Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 01, 2014, 02:46:24 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
| |-+  Election What-ifs? (Moderators: Bacon King, Dallasfan65)
| | |-+  A Second Chance
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 47 Print
Poll
Question: Should I go on?
Yes   -66 (79.5%)
I don't care   -5 (6%)
No   -3 (3.6%)
Hell No!   -9 (10.8%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 83

Author Topic: A Second Chance  (Read 80772 times)
Robespierre's Jaw
Senator Conor Flynn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8508
Ireland, Republic of


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -8.35

View Profile
« Reply #50 on: November 28, 2010, 07:31:55 pm »
Ignore

I like flashbacks and flashforwards. Flashforwards are in particular, very cool for TLs.
Logged



Here's to the State of Richard Nixon

Some things are better left covered up.
Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)
Vazdul
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4409
United States


View Profile
« Reply #51 on: November 28, 2010, 07:49:07 pm »
Ignore

I like flashbacks and flashforwards. Flashforwards are in particular, very cool for TLs.

I like them too when done properly. This timeline, unfortunately, did it too often and with poor execution, in my opinion. I originally thought that the first post was a "teaser" for 1968, and that the timeline would be mostly linear from then on (a concept which I rather liked).

In this timeline, however, the overuse of flashbacks and flashforwards led to two major drawbacks:

1.) It made the events much more difficult to follow, and
2.) It eliminated suspense. For example, after the initial post and the first few updates, we already knew:
    A.)Nixon won in 1960.
    B.)Kennedy defeated Nixon in 1964.
    C.)Kennedy was involved in close reelection campaign against George Romney in 1968, and
    D.)What the hot issues were in the 1968 campaign.
Most of the rest of the updates since then were only filler- we knew what the end results would be.

So, in conclusion, while I agree that flashbacks and flashforwards can be interesting to add to a timeline, the author must be judicious in their use.
Logged

Seriously, it was time to change back to the real avatar.
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: November 28, 2010, 08:09:37 pm »
Ignore

I'm sorry about all the confusion with the flashbacks. It gave me a certain amount of freedom to just write whatever I wanted when I saw fit.

My original intent with the first post was ti fulfill this "image" I had. In my head, the original setting was in the Presidential limo going into the Whitehouse while it's being mobbed by peace protesters, and McNamara or Bobby says something like "Romney's gaining". It was just really cool in my head.

From now on, I'll pop my head into the Nixon "era" only two more times, give a couple updates leading up to the 1968 Presidential election, and then it'll be linear, with a couple of flash-forwards (usually interviews with certain key figures).
Logged

Robespierre's Jaw
Senator Conor Flynn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8508
Ireland, Republic of


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -8.35

View Profile
« Reply #53 on: November 28, 2010, 08:16:16 pm »
Ignore

I like them too when done properly. This timeline, unfortunately, did it too often and with poor execution, in my opinion. I originally thought that the first post was a "teaser" for 1968, and that the timeline would be mostly linear from then on (a concept which I rather liked).

Agreed. Have you checked out some TLs on Alternate History Discussion? There are quite a few on there that use flashbacks and flashforwards very effectively. Make sure to check out Fight and Be Right. It's by a guy called Ed Thomas. He is a master at using flashforwards to create intrigue; which is used very effectively.

In this timeline, however, the overuse of flashbacks and flashforwards led to two major drawbacks:

1.) It made the events much more difficult to follow, and
2.) It eliminated suspense. For example, after the initial post and the first few updates, we already knew:
    A.)Nixon won in 1960.
    B.)Kennedy defeated Nixon in 1964.
    C.)Kennedy was involved in close reelection campaign against George Romney in 1968, and
    D.)What the hot issues were in the 1968 campaign.

Most of the rest of the updates since then were only filler- we knew what the end results would be.

Yes, it did make the TL redundant but I commend him for trying. Though it may have been best if the previous presidential campaigns of 1960 and 1964, even, more recently Kennedy's re-election were inferred in conversation. Speeds up the process, while being unique.

So, in conclusion, while I agree that flashbacks and flashforwards can be interesting to add to a timeline, the author must be judicious in their use.

