transformative policy, but rather bringing the country back to stability. After years of war and turmoil, in addition to the divisiveness of the Johnson Era, many in the country, especially the most well-to-do, breathed a sigh of relief that the United States was finally back on track in terms of business-as-usual. The loss of the Progressives seemed to symbolize a realignment towards the old Third Party System.

  Fitzgerald immediately began to work on fulfilling his promises. He had the Democrats in both the House and the Senate agree to push unified support for each of his proposed legislative measures. From April to November, the 67th Congress passed fifteen laws. Many of these were more emergency laws necessary to halt the fear of an economic recession, including the Emergency Tariff Act, the Budget and Accounting Act, and the Naval Appropriations Act For 1922.

  The Federal Aid Highway Act and the Transport Investment Act were two bills crafted by federal commissions to promote massive infrastructure improvements and supply the means to build intertwining road systems. While the first bill sought to repair and expand streets and parkways to assist in the usage of automobiles, the second would directly invest in cities like New York, Chicago and Sacramento to produce new public transport systems.

  Senate Progressives almost always voted along with the Democrats, thus maintaining a near-guarantee 59-to-37 vote. The House was somewhat trickier, as the Democrats needed 55 votes from the opposition to pass any bill. However, many Progressives and some Socialists were willing to work with Fitzgerald to prevent an economic backlash. Therefore, your typical House vote was about 250-to-185.
edit: spelling fix
285  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What was your former predictions? (GOP edition) on: December 17, 2015, 03:32:53 am
Bush and Christie probably in most of 2014.
Paul when he entered the race.
Bush when Paul made it clear he wasn't in it to win it.
Kasich/Rubio tie in Aug/Sept when Walker flopped and Trump murdered Bush in the debates.
Rubio until this 3-Man race thing became the new norm.
286  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who Will Win New Hampshire GOP Primary and Why? on: December 16, 2015, 10:01:16 pm
Trump unless something unexpected happens.
287  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-) on: December 16, 2015, 02:19:41 pm

John F. Fitzgerald, 30th President of the United States

Chapter Seven: Honey Fitz and Prohibition: A Match Made in Heaven

  President Johnson, after the realization of his failure to win, attempted to go full force with his legislative demands. He had three pieces of legislation introduced into the Senate in December 1920, though only one, the Murdock Bill, reached the floor for a vote. This bill, had it became law, would mandate that by 1935, every state required an official Redistricting Committee to ensure the outlaw of gerrymandering as political practice. Johnson had expected an endorsement of the bill by President-elect John Fitzgerald and thereby provide bi-partisan support. However, as the Democrats (including Fitzgerald himself) had benefited from gerrymandering, he announced disapproval for the measure. The vote in the Senate failed.

  Johnson stepped down with some grace as the inauguration ceremony for Fitzgerald, and declared that he would continue to work politically with Progressives, along with Democrats, to ensure the American people gain a sense of partnership in Washington. The incoming president, aside from a single handshake, did not look towards or speak to Johnson.

 Hiram Johnson, other than at certain moments in his speeches when he would act in enthusiasm, was an introvert and largely kept to himself. He did not partake on the strolls or in the events that TR had, and only made public declarations when he considered them absolutely essential to the governance of the nation.

  John Fitzgerald was the total opposite. He won over the public with his gentile and approachable nature, and earned the 'Honey Fitz' nickname because of his ability to appease both corporate executives as well as their workers. He was jubilant and adored the attention he could get from public crowds, exemplified through his theatrical campaign appearances. As such, his inaugural ceremony was enormous, expensive, and included, to much controversy, a collection of jazz ensembles opposed to the prototypical marching band.

  In his inaugural address, Fitzgerald did not hesitate to make grandiose, popular promises. He pledged to follow the "demands, not of party bosses, but of the people." He announced his plan to invest millions of tax dollars in infrastructure improvements, an increase in federal funding of public transportation programs, and a definite lowering of the tariff. He also stressed the urgency for bipartisan support in the "Theodore Roosevelt National Health Board", which would theoretically protect injured and incapacitated veterans.

