Into the Next Millenium
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 01:49:21 PM
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)
  Into the Next Millenium
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]
Author Topic: Into the Next Millenium  (Read 19854 times)
The Lord Marbury
EvilSpaceAlien
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 438
Sweden


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -5.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #100 on: January 28, 2013, 12:42:22 PM »
« edited: January 28, 2013, 01:03:04 PM by The Lord Marbury »

Here's a little infodump:

Premiers of American Provinces, as of the beginning of February 1989

Alabama
Jim Folsom Jr., since January 1989
Liberal majority


Alaska
Frank Murkowski, since August 1988
Alaskan Independence-Progressive Conservative coalition

Alberta
Don Mazankowski, since September 1985
Progressive Conservative majority


Arizuma
Peter Domenici, since January 1983
Progressive Conservative majority


Arkansas
Bill Clinton, since October 1976
Liberal majority


Bahamas
Hubert Ingraham, since August 1986
Progressive Conservative majority


British Columbia
Michael Harcourt, since May 1987
Labor majority


California
Tom Bradley, since February 1988
Labor
-Liberal coalition

Canada
Marc Lalonde, since November 1985
Liberal majority


Colorado
Dick Lamm, since April 1981
Liberal majority


Connecticut
Christopher Dodd, since October 1985
Liberal majority


Dakota
Quentin N. Burdick, since March 1978 (also from 1960 to 1967)
Liberal majority


Delaware
Shien Biau Woo, since June 1983
Liberal majority


East Florida
Maurice Ferre, since September 1985
Liberal minority


Georgia
Zell Miller, since May 1985 (also from 1971 to 1976)
Liberal majority


Hawaii
Pat Saiki, since November 1988
Progressive Consevative
-Liberal coalition

Hudson
Jack Masters, since March 1984
Liberal majority


Illinois
Adlai Stevenson III, since April 1982
Labor
-Liberal coalition

Indiana
Dan Quayle, since September 1981
Progressive Conservative minority
with supply and confidence from American Heritage and Libertarian

Iowa
Neal Smith, since February 1979 (also from 1966 to 1971)
Liberal minority


Jamaica
Edward Seaga, since June 1984
Jamaica Labour Party majority


Kansas
John W. Carlin, since July 1976
Liberal minority
with supply and confidence from Labor

Kentucky
Walter Huddleston, since December 1979
Liberal majority


Louisiana
Buddy Roemer, since August 1986
Liberal majority


Maine
Olympia Snowe, since May 1987
Progressive Conservative majority


Manitoba
Howard Pawley, since April 1980
Labor majority


Maryland
Paul Sarbanes, since April 1982
Liberal majority


Massachusetts
Edward Brooke, since May 1985
Progressive Conservative majority


Michigan
Donald W. Riegle Jr., since October 1979
Progressive Conservative majority


Minnesota
Arne H. Carlson, since September 1987
Liberal majority


Mississippi
Kirk Fordice, since March 1985
American Heritage
-Progressive Conservative coalition

Missouri
Thomas Eagleton, since June 1981
Liberal
-Labor coalition

Montana
John Melcher, since November 1977
Liberal majority


Nebraska
J. James Exon, since February 1984 (also from 1969 to 1977)
Liberal majority


Nevada
Harry Reid, since May 1987
Liberal majority


Newfoundland & Labrador
John Crosbie, since September 1984
Progressive Conservative majority


New Hampshire
Judd Gregg, since October 1986
Progressive Conservative majority


New Jersey
Thomas Kean, since April 1979
Progressive Conservative majority


New York
Al D'Amato, since August 1985
Progressive Conservative minority


North Carolina
Jim Hunt, since October 1981
Liberal majority


Nova Scotia
Donald W. Cameron, since November 1988
Progressive Conservative majority


Ohio
Howard Metzenbaum, since June 1980 (also from 1972 to 1976)
Liberal majority


Ontario
Jack Layton, since August 1986
Labor
-Liberal coalition

Oregon
Victor Atiyeh, since July 1983
Progressive Conservative majority


Pennsylvania
Robert P. Casey, since October 1986
Liberal minority
with supply and confidence from Labor

Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands
Rafael Hernández Colón, since April 1975
Labor majority


Rhode Island
Claudine Schneider, since January 1987
Progressive Conservative majority


Saskatchewan
Allan Blakeney, since May 1985 (also from 1970 to 1981)
Labor minority
with supply and confidence from Liberals

Sequoyah
W.W. Keeler, since August 1974
Sequoyahn People's Party minority
with supply and confidence from Liberals

South Carolina
Arthur Ravenel Jr., since September 1988
American Heritage
-Progressive Conservative coalition

St. John's
James Lee, since November 1985
Progressive Conservative majority


Tennessee
Lamar Alexander, since February 1977
Progressive Conservative minorit
y with supply and confidence from American Heritage

Texas
Ann Richards, since June 1988
Liberal
-Labor coalition

Utah
James V. Hansen, since March 1984
Progressive Conservative majority


Vermont
Madeleine M. Kunin, since November 1981
Labor majority


Virginia
Douglas Wilder, since March 1986
Liberal majority


West Florida
Sonny Callahan, since July 1985
Progressive Conservative
-American Heritage coalition

Wisconsin
Dave Obey, since October 1986
Labor
-Liberal coalition

Wyoming
Malcolm Wallop, since March 1980
Progressive Conservative majority



Liberal - 24*
Progressive Conservative - 20
Labor - 9
American Heritage - 2
Minnesota Liberal - 1*
Alaskan Independence - 1
Seqouyahn People's - 1
Jamaica Labour - 1**


*While official numbers put 25 provincial parliaments under Liberal control, in reality it is only 24 since the Minnesota Liberal Party, while using the same name and colors, is not affiliated with the federal Liberal party due to generally be more right of centre and more in line with the conservatives due to having been the main opposition to the provincial Labor Party for the better part of the century.
**The Jamaica Labour Party, while in affiliation with the Tories when it comes to federal elections, has no ties to the party on the provincial level despite sharing most of their views on policy matters.

------

Comments? Questions? Critiques? Smiley
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,709
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #101 on: January 28, 2013, 05:57:47 PM »

Keep up the good work!

I'd love to see Reagan get ousted as PM Wink
Logged
Peter the Lefty
Peternerdman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,506
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #102 on: January 28, 2013, 06:26:33 PM »

Loving it!
Logged
The Lord Marbury
EvilSpaceAlien
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 438
Sweden


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -5.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #103 on: January 29, 2013, 04:22:04 AM »

Keep up the good work!

I'd love to see Reagan get ousted as PM Wink

That could possibly be arranged... Wink

------------

Desperation Part Deux: A Party in Crisis

Some four months or so following the formation of the Progressive Liberals it was finally time for the party to hold its own national convention. In the time since its formation the party had managed to recruit a sizable number of members, with provincial and territorial level chapters having been formed in every province and territory except for the Northwest Territories, Nunavut and Jamaica. But what remained was probably even more important, and that was to actually agree on a common platform which the party would run on in the next federal election, in addition to forming the basis for future platforms. That job was left to the platform development commission, created by Brown in mid-December 1988 and chaired by Paul Tsongas. The new platform was essentially finished by the middle of February, when it was presented Brown who gave it his full approval. But no other high up members in the party would have the chance to read it prior to the convention, which indeed caused quite a stir with many criticizing Brown for the same kind of top heavy control prevalent in the Liberal Party. However the media came to the rescue, as a copy of the document was leaked to a New York Times reporter and they did in fact get a chance to read it, along with the rest of the world. But the reception was not really as positive as Brown would have hoped for….

------

"The ultimate goal of what we choose to define as 'progressive liberalism' is to shape a society based on the ideals of democracy and the inalienable individual liberties of all human beings."
-Jerry Brown, leader of the Progressive Liberal Party

"Long lasting prosperity and social progress are the primary goals of the Progressive Liberal Party. Therefore we recognize how irresponsible fiscal policies are one of the major obstacles in reaching these goals, and because of this we as party vow to always promote fiscal restraint and balanced budgets […]"

"A 13% flat tax along with a goods and services tax set as the same level is deemed to be ideal for reaching strong and long lasting economic prosperity in this country […]"

"As a party we are in favor of an official federally mandated implementation of trilingualism […]"

"As a party we strongly support placing a federal ban on the death penalty [...]"

"A reform of the way the social welfare system works, in order to remove excess bureaucracy, is deemed necessary to secure the long term survival of those important services we often take for granted […]"

Exerpts from "Innovation and Progress: A Roadmap to American Prosperity" - 1989 proposed Progressive Liberal Party platform

------

"Flat tax, balanced budgets, welfare reform, what the hell is that goddamn Californian hippie trying to turn us into, Libertarians!?"
-Quote attributed to Tip O'Neill

------

WM: "This is a disaster. We left the Liberal Party because of their drift rightwards, and now we have a leader who wants to take us all the way over to the far right fringe. Something needs to be done."

MD: "No argument from me. Have you talked to Brown?"

WM: "I called, but he won't budge. He drones on about how studies have shown that flat tax would more efficient than our current tax scheme, the need to focus on economic growth over fighting poverty, and blah blah blah. I'm telling you, the man has gone completely crazy."

MD: "Well that's that then. I guess it's back home to the Liberals for us."

WM: "Don't get ahead of yourself, Michael, we'll fix this. I'll talk to Pierre, and the two of us will go see Brown together. Together we'll let him know that he simply does not have the backing of his party on this."

MD: "Very well then. Good luck, I guess. You're going to need it."


To Be Continued….
Logged
Peter the Lefty
Peternerdman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,506
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #104 on: January 29, 2013, 03:05:37 PM »

LIBERAL OBLIVION!!!! Cheesy
Logged
The Lord Marbury
EvilSpaceAlien
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 438
Sweden


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -5.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #105 on: February 02, 2013, 12:04:26 PM »
« Edited: February 02, 2013, 12:06:01 PM by The Lord Marbury »

While I'm working on the next update, I thought I'd give you a bit of a closer look at some past elections. Smiley


Federal Election of 1943

With the start of World War II, Mackenzie King, despite commanding a sizable majority in the House of Commons, formed a national government with the Progressive Conservative and Labor parties in 1940. As a result of all parties being in government together, campaigning for the 1943 election was very low key and the Liberals gained several seats mostly as a result of many voters lining up behind them as the natural governing party in a time of national crisis.

Federal Election of 1946

Electoral fatigue started hitting the Liberals following the end of the war, and coupled with the election of Claude Pepper as party leader, it looked as if Dewey's Prog Cons were all but assured to win the next election. Pepper, who was percieved as too far to the left on many issues, as well being weak on Communism and a bit of an opportunist (he had switched party affiliation from Labor to Liberal in order to get elected to parliament), even caused a rift in his own party, when several MPs led by Harry Truman left the party to sit as Independent Liberals in protest over Pepper's foreign policy. But against all odds, Pepper's Liberals prevailed with a one seat majority. Dewey, who was blamed for squandering a 20 point lead at the start of the campaign, was eventually forced to step down as Tory leader.

Federal Election of 1951

Pepper's government had grown deeply unpopular by the time the next election came around, and despite being able to reconcile things with the Independent Liberals by offering significant concessions in areas such as foreign policy and defense, the Liberal Party suffered a major defeat and were ousted by the Progressive Conservatives led by Harold Stassen. The Labor Party, which had joined the Liberals in a coalition for the last two years of the term after the government lost its majority following a by-election, also saw its vote share collapse, resulting in Henry Wallace announcing his intention to step down as party leader. This was also the first time an election was contested by the Southern National Party led by Strom Thurmond, a party formed by a group of former Liberal and Progressive Conservative MPs, largely in opposition to Pepper's strong support of civil rights for African-Americans in the southern provinces.

Federal Election of 1955

The 1955 election was largely uneventful, with Stassen's government rather popular, quite few seats were lost, although the increase in the number of the seats in parliament from the last election twist the numbers. The Liberals, now under Lyndon Johnson's leadership, were able to recover some of their losses from the previous election, as was the Labor Party under Glen Taylor's leadership, but it was still not even close to overcoming big lead that the Prog Cons had.

----

Links to larger versions of the 46, 51 & 55 infoboxes:
http://i.imgur.com/iYh5V9I.png
http://i.imgur.com/dgZ5Z0z.png
http://i.imgur.com/FLEAJyS.png
Logged
Peter the Lefty
Peternerdman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,506
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #106 on: February 02, 2013, 12:42:20 PM »

Awesome!  What do you use to make those?
Logged
The Lord Marbury
EvilSpaceAlien
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 438
Sweden


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -5.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #107 on: February 02, 2013, 01:08:00 PM »

Awesome!  What do you use to make those?

I edit original election infoboxes in the wikipedia sandbox, and if some changes are needed which I can't do in wiki I fix that in Photoshop.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #108 on: February 05, 2013, 02:21:58 AM »

From the name of LBJ's constituency, I take it Stephen F. Austin stayed in Tennessee in this timeline? hehe

Love the fake Wikipedia articles!
Logged
The Lord Marbury
EvilSpaceAlien
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 438
Sweden


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -5.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #109 on: February 14, 2013, 04:51:02 PM »
« Edited: February 14, 2013, 06:47:18 PM by The Lord Marbury »

Jerry Brown's Office - Meeting between Brown and Walter Mondale - February 15th, 1989

JB: "Walter, it's good to see you. I understand you wanted to have a talk?"

WM: "Yes Jerry, I do, and I wish that I could say that I was happy to see you as well, but we really need to discuss this proposed party platform."

JB: [sighs] "Walter, I realize that this is all must come as shock for you, but please trust me when I say that this is a good thing. It's new and different from anything that the other parties have to offer an it will create enough excitement for our party to carry us through the next election."

WM: "Oh come on Jerry, you can't seriously think that.

JB: "Of course I do, Walter. You especially should realize the importance of running on a strong platform in a general election."

WM: "Yes, but the difference between the two is that the platform I ran with at least reflected the views of a solid majority of the party's MPs and voters, while what you're proposing looks like something written up by an escaped mental patient."

JB: "Seriously Walter, that was just uncalled for."

WM: "I am serious about this. If you do not agree to open the program for changes you are going to have revolt on your hands, and I am sure not going to be there to help you."

JB: "Then so be it. Over these past months thousands of members have joined this party largely thanks to me and what I have brought to the movement, and come the convention they will finally have the chance to make their voices heard. And then we will find out just who's voices matter the most; those of thousands of young people yearning for change, or those of some stuffy old politicians who can't evolve with the rest of society."

WM: [brief pause] "Is this really what you want, Jerry? An open fight between factions just months after the party has been formed. You'll tear the party apart."

JB: "If tearing it apart and putting it back together again is what's required to get the party on the right track, then that's what I'll do."

WM: … "You can't seriously think that."

JB: "Yes, I do."

WM: "Well okay then. I guess the only other thing I can say to that is that I promise to fight you tooth and nail for the soul of this party when on the convention floor. Good bye, Jerry."

[Mondale walks out of the office]

-------

PM's Office - Weekly meeting between Reagan, Buchanan and Paul - February 17th, 1989

RR: "So we can all agree to a pilot program for school vouchers encompassing 1500 schools nationwide, with further evaluation in three years time?"

RP: "Yes."

PB: "Yes, that's fine with me."

RR: "Excellent, then I think we'll announce it as soon as possible. Make it a cornerstone of the new budget. However I feel that it might be best if it's the three of us who present the idea to the public at large prior to the Education Ministry's announcement. Newt certainly won't be happy about it, but I think it would be good if he stayed out of the public eye for while, considering his comments a few weeks ago."

[All three men laugh]

PB: "Oh yes, I heard about that. Boy, the opposition will think of any excuse to complain nowadays, won't they?"

RR: "Well in their defense it is in their job description. Though personally I do wish that they could be at least a little bit worse at doing their job."

RP: [chuckles] "Yes, don't we all."

RR: "Yeah. Now, with the voucher program done, I think we should move on to the growing deficit. It has turned out to be quite the problem lately with the opposition being very successful at using it to attack us. Research shows that it has rose from 11th to 4th in the ranking of matters the voters are the most concerned about. Not to mention with a recession looming on the horizon, it is high time that we do something to address this issue in order to secure the public's confidence in our economic policy."

PB: "Well then what do you propose we do?"

RR: [sighs] "I want you to know that what I am about to suggest did not come easy to me, as it goes against a lot of my core principles. But after discussing this both with Jack [Kemp] and Don [Regan], I have come to realize that it is the best course of action, with the least backlash attached to it."

RP: "Ronnie, you actually have to tell us what it is too."

RR: "I know. I propose increasing the federal Goods and Services Tax from the current 2% to 6%."

RP: "Ronnie, I have to say that I would not be comfortable supporting such a thing without a significant cut of government spending to come along with it. Yes, the idea of a sales tax replacing the federal income tax is something which I am in favor of in the long run, but this is just a needless tax increase used to justify more reckless spending. I'm sorry, but neither me nor my party can support it."

PB: "Yes, I'm afraid I have to side with Ron here. My party's core constituents are on average a lot less well off than the average American, and I would have a very hard time trying to sell a spike in the tax on food and other necessities when the time comes for the next election."

RR: "Ron, I have to say that the notion that this tax hike would come with no cuts in spending what so ever is a fallacy. As an example, the cut to federal higher education funding we agreed upon in October will under the new deficit reduction plan be at 8% instead of the 4 we agreed on then, the same for the aid to First Nations which will be reduced by 10% instead of 5. I would also be prepared to at least open discussions in regards to reducing funding for the Strategic Defense Initiative as you proposed during the fall, as well as certain other cuts. This isn't some demand I'm placing on you two, this is very much a work in progress I hope we can reach an agreement on which will be suitable to our separate parties. And as for your concerns Pat, I would hope that your voters would see the values of the income tax cuts we've already given then, as well as the cuts to First Nations funding, which if I remember correctly, was a key point of your campaign in the last election."

RP: "Well it's at least good that you seem to have finally realized the problem we're having with the deficit, and that you're also willing to look at ways to solve it, but I'm still going to have a hard time selling any hike in taxes to my party without significant cuts to areas such as health and education."

RR: "Well we can certainly talk about that. I was thinking that perhaps the three of us, together with Jack [Kemp], Andre [Marrou] and Bob [Dornan], could sit down and discuss potential cuts and privatizations. Just nothing too drastic, as to not awaken anger from the public."

RP: "Well, we can certainly discuss it."

RR: "Good. What do you think, Pat?"

PB: "Well with the increased cuts to the waste spent on First Nations, I think we can at least talk about it. But I can't make any promises, as I'm still not happy with the GST hike."

RR: "Being willing to at least have a discussion is good enough. I'll have a meeting scheduled. Now onto the next order of business…"

Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,709
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.52, S: 1.46

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #110 on: February 15, 2013, 02:09:20 PM »

Still reading!
Logged
DKrol
dkrolga
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,542


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #111 on: April 17, 2013, 09:21:17 PM »

This is a really high quality TL and has partially inspired my Parliamentary US TL "General Election - 1990". I hope you continue this, it's interesting.
Logged
The Lord Marbury
EvilSpaceAlien
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 438
Sweden


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -5.91

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #112 on: April 18, 2013, 12:17:52 PM »

This is a really high quality TL and has partially inspired my Parliamentary US TL "General Election - 1990". I hope you continue this, it's interesting.

Thanks a lot. Smiley I will be continuing this at some point just to make things clear, but I'm currently so busy with stuff IRL that I probably won't have the chance to return to this until june/july at the earliest.
Logged
auburntiger
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,233
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.61, S: 0.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #113 on: April 20, 2013, 02:38:22 PM »

I would love to see a geographical representation of the election outcomes if that's possible Smiley
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]  
« 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 0.094 seconds with 11 queries.