Agreed, again. Perhaps, you Vazdul showcase your own abilities at some stage Smiley
Logged



Here's to the State of Richard Nixon

Some things are better left covered up.
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #54 on: November 28, 2010, 09:10:47 pm »
Ignore


Yes, it did make the TL redundant but I commend him for trying. Though it may have been best if the previous presidential campaigns of 1960 and 1964, even, more recently Kennedy's re-election were inferred in conversation. Speeds up the process, while being unique.

It'd be a lot easier to just refer to the elections in conversation, but I, as both a reader and a writer like to have the map for all to see.

By the way, I've noticed that for some reason, it's a lot more fun to do primary maps pre-1972. It's either the fact that there are only about fifteen states, or the colors I've been using.
Logged

#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #55 on: November 28, 2010, 09:25:15 pm »
Ignore

**BEWARE**A flashback!**BEWARE**

January 21st, 1961
As President Richard Nixon sits in his new office, the Oval Office, he thinks about his most pressing issue, that being naming a Secretary of State. He has a couple of names, but no-one he's enthusiastice about. One name that floats around in his head, but he has only given to one adviser, continues to float. Taking his feet off of his desk, he picks up the phone. and calls New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller.
    Nixon: Hello, Nelson, I need a favor from you.
    Rockefeller: Well what is it?
    Nixon: I need you to help me fill my cabinet.
    Rockefeller: I'm quite tied up here in New York as it is.
    Nixon: No, no, I know. I just need your help convincing one of your so called 'group' to fill the position of Secretary of State.
    Rockefeller: What's his name?
    Nxion: Not 'his'...

January 23rd, 1961
Nixon Announces His Choice for Secretary of State! Senator Margaret Chase Smith of Maine!
This afternoon, new President Richard Nixon announced his choice for Secretary of State. After three days of no clear sign of announcing his choice, the name has come forth. It is Senator Margaret Chase Smith of Maine, who is not only the most prominent female politician of our time, but has also had a long career in Congress and worked on the House Naval Affairs Committee furing World War II. Response is mixed on the choice, but generally positive.
« Last Edit: November 28, 2010, 09:32:01 pm by Cathcon »Logged

Robespierre's Jaw
Senator Conor Flynn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8508
Ireland, Republic of


Political Matrix
E: -4.90, S: -8.35

View Profile
« Reply #56 on: November 28, 2010, 09:26:36 pm »
Ignore

January 23rd, 1961
Nixon Announces His Choice for Secretary of State! Senator Margaret Chase Smith of Maine!
This afternoon, new President Richard Nixon announced his choice for Secretary of State. After three days of no clear sign of announcing his choice, the name has come forth. It is Senator Margaret Chase Smith of New Hampshire, who is not only the most prominent female politician of our time, but has also had a long career in Congress and worked on the House Naval Affairs Committee furing World War II. Response is mixed on the choice, but generally positive.

Correction: Smith was from Maine. Unless that was the dramatic POD: Smith moves to New Hampshire.
Logged



Here's to the State of Richard Nixon

Some things are better left covered up.
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #57 on: November 28, 2010, 09:31:29 pm »
Ignore

January 23rd, 1961
Nixon Announces His Choice for Secretary of State! Senator Margaret Chase Smith of Maine!
This afternoon, new President Richard Nixon announced his choice for Secretary of State. After three days of no clear sign of announcing his choice, the name has come forth. It is Senator Margaret Chase Smith of New Hampshire, who is not only the most prominent female politician of our time, but has also had a long career in Congress and worked on the House Naval Affairs Committee furing World War II. Response is mixed on the choice, but generally positive.

Correction: Smith was from Maine. Unless that was the dramatic POD: Smith moves to New Hampshire.

Sorry, in "America and Onward", Maine is taken over by Canada, so she escapes to New Hampshire. I got used to saying "Congresswoman Margaret Chase Smith of New Hampshire".
Logged

#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #58 on: November 29, 2010, 03:34:23 pm »
Ignore

October 9th, 1963
Commerce Secretary Ronald Reagan Announces Resignation
After continued disagreements between the Nixon Administration over foreign policy 'fumbles', Commerce Secretary Ronald Reagan has announced his resignation. He was originally chosen for the position because of his 'star status', and his work with General Electric. Reagan says that the final straw came with the signing of the Havana Accords, agreeing that the United States would no longer intervene in Cuba. The Havan Accords were first proposed because of the public death of CIA Agent E Howard Hunt, and the continued failure of the United States to oust Castro from power in Cuba. People have been wondering what Secretary Reagan is planning to do next, and he was not very forthcoming. It is expected that businessman, former Indiana State Senator, and son of 1940 Republican nominee Wendell Wilkie, Phil Wilkie, will be selected as Reagan's replacement. However, there is no formal announcement.