  In one of the most famous parts of his speech, Fitzgerald pledged to create a federal agency to thwart corruption. "At all levels of governing, from the local, state and federal levels, corruption shall have no tolerance under this administration." He proposed an expansion of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to delve into and eliminate underground laundering schemes and private enterprise (ie; the mafia) seeking illegal financial opportunities in the prohibition of alcohol. There was no mention of socialist or anarchist wiretapping as there had been with Johnson in charge, and Fitzgerald promised to immediately veto any law violating First Amendment rights.

  With a Democratic Congress at his fingertips, it appeared as if President Fitzgerald would be able to get, at least some, of his legislation processed through. Though, should the Progressives find commonality with the Socialists, such a coalition could prove to stun the mechanisms of Congress.
edit: syntax fix
288  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Can Trump win the anti-war vote against Hillary? on: December 16, 2015, 12:55:49 pm
Both candidates are pro-war.
The media has been loudly pounding the war drums.
The anti-war movement was thrown away when it funneled into Obama '08. It will not be a factor.
289  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who will you vote for? on: December 16, 2015, 01:14:12 am
Third Party.
290  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-) on: December 15, 2015, 05:22:15 pm
1920 Congressional Elections      

Senate
Democratic: 41 (-1)
Republican: 26 (-5)
Progressive: 18 (-2)
Socialist: 6 (+3)
Farmer-Labor: 3 (+3)
Independent: 2 (+2)

House
Democratic: 190 (+16)
Republican: 115 (+2)
Progressive: 82 (-31)
Socialist: 42 (+18)
Farmer-Labor: 6 (+5)
Prohibition: 0 (-1)

  The Progressives took a major beating in the Congressional races. The party lost 31 seats in the House and two in the Senate. Francis J. Heney (P-CA) lost his bid for re-election and was completely trounced by Samuel Shortridge, the Republican challenger. Senator Victori Murdock (P-KS), who had been expected to win his seat relatively easily, lost to Republican Charles Curtis. Fortunately for the Bull-Moose Party, Senator Albert Cummins of Iowa shifted his party affiliation from the Republicans to the Progressives, and won against a single Democratic challenger. However, this gain was thwarted when Ole Hanson (P-WA) lost in a 6-way split to C.L. France of the Farmer-Labor Party.

  In New York, Rose Schneiderman, a labor union leader and feminist, managed to sneak away with a victory in the Senate race. She defeated James Wadsworth, Jr., the incumbent Republican, as well as Henry C. Walker, the Democrat, and James Haverton, the Progressive. With a mere 32% of the vote, Ms. Schneiderman made front-page headlines for her calling for an executive order mandating the construction of nonprofit housing for lower income families. She was in the sect of the SP which did not endorse the Russian Revolution, though Senator Wadsworth still referred to her as a "Bloody Bolshevik" nonetheless.

  The Socialists won two other Senate races, in Oklahoma and Wisconsin, along with an unprecedented eighteen House races. Frank Weber of Wisconsin and A. A. Bagwell of Oklahoma would go on to credit Seymour Stedman for their victories, along with leftist author Upton Sinclair of California who won a seat in the House. Although these gains were great, they did not meet Stedman's expectations and the numbers were not large enough to pose too great of a threat in either Congressional house.

  The Farmer-Labor Party, the reformist, agrarian version of the Socialist Party, won a string of support in the West and South, winning three Senate seats and five additional House seats. The Republicans lost five seats to the Democrats in the Senate, but managed to remain a clear second-party in both houses of Congress. With the losses of the Progressive Party in the House, the GOP once again became the first-minority party with 115 seats.

  The Democrats walked away the victors of these elections. They kept their lead in the Senate and formed a near-majority in the House. With Democrat Fitzgerald in the White House, it looked as though, for the first time in decades, the Democratic Party was in firm control of policy. Former Governor Woodrow Wilson chose to run for a House seat from New Jersey, and defeated the incumbent Republican with nearly 65% of the vote. Wilson was eventually selected as the new Speaker once Clark ascended to the Vice Presidency.

 House of Representatives Leadership

Speaker Woodrow Wilson (D-NJ)
Minority Leader William Stephens (P-CA)
Minority Leader Frederick Gillett (R-MA)
Minority Leader Meyer London (S-NY)
Minority Leader William L. Carss (FL-MN), Farmer-Labor delegation caucuses w/ Socialists


  Senators Elected in 1920 (Class 3)
Braxton B. Comer (D-AL): Democratic Hold w/ 69%
Oscar Underwood (D-AL): Democratic Hold w/ 66%
Marcus A. Smith (D-AZ): Democratic Hold w/ 48%
Thaddeus H. Caraway (D-AK): Democratic Hold w/ 68%
Samuel M. Shortridge (R-CA): Republican Gain w/ 47%
Charles S. Thomas (I-CO): Independent Gain w/ 40%
Augustine Lonergan (D-CT): Democratic Gain w/ 45%
Duncan U. Fletcher (D-FL): Democratic Hold w/ 69%
Thomas E. Watson (FL-GA): Farmer-Labor Gain w/ 64%
John F. Nugent (D-ID): Democratic Hold w/ 50%
William B. McKinley (R-IL): Republican Hold w/ 60%
Thomas Taggart (D-IN): Democratic Gain w/ 51%
Albert B. Cummins (P-IA): Progressive Gain w/ 60%
Charles Curtis (R-KS): Republican Gain w/ 55%
John C.W. Beckham (D-KY): Democratic Hold w/ 49%
Edwin S. Broussard (D-LA): Democratic Hold w/ 100%
John W. Smith (D-MD): Democratic Hold w/ 46%
Breckenridge Long (D-MO): Democratic Gain w/ 53%
Ashley G. Miller (S-NV): Socialist Hold w/ 49%
George H. Moses (R-NH): Republican Hold w/ 55%
Rose Schneiderman (S-NY): Socialist Gain w/ 32%
Lee S. Overman (D-NC): Democratic Hold w/ 60%
H. H. Perry (FL-ND): Farmer-Labor Gain w/ 40%
Warren G. Harding (R-OH): Republican Hold w/ 57%
A. A. Bagwell (S-OK): Socialist Gain w/ 37%
Boies Penrose (R-PA): Republican Hold w/ 58%
Ellison D. Smith (D-SC): Democratic Hold w/ 100%
Tom Ayres (I-SD): Independent Gain w/ 46%
Reed Smoot (R-UT): Republican Hold w/ 55%
William P. Dillingham (R-VT): Republican Hold w/ 77%
Carter Glass (D-VA): Democratic Hold w/ 91%
C.L. France (FL-WA): Farmer-Labor Gain w/ 40%
Frank J. Weber (S-WI): Socialist Gain w/ 41%
edit: formatting
291  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Sieg heil! Nazi saluted shouted at Trump event by audience member. on: December 15, 2015, 02:39:47 pm
Considering the diarrhea pouring out of Trump's mouth, it's unsurprising that these scavengers would be so enticed.
292  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Things That Will be Said in 2020 on: December 14, 2015, 12:37:21 am
Democrats: "Man, things were so much better under Obama."

Republicans: "I still can't believe we managed to lose to Hillary Clinton."
293  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-) on: December 13, 2015, 06:49:05 pm
Was Stedman not included in Chicago's polling?

Right! I think I mentioned it in an earlier part. In order to better gauge voter tendencies of the top candidates they do not include the Socialists as an option in the polls. With the Chicago riots and the fear from the Red Scare in recent memory, the organization opted not to include Stedman.
Apologies, just wanted to see how everybody's favorite socialist was doing. I am excited to see Fitzgerald in action. I wonder if the Kennedys will make their political rise still.

No problem! I don't mind clearing up any confusion. Yes! I have some fun ideas for the next chapter =)

Probably the best TL I've seen so far, and I mean that seriously. Great job! Cheesy

Thanks, man! And yes, I know that you can combine the totals in the map gen, but, personally, I like having the EV and PV separated. I'm not a huge fan of how the map looks with the PV color shades, so I wanted to keep that in a separate thing for anyone who is interested in seeing PV %s.
294  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-) on: December 13, 2015, 06:40:19 pm
The Election of 1920: Final Results





295  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-) on: December 13, 2015, 06:23:10 pm

Citizens Lining up to Vote on Election Day.

