2027-2037: The Rise of a Great President
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 05:59:30 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs? (Moderator: Dereich)
  2027-2037: The Rise of a Great President
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 2027-2037: The Rise of a Great President  (Read 1218 times)
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,518
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 22, 2011, 07:02:07 PM »
« edited: August 22, 2011, 07:45:35 PM by Grover Cleveland was a DINO »

Hey all, I would like to submit this for your reading pleasure Smiley

2027-2037: The Rise of a Great President

By the year 2027, the Republican Party was in serious trouble. The administration of Republican President Marco Rubio, beset by the ongoing war in Iran, high inflation, double-digit unemployment, and revelations of administration corruption, was coming to an abysmal end. Thousands of demonstrators routinely marched on Washington to demand economic relief and an end to the war in Iran. In addition, GOP had increasingly become identified as the party of working-and middle class white voters. Though Rubio had made sizable dents in the Democrats’ control of the Hispanic and Asian votes (winning 44% and 39%, respectively, in 2020 and 47% and 40%, respectively, in 2024), those gains were being lost rapidly as the economy soured and foreign policy hopes dimmed. In 2026, the Democrats had recaptured the US Congress after 8 years of Republican control, with 56 Republicans in the House and 9 in the Senate going down in inglorious defeat. The polls showed that only 22% of voters in February 2027 identified as Republican, in contrast to 40% for Democrats and 38% for Independents. It was truly a lousy time to be a Republican; but it was also a time of great fear and uncertainty for the American people as the coming Presidential election drew closer.

The Democrats, however, had no strong candidates in early 2027. Despite their resounding success in the previous year’s midterms, the Party of Jackson was not yet even close to being united on a Presidential contender for 2028.  Among the declared candidates were Representative Jason Stevens of California, Senator Mitch O’Neill from Illinois, Governor Will Hernandez of Texas, and Governor Katherine Werner of Iowa. On the issues, the Democratic candidates were a study in contrasts. Stevens was typical of California Democrats: very liberal on social/cultural issues, somewhat more moderate on taxes and government regulation of the economy. O’Neill was a populist liberal in the mold of Paul Wellstone or Tom Harkin. Hernandez stressed the government’s obligation to impoverished communities hit hard by the economic downturn; on social issues, however, he was actually quite conservative. Werner was similar to O’Neill, but with more of an emphasis on health care; she had signed a bill that had partially socialized the health care system in Iowa. Potential candidates who had not yet declared, but were widely speculated as likely to run, included media mogul Steve Alter of California, Senator Michael Kim of Oregon, and Governor Tanya Forney of Pennsylvania. But at that time, most of the rumors were just that: rumors.

On the Republican side, few wanted the job of facing the American electorate in 2028.  Still, there were a handful of candidates who had already declared by early 2027, including Governor Jack Wallace of North Carolina, Governor George Gaither of Indiana, and Senator Wayne Arnolds of Kansas. All three were conservatives, but all three had different policy prescriptions for the economy. Governor Wallace was known as a tight-fisted spender and staunch fiscal conservative who had killed many of the programs of the Democratic legislature in North Carolina. Governor Gaither was seen as being more pragmatic; he had increased spending on education in Indiana, in exchange for modest spending cuts in other areas. Senator Arnolds, for his part, was something of a maverick on taxes, proposing bills that would drastically lower corporate rates, close corporate tax loopholes, increase the number of deductions for families, reduce the number of families subject to the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), and institute a national sales tax that would be modestly progressive (higher taxes on luxuries, lower taxes on consumption in general). The three men, however, agreed on foreign policy, arguing that a swift escalation of the war in Iran to “accomplish military objectives” should be followed by a gradual withdrawal.

As election year approached, voters and observers, whatever their political persuasion, anxiously hoped for the best as the economy continued to slump.  The conflict in Iran, meanwhile, had already cost the lives of 2000 American soldiers. Inflation remained high; it broke 9 percent in February 2027, 9.5 percent in March. Unemployment was at 11%. And as President Rubio dismissed two Cabinet officials on charges of bribery, the popularity of the US government continued to decline; approval ratings of Congress were at 15% in February, while approval ratings of the President were at a meager 36%. It would take a lot of political courage and aptitude to reverse this tide of despair.


---
Logged
Snowstalker Mk. II
Snowstalker
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,414
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -4.35

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 22, 2011, 07:42:02 PM »

Nitpick: A 32% Congressional approval rating is really good. Right now it's in the teens.

Also, I'm gonna bet that Casey would be the outgoing governor after 2026, and Pennsylvania consistently switches parties every 8 years. Maybe he didn't run in 2022 and Tanya was elected?
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,518
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 22, 2011, 07:45:00 PM »

Nitpick: A 32% Congressional approval rating is really good. Right now it's in the teens.

Also, I'm gonna bet that Casey would be the outgoing governor after 2026, and Pennsylvania consistently switches parties every 8 years. Maybe he didn't run in 2022 and Tanya was elected?

This is my story, don't bother me with facts! Tongue

Yeah, I'll go with the latter scenario re: Pa Governors.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,310
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 22, 2011, 09:25:13 PM »

Ftr, Im reading.
Logged
Captain Chaos
GZ67
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 735
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 23, 2011, 08:01:16 AM »

What was the cause of the Iran war?
Logged
Vosem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,634
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.13, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 23, 2011, 08:03:37 AM »

Nitpick: A 32% Congressional approval rating is really good. Right now it's in the teens.

Also, I'm gonna bet that Casey would be the outgoing governor after 2026, and Pennsylvania consistently switches parties every 8 years. Maybe he didn't run in 2022 and Tanya was elected?

This is my story, don't bother me with facts! Tongue

Yeah, I'll go with the latter scenario re: Pa Governors.

Or, alternatively, 2028 isn't that far into the future - why not ex-Governor Casey himself?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.225 seconds with 12 queries.