Commerce Secretary Ronald Reagan, who recently announced that he will be leaving office
« Last Edit: December 01, 2010, 03:58:40 pm by Cathcon »Logged

#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #59 on: November 29, 2010, 08:41:23 pm »
Ignore

From the viewpoint of several Conservatives, 1968 was seen as our great failure. After years of being ignored by Eisenhower and Nixon, we had hoped that we could successfully lead a surge against the establishment Republicans, and then against the Kennedys who had been waffling on Vietnam and domestic policy for four years. However, the nomination in 1968 ended up falling once again to the moderate wing. Not in the form of Nelson Rockefeller, but in a new form, the anti-war candidate George Romney. Romney made no attempt to connect with the conservative wing of the party-aside from a few brief telephone conversationg with California Senator Ronald Reagan-and chose Oregon Senator Mark Hatfield as his running mate. This, I think, cememnted the divide in the Republican Party, never to be re-bridged until the late 1980's. However, 1968, in retrospect, was just another failed year. The Conservatives would have other years. Only time would tell what we would do with them.
                       -Excerpt from Right From the Beginning by Patrick J Buchanan, 1987
Logged

#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #60 on: November 29, 2010, 10:07:28 pm »
Ignore

Comments, Questions, Critiques, Complaints, Compliments?
Logged

#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #61 on: December 01, 2010, 04:10:11 pm »
Ignore

September 28th, 1968
Kennedy has failed. It is obvious. Now is the time for new leadership, for bold steps to securing America. America can not be disgraced like this! True patriots can not allow it. It is time to stand up for America! That is why I have selected General Curtis LeMay as my running mate, because, as a military man, he knows what it takes to stand up for America!
                                         -Dixicrat Presidential nominee and former Alabama Governor George Wallace

October 1st, 1968
In this tumultuos decade we call the sixties, when American boys are shipped overseas to fight in a battle that has been long lost, when at home we see riots on every street corner of every major city, when we see civil unrest and racial violence on the television and in our country, we can no longer tolerate it. President Kennedy, running on a message of restoring America's image and improving racial relations, has done nothing on either front. That is why we must push ahead, and that is why we are running.
                                    -Oregon Senator and Republican Vice-Presidential nominee Mark Hatfield

October 3rd, 1968
I will remind the Republican ticket this year that we are the party of Conservatism. If the Republicans continually fail to see this, and continues to go along the path of the Left, it will remain a losing party.
                                                          -California Senator Ronald Reagan
Logged

Niemeyerite
JulioMadrid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6544
Spain


View Profile
« Reply #62 on: December 02, 2010, 10:53:13 am »
Ignore

LoL Reagan
Logged

My evolution (by The Political Matrix):
E: -6.06 -> -6.97 -> -6.97 -> -8.13 -> -7.29 -> -8.26 -> -8.65 -> -7.03
S: -6.78 -> -6.09 -> -7.30 -> -7.13 -> -8.09 -> -8.35 -> -9.04 -> -8.61
Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)
Vazdul
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4409
United States


View Profile
« Reply #63 on: December 02, 2010, 11:00:21 am »
Ignore

LoL Reagan

I have to agree with this. It seems that most Republicans ITTL do not share Reagan's opinion on the direction their party is going.
Logged

Seriously, it was time to change back to the real avatar.
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #64 on: December 02, 2010, 03:58:26 pm »
Ignore

LoL Reagan

I have to agree with this. It seems that most Republicans ITTL do not share Reagan's opinion on the direction their party is going.

We shall see...
Logged

Frink
Lafayette53
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 710
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.39, S: -6.17

View Profile
« Reply #65 on: December 03, 2010, 02:56:13 am »
Ignore

Lemay was certainly the perfect type of sociopath for the Wallace campaign.

Interesting work; keep it up. Hatfield is an interesting character for sure and probably my favorite Republican of the era all told (you can probably guess why ;p).
« Last Edit: December 03, 2010, 03:08:48 am by Foster »Logged

"Free speech is not to be regulated like diseased cattle and impure butter. The audience that hissed yesterday may applaud today, even for the same performance." - William O. Douglas
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #66 on: December 04, 2010, 08:13:38 am »
Ignore

By the way, does anyone know how many ballots someone would have needed to be nominated for President and Vice-President at the 1968 RNC? I want to put up those numbers.
Logged

#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #67 on: December 04, 2010, 08:40:44 am »
Ignore

October 7th, 1968
The office of California Senator Ronald Reagan, where he talks with his colleague, political ally, and friend Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona. They are discussing the  upcoming election.
    Ronnie: Well, Barry. This election really puts us in a pickle. We agree more with the Dixiecrats and with the Democrats than the Republican ticket. We can't endorse either of them either, otherwise, if Romney wins, we'll be permanently marginalized in the party, and if Romney loses, they party would blame us.
    Barry: I know. The fact is that we'll have to sit this one out. If Romney wins, we'll do our best to make sure he selects Conservative cabinet members.
    Ronnie: Do you think we can make it in 1972? If Romney loses, Rockefeller, the New York one, will run again. He'll probably have the support of the entire Eastern establishment. We already have had two strong moderates in the field at the same time, and both made an impressive showing.
    Barry: Either we'll win it in 1972, or we'll see the death of this nation at the hands of the Rockefellers and the Romneys, and the McGoverns.
    Ronnie: Romney's leading again. Did you know that?
Logged

#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #68 on: December 04, 2010, 07:20:54 pm »
Ignore

October 7th, 1968
While Senators Reagan and Goldwater are conversing about the fate of their party, the President is conversing with the fate of his Administration. In the Oval Office, he has gathered some of his most trusted advisors. Once again, Treasury Secretary McNamara reads from the newspaper.
    McNamara: 'Since the most recent unfolding events in the election, Michigan Governor George Romney once again has the lead. Wallace's campaign has hurt the President the most, for the most part because it has taken away the Deep South, a region that consistently votes Democrat, except in situations such as these where a segregationist Southerner runs independent of the Democrats. Romney is currently polling at 43%, Kennedy at 41%, and Wallace at 14%.' Jack! We can't let this happen. We can't be beaten just because of these damn Dixiecrats!
    Jack: I know, I know. We'll do what we did last time. You know how this goes, we shift funds. Sargent, I want all funds removed from the following places: Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Arkansas. We're going to use these new funds to swing Nevada, New Mexico, Washington, and California our way.
    Sargent: California? You think we can take that place? That's Nixonland and Reaganland, and Finchland. How are we going to swing that?
    Jack: Sargent, the point's been made before. While these Dixiecrats hurt us in the South, they hurt Republicans more in the rest of the country. In places like California, the Conservative vote will split, and we'll have a very good chance at this.
    Sargent: Okay, I'll call the Treasurer, but from what I remember, we were barely spending anything down there anyway because either we'd get it handed to us, or the Dixiecrats woudl take it.
    Jack: John, you're connected with al the big businessman down there. We need more funds, and we need them in all the right places.
    Connally: Now, Jack, Texas might have a lot of oil, but it's dry in funds. My boys have done just about everything possible and gotten as much money as possible.
    Jack: Robert...
    Bobby and McNamara Which one?
    Jack: McNamara. Is there anybody back in Michigan willing to contribute?
    McNamara: I'm afraid not. They're going for their favorite son, Romney. I've talked with them like you asked, and they're not willing to do anything until you withdraw the proposal for the Environmental Protection Agency.
    Jack: That? Give me a break! We'll find the money, even if we have to drain Texas' oil. We're going to win this.

Who do you prefer for President?
George Romney-43%
John F Kennedy-41%
George Wallace-14%
Undecided/Other-2%
Logged

tmthforu94
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 18331
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #69 on: December 04, 2010, 09:22:21 pm »
Ignore

Romney `68!
Logged


"A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives."
-Jackie Robinson
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #70 on: December 04, 2010, 09:53:52 pm »
Ignore

**BEWARE**Flashback into relatively recent history**BEWARE**

August 25-28
Going into the Republican Convention, a winner for the nomination is till undecided. Different factions are vying for the nomination, and they each have their areas of strength among the delegates. For the Conservatives, there is Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona. For the Moderates, there is Governor Winthrop Rockefeller of Arkansas. And for a newly found anti-war voice in the Republican Party, there is Michigan Governor George Romney. While Romney has won a plurality of the primaries, Goldwater is the winner of the popular vote, and the establishment favors Rockefeller to win.

Ballot 1 for President
  • Barry Goldwater: 502 delegates
  • George Romney: 431 delegates
  • Wintrhop Rockefeller: 328 delegates
  • James Rhoads: 40 delegates
  • Edward Finch: 29 delegates
  • Edward Brooke: 2 delegates
  • Margaret Chase Smith: 1 delegates

Ballot 2 for President
  • Goldwater: 532 delegates
  • Romney: 452 delegates
  • Rockefeller: 349 delegates

Ballot 3 for President
  • Romney: 722 delegates
  • Goldwater: 611 delegates


Ballot 1 for Vice-President
  • Mark Hatfield: 576 delegates
  • Ronald Reagan: 546 delegates
  • John V Lindsay: 102 delegates
  • Spiro T Agnew: 76 delegates
  • Edward Brooke: 33 delegates

Ballot 2 for Vice-President
  • Hatfield: 752 delegates
  • Reagan: 581 delegates
« Last Edit: December 04, 2010, 10:24:03 pm by McMillan 2012 »Logged

#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #71 on: December 04, 2010, 10:34:23 pm »
Ignore

Does anyone want any more conversations before the election?
Logged

Niemeyerite
JulioMadrid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6544
Spain


View Profile
« Reply #72 on: December 05, 2010, 08:10:49 am »
Ignore

Does anyone want any more conversations before the election?

I like conversations, but I really want to see the election Wink
Logged

My evolution (by The Political Matrix):
E: -6.06 -> -6.97 -> -6.97 -> -8.13 -> -7.29 -> -8.26 -> -8.65 -> -7.03
S: -6.78 -> -6.09 -> -7.30 -> -7.13 -> -8.09 -> -8.35 -> -9.04 -> -8.61
#Ready4Nixon
Cathcon
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15061
United States


View Profile
« Reply #73 on: December 05, 2010, 11:30:58 am »
Ignore

November 5th, 1968
...Tonight is election nigth. After months of hard fough campaigning by all three opponents, no-one has been able to predict a winner. Battling in the polls are President John F Kennedy and Michigan Governor George Romney, with former Alabama Governor George Wallace taking up a significant portion of each one's support. Romney has ridden a wave of anti-war sentiment while Kennedy has run on his economic record as well as claiming that the war is on its way to being won...

...And the first state to be called is Kennedy's home state of Massachusetts, where it has been determined in nearly no time at all that the President is the first to pick up electoral votes...

...With Romney's picking up of Vermont, he has taken the three most northeastern states, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine...

...We have called Georgia for Wallace, thus giving him all of the Deep South...

...And with the calling of California, President Kennedy has been elected to another term in the Whitehouse...


President John F Kennedy (D-MA)/Vice-President Terry Sanford (D-NC); 273 electoral votes; 42.9% of the popular vote
Governor George Romney (R-MI)/Senator Mark Hatfield (R-OR); 212 electoral votes; 42.7% of the popular vote
Former Governor George Wallace (DI-AL)/General Curtis LeMay (DI-CA); 53 electoral votes; 14.1% of the popular vote
« Last Edit: November 05, 2011, 09:28:54 am by Cathcon »Logged

Niemeyerite
JulioMadrid
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6544
Spain


View Profile
« Reply #74 on: December 05, 2010, 11:52:20 am »
Ignore

=) =) =) =) =) =) =) =) =) =) !!!

I actually like terry sanford, he could have been a great president or vicepresident. Let's see what happens with him in this TL Wink
Logged

My evolution (by The Political Matrix):
E: -6.06 -> -6.97 -> -6.97 -> -8.13 -> -7.29 -> -8.26 -> -8.65 -> -7.03
S: -6.78 -> -6.09 -> -7.30 -> -7.13 -> -8.09 -> -8.35 -> -9.04 -> -8.61
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 47 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines