Jump to content
270soft Forum
TheMiddlePolitical

General Election only Results

Recommended Posts

La Follete 1st term

-Passed Womens Rights acts

-Striked down corruption in government

-Imposed the already placed national healthcare act,and expanded it greatly

-Championed for workers rights,passing all the workers rights acts

-Was disliked greatly by the deep south, after he called it "the land stuck in time"

-Approval averaged 51%

-National Democrats "concede" Leader Sen.Palmer saying "If a popular sitting president cannot win an election,no one will" 

-For the first time in history someone wins there parties nomination 4 times in a row,who isn't a sitting president in all but one,,Grover Cleveland and the Democrats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1904

La Follete/Taft (I)(rep) vs Cleveland/Parker (dem) ---The difference of no southern support,and no splitting votes makes

 

Capture.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

1904

La Follete/Taft (I)(rep) vs Cleveland/Parker (dem) ---The difference of no southern support,and no splitting votes makes

 

Capture.PNG

Ah, it seems another one of my little notes to try to keep these alternate histories more realistic when it comes to viewing the proportion and perspective of the U.S. versus other parts of the world in earlier eras of history that aren't idealistic to "nationalistic-themed alternate history portrayals" where it's the U.S. in a void until and when the U.S. interacts with another part of the world always collapses like a house of cards, regardless of how realistic for that era of time for that era of time it would have been, is ignored utterly without comment and a move on action is done. This is done VERY often on this sub-forum. I feel like, when I make such commentary and advice on historic realistic, I'm viewed like everyone's Uncle Vernon Dursley when they want to have flights of fancy unfettered by the laws of reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cleveland's 2nd term

-Silently drew back La Folletes restrictions on industry

-Lowered company tax to an all time low

-Totally got rid of gold being backed in to government

-Cleveland was trialed for tax evasion,overall being dropped on the charges,though why those are dropped seemed suspicious,this did however tank his approval,and conspiracys arose

-Approval average 37%

-Cleveland denied running for a third term,however he throned his VP,Alan Parker to the nomination

-Socialists rise to a strong 3rd party

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1908

Hughes/Rossevelt (rep) vs Parker/Bryan (dem) vs Debs/Hanford . ---Another suprising result,Hughes started with strong support in the North but Debs took away the votes.

 

Capture.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parkers 1st term

-Very quiet overall with using executive power

-Helped big buisness,mostly ignored the south

-Did little to move foward civil rights

-A couple scandals that overall hurt Parker

-Socialist party continued to rise

-With former President La Follette as the Republican party canidate,no progressive or socialist ran as he was supported by both groups

-Average approval 33%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1912

La Follette/Sherman (rep) vs Parker/Bryan (I)(dem) -----Suspicious aye?

 

 

Capture.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parkers 2nd term

-It is found on June 3,1913 That Alton B Parker of New York is found guitly on over 10 million,yes 10 million,counts of voter fraud after it was found that with help of the democratic party that Parker modified and tampered with voting results, The Last election it was found the La Follete would have been the one to claim victory,there is an ongoing investigation of the 1908 election.

Bryans 1st term

-Backed American currency with silver

-Evaded war with Germany

-Imposed slight regulations on buisness

-Subsized farmers,and also gave them tax breaks

-raised company tax

-Scandal free,well liked,But being a democrat holds him down

-Approval 45%

-Completely avoided WW1

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1916

Ford/Lodge(rep) vs Bryan/Marshsall (I)(dem)----One of the more close elections in our series,However running for the party that just had the most major scandal in history,doesn't give the best of luck. -----Note: Lodge was Conklings VP 20 years ago.

 

Capture.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2018‎-‎01‎-‎30 at 7:49 AM, TheMiddlePolitical said:

Parkers 2nd term

-It is found on June 3,1913 That Alton B Parker of New York is found guitly on over 10 million,yes 10 million,counts of voter fraud after it was found that with help of the democratic party that Parker modified and tampered with voting results, The Last election it was found the La Follete would have been the one to claim victory,there is an ongoing investigation of the 1908 election.

Bryans 1st term

-Backed American currency with silver

-Evaded war with Germany

-Imposed slight regulations on buisness

-Subsized farmers,and also gave them tax breaks

-raised company tax

-Scandal free,well liked,But being a democrat holds him down

-Approval 45%

 

Why did Bryans, who was a running mate, get the full Presidency after this debacle?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Parker admitted to the court that Bryan had absolutely nothing to do with the controversy, the only reason he chose Bryan, a man of the farmer,and against big business,was to unify the party,as Parker was all for big business. They really had no liking for each other,though Parker did save Bryan for the presidency by admitting his innocence. Bryan completely condemned the democratic party as a whole,and whoever was involved. At this point he turned into the Trump kind of anti-government stance. So in the election I just posted were he went against Ford,both of them were against corrupt government, Both of them were highly approved of (kind of the opposite of the 2016 election). 

@Patine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

Parker admitted to the court that Bryan had absolutely nothing to do with the controversy, the only reason he chose Bryan, a man of the farmer,and against big business,was to unify the party,as Parker was all for big business. They really had no liking for each other,though Parker did save Bryan for the presidency by admitting his innocence. Bryan completely condemned the democratic party as a whole,and whoever was involved. At this point he turned into the Trump kind of anti-government stance. So in the election I just posted were he went against Ford,both of them were against corrupt government, Both of them were highly approved of (kind of the opposite of the 2016 election). 

@Patine

And what about the navy thing I mentioned earlier you kind of didn't respond to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

And what about the navy thing I mentioned earlier you kind of didn't respond to?

Actually haven't even checked the comments,just went back and did,I'm happy this is actually getting interest.

The presidents in this series dating all the way back to Grant have had very "protective minds",and they have also been power hungry except for La Follete,Post Cival war the focus has been on eventually being the colonial power of the world,and things will be brewing for the African continent depending who wins later on,expansion wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

Actually haven't even checked the comments,just went back and did,I'm happy this is actually getting interest.

The presidents in this series dating all the way back to Grant have had very "protective minds",and they have also been power hungry except for La Follete,Post Cival war the focus has been on eventually being the colonial power of the world,and things will be brewing for the African continent depending who wins later on,expansion wise.

But will you take into account that the British and French (moreso than the others, honestly) were already entrenched and VERY powerful colonial powers, and Britain had a HUGE navy with more coaling stations and full-facility ports under it's own sovereign control than all other navies in the world combined at that time, and they wouldn't fold like a house of cards, or with any ease at all, if the U.S. had taken a shining to colonize Africa or other areas they hadn't historically?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Patine said:

But will you take into account that the British and French (moreso than the others, honestly) were already entrenched and VERY powerful colonial powers, and Britain had a HUGE navy with more coaling stations and full-facility ports under it's own sovereign control than all other navies in the world combined at that time, and they wouldn't fold like a house of cards, or with any ease at all, if the U.S. had taken a shining to colonize Africa or other areas they hadn't historically?

All the presidents who approved upon history brought an abundance of factory workers with it,meaning tons of ships,will America be successful in there "late" colonization or Africa? Perhaps. But they may take advantage of the distraction or WW2 when it comes around. From the Italins, and Germans,depending on whose president we may see nothing happen as we have with president Bryan avoiding WW1 entirely. Though the industrial boom didnt matter because the US has been in a constant state of it.

 

-Also with Cleveland disbanding the Democrats he was defidently in over his head. The National Democrats were a rising party but as I've noted fell hard after his loss. I guess you could say so far that has been the Progressive Party of this election, ex:The election of 1912 irl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

All the presidents who approved upon history brought an abundance of factory workers with it,meaning tons of ships,will America be successful in there "late" colonization or Africa? Perhaps. But they may take advantage of the distraction or WW2 when it comes around. From the Italins, and Germans,depending on whose president we may see nothing happen as we have with president Bryan avoiding WW1 entirely. Though the industrial boom didnt matter because the US has been in a constant state of it.

Are you saying they ignore WW2 as well, by term "distraction" for it? The Japanese weren't liable to leave them alone even without the bank freezes and oil embargos - they wanted the Pacific Islands the U.S. controlled and to neutralize the U.S. Pacific Fleet in any case. Germany and Italy weren't in a hurry for war with the U.S., but Japan was a different story - and you don't just ignore an outright attack by a nation like Japan if you have any sense in your head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Patine said:

Are you saying they ignore WW2 as well, by term "distraction" for it? The Japanese weren't liable to leave them alone even without the bank freezes and oil embargos - they wanted the Pacific Islands the U.S. controlled and to neutralize the U.S. Pacific Fleet in any case. Germany and Italy weren't in a hurry for war with the U.S., but Japan was a different story - and you don't just ignore an outright attack by a nation like Japan if you have any sense in your head.

Japan is all accounts will not be ignored,and depending who is at the helm,talks may be held with Germany and Italy, If a very passive president comes into office. Will those talks work? probably not but we shall see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, TheMiddlePolitical said:

Japan is all accounts will not be ignored,and depending who is at the helm,talks may be held with Germany and Italy, If a very passive president comes into office. Will those talks work? probably not but we shall see. 

Keep in mind that, although the "Axis" was on paper a cohesive military alliance with unified objectives, and is firmly portrayed as such in strategy games like the classic Axis & Allies, in truth, Japan operated almost entirely in a strategic and political void from the European Axis, trading only declarations and speeches of solidarity and congratulations for each others' military and political victories. There was no meeting of all three Axis leaders (or even very senior military officers from all three nations) during the war in anywhere near an analog to the Tehran or Yalta meetings, or even any plans or attempt for such a meeting. Hitler first heard about the Pearl Harbour bombings the same way most people in the world at the time did - on the radio news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Presidentinsertname said:

did ford ever ran for president or is he a what if?

He did,he was second in the nomination that year I believe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ford first term

-Renegotiated trade deals

-Stayed out of WW1 

-Strengthened the steel and coal industries

-Lowered corporate tax (people did not approve of this saying it would just benefit himself)

-Made a flat tax of 17% (passed because republicans had a complete majority in congress)

-Purchased 10,000 square miles from Liberia (though it would remain part of the country,it was 1/4 of there land)(Start of "the late colonization?) 

-Scandal free

-Created a vast amount of jobs for the country

-Average approval 52%

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1920

Ford/Coolidge (I)(rep) vs Clark/Merdith (dem) vs La Follette/Wheeler (pro)---domination for the popular incumbent

 

Capture.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fords second term

-Continued to build the US economy

-During a visit to Liberia,a Liberian nationalist attempted to assanaite Ford,Ford survived the gunshot wound and proceded to be president

-Liberia becomes a fully incorporated US colony,While Ford continues to work on making another colony in Africa "The peoples republic of africa" (this includes parts of Ethopia,And Somalia)

-Ford helps Germany rebuild after calling the Paris agreement completely one sided,and a war crime to innocent people (prohaps may prevent the rise of Hitler?)

-Ford begins to subsidize farmers,as he already has subsidized coal and steel industries

-Average approval 58%

-Socialism becomes a major,major movement (after the revolutions in Russia are recognized) could do better then Dems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/31/2018 at 4:19 PM, Patine said:

Keep in mind that, although the "Axis" was on paper a cohesive military alliance with unified objectives, and is firmly portrayed as such in strategy games like the classic Axis & Allies, in truth, Japan operated almost entirely in a strategic and political void from the European Axis, trading only declarations and speeches of solidarity and congratulations for each others' military and political victories. There was no meeting of all three Axis leaders (or even very senior military officers from all three nations) during the war in anywhere near an analog to the Tehran or Yalta meetings, or even any plans or attempt for such a meeting. Hitler first heard about the Pearl Harbour bombings the same way most people in the world at the time did - on the radio news.

Will keep it in mind thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1924

Ford/Dawes (I)(rep) vs Bryan/Walsh(dem) vs Debs/Stedman(soc)

 

Capture.PNG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×