  Fortunately for President Johnson, his advantage was always in the West. Although Fitzgerald worked hard to win the upper hand with farmers, Johnson had continued the agrarian policies of his predecessor and won notoriety for it. As such, the president won Michigan, Minnesota, both Dakotas, Montana, Idaho and Wyoming by over 50%. He also handily won California and Oregon, both from a three-way split. South Dakota had a major push by the Farmer-Labor Party fusion ticket with Fitzgerald, giving him a strong second-place finish. Minnesota was one of the strongest finishes for Stedman, where he won almost 16%.

  Utah and Nevada also both went to the president, with a nearly four-way tie in each state. New Mexico, a state heavily concentrated on this year by the Democrats, was easily won by Fitzgerald. Arizona, with a huge push by Senator Miller, was won for Stedman with nearly 40% voting for him, with Fitzgerald in a near-second. Washington, one of the closest states in this cycle, also ended up narrowly being won by Stedman. It (and the entire coast) had been trending Progressive for some time, and because of this Hughes did not work whatsoever on the West Coast. Fitzgerald and Johnson both considered the coast a win for the incumbency, but this was not the case. Along with popular Senator Emil Seidel, Stedman was able to win the state of Washington and its seven electoral votes with nearly 42% of the vote.

  Stedman also concentrated heavily in Wisconsin, a state which had been trending to the Left for a number of years. Milwaukee and Madison each had about eight labor strikes since the May Uprising, and this collection of workers was not about to vote for the president who ordered in the National Guard to end most of these battles. Fitzgerald had most of his popularity in the East, as did Hughes, which meant that the alternative was explored. Thus, you have a third win for the Socialist candidate.

  As for the hotly contested Midwest, the states were fairly divided in who to choose. Ohio was narrowly won by President Johnson, as was Iowa and Indiana. Illinois, which had been trending Republican in recent polls, ended with a surprise win for the president. Lowden captured about 14% of the vote in his home state, putting him in a distant third. Hughes was in second, and would later quietly put the blame on his loss to Lowden's separate candidacy.

  At last, the election reached its close when Kansas, another close state in this election, was won by Fitzgerald with about 41% of the vote, with Johnson in second. Fitzgerald ended up coming out victorious in West Virginia, Nebraska, and Colorado as well. With that, the Election of 1920 was won by the Democrat, John F. Fitzgerald of Massachusetts with 272 Electoral Votes.
296  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-) on: December 13, 2015, 06:22:05 pm

Women Voting on Election Day 1920

    Then came Election Day itself. On November 2nd, 1920, the people of the United States once again went to the polls to choose the leader for the following four years. There was the incumbent President Hiram Johnson, the Progressive, who was hoping for a huge turnout in his favor similar to his predecessor.

  The incumbent had four major challengers. Democratic nominee John F. Fitzgerald of Massachusetts, who had spent his campaign championing his outsider status and relatively liberal economic policies, was fighting to be the first Democratic president of the 20th century. Republican Charles Evans Hughes, former Attorney General to President Knox and Governor of New York, sought a victory through a total rejection of Johnson’s social policies and a unified resurgence of Republican conservatism. Socialist Seymour Stedman, though focusing on electing a “Socialist Congress”, had worked diligently in support of workers’ issues and hoped to each a high enough Popular Vote to thrust his ideology into the mainstream. Finally, there was the independent Governor Frank Lowden of Illinois who, upon losing the Republican nomination, won over a high number of supporters after crafting his own campaign preaching “economic nationalism” and anti-liberalism.

  The election was a tossup. Both major polling agencies concluded that it was anyone’s game. The New York Times estimated a slight Progressive advantage due to the groundwork laid by Theodore Roosevelt. However, states like Pennsylvania and Ohio who had easily gone to TR would be an uphill battle in this close match.

  Although the 19th Amendment had not yet been ratified by enough states, many states did already allow women the right to vote. As such, in 1920, there were quite a few instances of women registering to vote in states that allowed them to do so. Pennsylvania, a state which did not have women's suffrage legislation, had many of its women leave the state and vote in "suffrage states" like New York and Ohio. Analysts were unsure exactly which way the "Women Vote" would go, with one Gerard Dickson of the Chicago Tribune stating, "This new variable could very much decide this election."

  As the vote totals began to come in, with the results being revealed live on radio, it became clear that this political landscape was not the one from four years earlier. C.E. Hughes dominated New England, picking up Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island with clear-cut amounts each. These states had always been Republican strongholds, but TR had come close in each of these states and had won Maine in both 1912 and 1916.

  New York was called for Fitzgerald relatively early in the night. The Empire State saw a close split vote between the contenders, although President Johnson ended up receiving a lesser vote total than Seymour Stedman (16.4% to 16.6%) while Hughes carried 27% and Fitzgerald 40%. New Jersey, a state carried by Wilson in 1916, was won by Fitzgerald in a five percent advantage over the president.

  Pennsylvania, in a most curious way, ended up turning to C.E. Hughes. It had been an expected win for Johnson, as TR had easily won Pennsylvania in both prior elections, but the president lacked the magnetism of his predecessor, and even Philadelphia had a greater percentage choosing Hughes over Johnson. Stedman locked in a healthy 6% of the vote in Pennsylvania, and Lowden managed 3%. Honey Fitz did not spend much time in the Keystone State, though his vote total just barely missed surpassing Johnson's for second place.

  Woodrow Wilson had done a great job in 1916 in setting up the dominoes to fall in just the right way for a Democratic advantage in 1920. Although Fitzgerald himself barely campaigned in the South, every single Southern state went to Fitzgerald with well over 50% of the vote. The entire former Confederacy, including the border states of Kentucky and Missouri, went straight into the Democratic column. Oklahoma, a state won by Allan Benson in 1916, narrowly went to Fitzgerald in this race in a tight vote over Stedman. At this moment, Fitzgerald only needed 29 more Electoral Votes to win. Although, the easy part was over. Once again, it would come down to the Midwest to decide the race.
297  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Greatest President that Never Was on: December 13, 2015, 01:06:59 am
Henry Clay
Eugene Debs
Robert La Follette
Huey Long
Henry Wallace
RFK
Shirley Chisholm
298  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-) on: December 11, 2015, 10:30:20 pm
Was Stedman not included in Chicago's polling?

Right! I think I mentioned it in an earlier part. In order to better gauge voter tendencies of the top candidates they do not include the Socialists as an option in the polls. With the Chicago riots and the fear from the Red Scare in recent memory, the organization opted not to include Stedman.
299  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-) on: December 11, 2015, 08:05:46 pm

House Portrait of John Fitzgerald

 Hughes’ speech had won him over a great deal of support from the La Follette branch of Progressive Party dissidents and anti-Johnsonites, and, especially in what were once Progressive strongholds, Hughes captured much of the magic from the old Roosevelt camp. Fitzgerald kept on his heels for the entirety of October and up to Election Day. He hammered Hughes on his silence on the issue of internationalism and his unwillingness to support laws which would benefit industrial and agricultural workers, including the 8-hour day.

  Still, Fitzgerald’s campaign was chiefly directed toward what he called a “New Day for America”. He concentrated on federal regulation of factories and hazardous workplaces and stressed coalition building between the Democrats and the emerging Farmer-Labor Party. "I shall support the will of the American people in every regard, including working with the other parties to ensure meaningful progress in Washington."

  A great deal of Fitzgerald's support was his 'outsider' status. While Hughes and Johnson were part of the establishment, Fitzgerald was relatively untouched by the Democratic machine. The same did not quite apply to his running mate, but Clark's experience in dealing with Congress did not harm the ticket. Still, there were plenty in the party who believed that the ticket should have been the other way around, with Clark as the chief nominee, and feared that Fitzgerald was to be only a mere figurehead.

  Fitzgerald did not often go negative against his opponents, but did famously work to tie together Johnson and Hughes as “Two fat legs on the same elephant”. Hughes did not comment much on the Democratic nominee, but as exemplified through his aforementioned speech, concentrated on defeating Johnson to bring unity back to the Republican Party. All in all, the Campaign of 1920 was against President Johnson for his failure to live up to the promises of Roosevelt, his inability to work with Congress, and his hugely unpopular push for security legislation.

 President Johnson did little campaigning at all, leaving this up to Garfield and his campaign workers. He had hoped to look presidential by staying above the fray. This, however, opened him up to incessant attacks from the other campaigns, especially the Hughes campaign. In October, he did make some brief stops in swing cities like Charleston and Boston, but it was becoming too late to turn the tide.

  Lastly, Seymour Stedman continued on his objective to elect “the First Real Democracy” in the U.S. Congress. He campaigned alongside nearly every single Socialist running for the House or the Senate, including Upton Sinclair in California, M.J. Martin in Florida, and Frank Weber in Wisconsin. Weber, a union organizer and carpenter from Milwaukee, was the only non-incumbent Socialist forecasted to win his election, and Seymour, in turn, had huge popularity in the Badger State.

  The last presidential poll of the season, from the Chicago Daily News, had the candidates closely matched. It would take Election Day itself to discover exactly who would be sitting in the Oval Office come March.
    
The Chicago Daily News
     
The Peoples' Poll for November 1920

John F. Fitzgerald30%
Charles E. Hughes30%
Hiram Johnson28%
Frank O. Lowden06%
Others/None of These06%
300  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-) on: December 11, 2015, 04:02:46 pm

C.E. Hughes Campaigning in Winona, Minnesota. October 1920.

  The weeks continued to tick by closer to the election as each of the candidates, and their parties, embraced the tossup to come. Even as close as November 1st, there were very few worthy publications willing to call the election for any one candidate. As one journalist printed in the New York Times commented, “Every so often we have ourselves an election such as this, where it could easily end up a three, or even four-way, tie. That scenario is most unlikely, but we have long left behind the days where a tossup meant Missouri swinging towards the Republicans.” The Philadelphia Inquirer had a front-page article on October 25th featuring, “History’s Squeakers: Jefferson-Adams, Hayes-Tilden, Garfield-Hancock, Harrison-Cleveland, Roosevelt-Wilson. Is Johnson-Fitzgerald-Hughes Next?” The final Des Moines poll, released on October 28th, revealed how close the election truly was.

The Des Moines Register: October 1920
Which candidate would you endorse for president?

Hiram Johnson: 28%
John F. Fitzgerald: 28%
Charles E. Hughes: 26%
Seymour Stedman: 11%
Frank O. Lowden: 7%

  Charles E. Hughes had embarked on an expensive railroad trip across the nation, hoping to spread his message: “A Return to Our Conservative Roots”. Though he assured the nation that he would not touch the gains of the Square Deal legislation, he would work to ensure an “America safe for business”. Hughes was the only candidate to focus almost exclusively on the economy. He gained a plethora of support from large corporate interests for his stern opposition to any 8-hour workday legislation and outspent the other contenders 2-1.

  At an election stop when Hughes was asked about the splitting of the GOP, Lowden’s candidacy and the difficulty in reaching enough electoral votes to win, he responded, “I certainly understand the frustration and dissenting opinion. Many of us who have been integral within the Republican Party since President William McKinley remember a momentum time when the GOP stood by its namesake and won over the American public time and time again. I do differ with some of my colleagues when I say that we should have seriously considered nominating Theodore Roosevelt in 1912. He had the support from all corners of the nation, and he possessed the energy to not only win two additional terms, but lead the country through a tumultuous war.

  “I have immense respect for Senator Root, and personally supported his campaign, but I believe he did more to tarnish the Republican name in his discrediting of President Roosevelt than anyone else. Now to be clear, the Progressive Party’s very existence was on the pledge to elect Theodore Roosevelt to the presidency when the Republican Convention failed to do so. It did that. That party has succeeded in its mission. President Johnson has soiled the purpose of his own party and will be held personally responsible for swaying the nation towards the Democrats should Senator Fitzgerald be victorious.”


Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 ... 46


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines