Jump to content
270soft Forum

New Historical President RP


Recommended Posts

I gladly accept this offer

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I forgot to say, but New Mexico and Arizona are now States.

1912 Election

Welcome to the election of 1912! For the first time since Liberty half a century ago, it seems that this race will be a landslide, regardless of the Progress-Liberal merger, which has more hurt Progress and the Liberals more than helped due to the shift of the platform. A supermajority of Americans are pro-intervention, so pulling an anti-intervention platform together was a bad move. The Conservative candidate had a few weak points during his term, but no candidate succeeded in pushing those points forward, especially when they made gaffes of their own. 

 

Primaries

There were no significant primaries. 

 

General Election Round 1

Rodgers/Hillsbury (Con) 454 EV 67% PV [All States but the ones below.]

Farnsworth/Spring (Lib) 77 EV 31% PV [UT, SD, IL, AL, GA, SC, NH]

Weaver/Smith (Soc) 0 EV 2% PV

 

RP Note: This election is very important because it is the first landslide in around half a century. The Conservatives used the economy, their opponent's weaknesses, and the accomplishments of the past to put together a solid platform that would even dull their most extreme beliefs. Liberals had a few holdout States, most key being Illinois where the difference between the Conservative vote in pre-election polling so was close that Socialist voters voted Liberal just so they could push them over the edge. The lack of support in the West is directly attributed to the Progress Party's radical shift towards liberalism, losing many of their pro-intervention and anti-big government voters. The Liberal Party's radical shift to being anti-intervention lost them many of their business voters, as the arms industry and the profit off of intervention is high. Labor issues have seemed to have quelled down where even wage workers are voting conservative because of the economy being good for them.

 

Also, as the South is much more industrialized than before, and the fact that race is not been an issue, Southern voters both white and black alike have begun to vote Conservative. The deeper the south, the more reluctant they are to switch however.

 

Congress

Conservatives 70% Senate 60% US Rep

Liberal 30% Senate 28% US Rep

Progress 0% Senate 10% US Rep

Socialists 0% Senate 2% US Rep

RP Note: While Conservatives have swept a supermajority in the Senate, and a majority in the House, a lot of these members are moderates. The Liberal Senate is also pro-intervention for the most part, as they are holding on to the values of their Party. The election merger cost Progress all their Senate seats, and has a house representation similar to the socialists last election.

 

@Reagan04 You will get the SOTU and Events either late tonight or tomorrow morning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kingthero said:

I forgot to say, but New Mexico and Arizona are now States.

1912 Election

Welcome to the election of 1912! For the first time since Liberty half a century ago, it seems that this race will be a landslide, regardless of the Progress-Liberal merger, which has more hurt Progress and the Liberals more than helped due to the shift of the platform. A supermajority of Americans are pro-intervention, so pulling an anti-intervention platform together was a bad move. The Conservative candidate had a few weak points during his term, but no candidate succeeded in pushing those points forward, especially when they made gaffes of their own. 

 

Primaries

There were no significant primaries. 

 

General Election Round 1

Rodgers/Hillsbury (Con) 454 EV 67% PV [All States but the ones below.]

Farnsworth/Spring (Lib) 77 EV 31% PV [UT, SD, IL, AL, GA, SC, NH]

Weaver/Smith (Soc) 0 EV 2% PV

 

RP Note: This election is very important because it is the first landslide in around half a century. The Conservatives used the economy, their opponent's weaknesses, and the accomplishments of the past to put together a solid platform that would even dull their most extreme beliefs. Liberals had a few holdout States, most key being Illinois where the difference between the Conservative vote in pre-election polling so was close that Socialist voters voted Liberal just so they could push them over the edge. The lack of support in the West is directly attributed to the Progress Party's radical shift towards liberalism, losing many of their pro-intervention and anti-big government voters. The Liberal Party's radical shift to being anti-intervention lost them many of their business voters, as the arms industry and the profit off of intervention is high. Labor issues have seemed to have quelled down where even wage workers are voting conservative because of the economy being good for them.

 

Also, as the South is much more industrialized than before, and the fact that race is not been an issue, Southern voters both white and black alike have begun to vote Conservative. The deeper the south, the more reluctant they are to switch however.

 

Congress

Conservatives 70% Senate 60% US Rep

Liberal 30% Senate 28% US Rep

Progress 0% Senate 10% US Rep

Socialists 0% Senate 2% US Rep

RP Note: While Conservatives have swept a supermajority in the Senate, and a majority in the House, a lot of these members are moderates. The Liberal Senate is also pro-intervention for the most part, as they are holding on to the values of their Party. The election merger cost Progress all their Senate seats, and has a house representation similar to the socialists last election.

 

@Reagan04 You will get the SOTU and Events either late tonight or tomorrow morning.

Well this going to be fun to play through being a member of the opposition that is, also I assume this is going to be akin to the GOP domination from 1920 to 1932 IRL?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kingthero said:

The lack of support in the West is directly attributed to the Progress Party's radical shift towards liberalism, losing many of their pro-intervention and anti-big government voters.

Historically, at this time they were isolationist and progressive during this time and would have enthusiastically supported the Progress Party's shift. I made the shift to capture the mood of the West. I understand if the alternate history took a different turn since you took over. See Borah, Norris, La Follette and countless other from US History. To me this result comes off as rather abrupt and inaccurate even for our own RP. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

American Progress Party dissolves; Leaders joins the Liberal Party. 

The party sees the Liberal Party as the only party promising any "Progress," as such they encourage the party leaders and their voters to henceforth become Liberal Party members. And after a large meeting in Milwaukee, they declare their party dead.

Dodge, Folette, and other American Progress Leaders promise to become active members of the Anti-Conservative Coalition. They will play the part of pro-farmer liberals, since a major section of the West follows these values. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, vcczar said:

American Progress Party dissolves; Leaders joins the Liberal Party. 

The party sees the Liberal Party as the only party promising any "Progress," as such they encourage the party leaders and their voters to henceforth become Liberal Party members. And after a large meeting in Milwaukee, they declare their party dead.

Dodge, Folette, and other American Progress Leaders promise to become active members of the Anti-Conservative Coalition. They will play the part of pro-farmer liberals, since a major section of the West follows these values. 

The Leaders of the Socialist Labor Party are mulling over their options considering their poor performance in both the Presidential and Congressional elections.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sen. Dodge declines to lead the western wing of the Liberal Party. Sen. Larry Folette of WI leads the Western Wing and will offer himself henceforth as a VP nominee for the Liberal Party. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@vcczar As if this wasn't in the scope of your RP, the one where a President led for over twenty years in a one party state. Landslides are a realistic outcome if pretty much everything is going good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am really excited to see how re-alignment works now that the Western party has dissolved, and the Conservative reign will ought to fall apart eventually.

 

I'll be posting the decisions and stuff tomorrow likely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Secretary of State Talbot congratulates President Rodgers on his re-election.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kingthero said:

@vcczar As if this wasn't in the scope of your RP, the one where a President led for over twenty years in a one party state. Landslides are a realistic outcome if pretty much everything is going good.

I expected a landslide defeat. Victory wasn't on my radar. But an almost complete defeat in the West--the bulwark of American isolationism (anti-Imperialism)--when two major parties combine to endorse an isolationist platform and a platform that creates a White House Farming Council--basically ushering farmers to the forefront of White House policy, doesn't make much sense. Historically, Bryan's nomination was in part to the reaction to Imperialism--all hugely popular movements (Imperialism, in our case) create a powerful, though smaller, reaction. Bryan was that reaction. In our case, The American Progress Party took up this mantle as no other party did, but also because geographically it held the hearts of those that had no need for imperialism, since the farmers in the West delivered their goods domestically, for the most part, rather than abroad, as was the case with the Eastern portion and the extreme West Coast. Farmers were the dominant profession in the interior West. 

Anyway, I've said what I have to say, and I won't litter the board with my reactions anymore. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Kingthero said:

I forgot to say, but New Mexico and Arizona are now States.

1912 Election

Welcome to the election of 1912! For the first time since Liberty half a century ago, it seems that this race will be a landslide, regardless of the Progress-Liberal merger, which has more hurt Progress and the Liberals more than helped due to the shift of the platform. A supermajority of Americans are pro-intervention, so pulling an anti-intervention platform together was a bad move. The Conservative candidate had a few weak points during his term, but no candidate succeeded in pushing those points forward, especially when they made gaffes of their own. 

 

Primaries

There were no significant primaries. 

 

General Election Round 1

Rodgers/Hillsbury (Con) 454 EV 67% PV [All States but the ones below.]

Farnsworth/Spring (Lib) 77 EV 31% PV [UT, SD, IL, AL, GA, SC, NH]

Weaver/Smith (Soc) 0 EV 2% PV

 

RP Note: This election is very important because it is the first landslide in around half a century. The Conservatives used the economy, their opponent's weaknesses, and the accomplishments of the past to put together a solid platform that would even dull their most extreme beliefs. Liberals had a few holdout States, most key being Illinois where the difference between the Conservative vote in pre-election polling so was close that Socialist voters voted Liberal just so they could push them over the edge. The lack of support in the West is directly attributed to the Progress Party's radical shift towards liberalism, losing many of their pro-intervention and anti-big government voters. The Liberal Party's radical shift to being anti-intervention lost them many of their business voters, as the arms industry and the profit off of intervention is high. Labor issues have seemed to have quelled down where even wage workers are voting conservative because of the economy being good for them.

 

Also, as the South is much more industrialized than before, and the fact that race is not been an issue, Southern voters both white and black alike have begun to vote Conservative. The deeper the south, the more reluctant they are to switch however.

 

Congress

Conservatives 70% Senate 60% US Rep

Liberal 30% Senate 28% US Rep

Progress 0% Senate 10% US Rep

Socialists 0% Senate 2% US Rep

RP Note: While Conservatives have swept a supermajority in the Senate, and a majority in the House, a lot of these members are moderates. The Liberal Senate is also pro-intervention for the most part, as they are holding on to the values of their Party. The election merger cost Progress all their Senate seats, and has a house representation similar to the socialists last election.

 

@Reagan04 You will get the SOTU and Events either late tonight or tomorrow morning.

I’m sorry, but I kind of disagree with a total wipeout of Progress in the Senate. A party with 25% representation wouldn’t get wiped out in one election, regardless of a landslide. You say gaffes but never really detail what they were besides isolationism, when elections rarely are decided on one issue alone. I get why Conservatives won, but I disagree with the magnitude and the way they won, because as president there were mistakes to exploit and you glossed them over. It’s all I’ll really say on the issue, and I get why Conservatives won.

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Hestia11 said:

I’m sorry, but I kind of disagree with a total wipeout of Progress in the Senate. A party with 25% representation wouldn’t get wiped out in one election, regardless of a landslide. You say gaffes but never really detail what they were besides isolationism, when elections rarely are decided on one issue alone. I get why Conservatives won, but I disagree with the magnitude and the way they won, because as president there were mistakes to exploit and you glossed them over. It’s all I’ll really say on the issue, and I get why Conservatives won.

^^^

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't want to keep arguing about this 1912 election, but I agree with Caleb and Hestia, and I want that to be noted on the record. I think this entire 1912 Election needs to be redone. Conservatives can still win, but it needs to be within the realm of reason even for an alternative history. The results in the West and the results in Congress make little sense. It's also as if there was no opposition to American Imperialism, when the whole history of it had a massive reaction to it, which made Bryan possible. I call for a 1912 Election redo, as I think this unrealistic result ruins the RP.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, CalebsParadox said:

^^^

Quote

Party Power: Conservatives are on an upwards trend, while polls project that the other parties will take small losses.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

OOC: I cannot say if a redo makes sense, but if you want to do one I will not obstruct. Landslide elections are not uncommon, taking the RL 1912 Wilson win or Roosevelt’s large victory against Alf Landon 1936. We had ours as well during the Liberty ruling. The total Senate wipe out might be not reasonable, however. Why would South Dakota for example elect a non-progress Senator? I always thought that Congressional elections are subject to the dice roll as well but perhaps that is done randomly based on how someone thinks. Anyway I still love the RP and I am not just saying this because the Conservatives won. 

(I could grumble about the fact that I was never (elected) President and that I was the last time in office 1821, but hey it is a game which makes my boring life a little bit better so I love to check it out everyday even though, not everything might be perfect)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ill answer this later, but note that Progress rolled a 1 on a 1-100 number gen and i used the excuse they swithed liberal. Also VCC completely changed the progress platform where it should be dissolved.

 

If we redo this election, then lets redo Liberty. That was real bullshit and reagan and I never whined about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kingthero said:

Ill answer this later, but note that Progress rolled a 1 on a 1-100 number gen and i used the excuse they swithed liberal. Also VCC completely changed the progress platform where it should be dissolved.

 

If we redo this election, then lets redo Liberty. That was real bullshit and reagan and I never whined about it.

Liberty had a reason, and I stood against Liberty at that point as well, and you didn't see me complain. Progress wasn't supposed to be Liberal or Conservative, but I didn't complain when you lined up against me every administration I had. I never had more than 30% Congress when I was in power, but every time a Conservative is in power they have 40-50% of support. It's bullshit that one party gets 70% of Congress when in your own words "parties were only going to grow by a small margin". It's downright dumb that Progress has no senators left.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Hestia11 @vcczar

 

Wait, I gave 0% senate? I meant 10%, ill fix that even though progress was dissolved.

 

In all fairness, Quincy and the previous Liberal President were great. The only reason you didn’t reach a majority was super shitty luck; also i ran only 3 elections with a new-ish system so I was tinkering numbers.

 

Midterms will likely resurge, think of this time around as a tea party esq surge year.

 

I implemented midterms for a reason, and I hope to see this taken advantage of.

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

@Hestia11 @vcczar

 

Wait, I gave 0% senate? I meant 10%, ill fix that even though progress was dissolved.

 

In all fairness, Quincy and the previous Liberal President were great. The only reason you didn’t reach a majority was super shitty luck; also i ran only 3 elections with a new-ish system so I was tinkering numbers.

 

Midterms will likely resurge, think of this time around as a tea party esq surge year.

Ok, I'll reserve further comment for later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am at work too so I will reread what everyone said too. 

 

also @MBDemSoc you all have 8 and progress has 12 house %. I typed in the wrong numbers. Ill repost the election later

 

@vcczar @Hestia11

 

I messed up the house/senate numbers somehow, will be fixing those in 4-5 hours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The main election numbers were right, however one typo in the calculator gave the conservatives 15 extra house and 15 extra senate. 

 

I apologize sincerely for overlooking this.

 

For the future, question the numbers before the gm; I seriously thought you all were talkin the main election.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Kingthero said:

The main election numbers were right, however one typo in the calculator gave the conservatives 15 extra house and 15 extra senate. 

 

I apologize sincerely for overlooking this.

 

For the future, question the numbers before the gm; I seriously thought you all were talkin the main election.

It's alright, thanks for clearing it up though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Socialist Labor Representative Eric V. Dobs accepts the election results as valid, and promises that the Conservative Party will face significant backlash in the midterms following true implementation of horrid policy. He does however proclaim that he will be retiring from elected politics once he has finished the remainder of his term, and will instead be serving as the president of the Italian Cooperation Organization, which aims to further economic and cultural ties between the United States and Italy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...