Abe Lincoln Posted January 4, 2008 Share Posted January 4, 2008 This is the scenario, it's 2016 and the supreme court is in the process of possibly declaring parties a type of trust. Therefore, while parties still excist they have lost a lot of momentem. For the purpose of this scenrio there are 2 parties, the democrat and republican, but 3 other "classifactions, Libreal Independent, Conservitive Independent, and Centrist Independent. I'm looking for suggestions on canidates and issues, the current issues I'm thinking of are Parties, Definition of Trust, Iran War (supposing we invaded there), and I'm looking for more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big M Posted January 5, 2008 Share Posted January 5, 2008 I tink it would be a good idea to have atleast one candidate who is a ture Social Democrat. A candidate simlar to Canadas Belinda Stronach would be good for the Democrats or Liberal Independant. By similar I mean candidate who is a Social Democrat, pro-union but also pro-business. Im sure the US must have a politician like this and it dont have to be woman, because it can also be a man but it wouldnt matter as long as they are a Social Democrat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Lincoln Posted January 5, 2008 Author Share Posted January 5, 2008 Good idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hcallega Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 This seems like a good idea. I can help by finding a bevy of good candidates and then plugging in their platform and bios. As far as a Social Democratic Party, their definatly has to be one. Several possible social dems would be Rahm Emanuel who pushed NAFTA while being very pro-union, John Dingell: Not pro-free trade, but very much a social democrat, Denis Kucinich, Barbara Lee, and possibly John Edwards. I would also suggest making the Parties more European in nature. That would mean Labor, Liberal, Social Dems, Greens, Conservatives, Natural Law, and, what they heck, Libertarian. I would also support eliminating the Dems and Republicans to truly shake things up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Lincoln Posted January 6, 2008 Author Share Posted January 6, 2008 Well the idea that parties are frowned upon (in this scenario,read above) would mean few parties but everything else you said is good. We could have a socialist independent classifaction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Lincoln Posted January 6, 2008 Author Share Posted January 6, 2008 Canidates (so far) Republicans Romney Huckabee Condoleezza Rice Arnold Schwarzenegger (A law allows him to in this scenario) Mike Sanford Democrats Nancy Pelosi Bill Richardson Deval Patrick Conservitive Independents Bloomberg Mark Warner Libreal Independents Nader Obama Centerist Independents John P. Reisman James Grier Miller Socialist Independents Denis Kucinich Barbara Lee Russ Feingold Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kheldin Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 I'd drop Paul, Nader, Gore and Pelosi on age grounds, since we'll be eight years in the future. For the Republicans, I'd add Bobby Jindal of Lousiana, and Matt Blunt of Missouri, and Sarah Palin from Alaska. Democrats: Deval Patrick from Massachussets and perhaps Evan Bayh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHorberg Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 I'd drop Gore (Nixon staged a comeback 8 years after he lost to Kennedy but a 16 year comeback seems like a stretch) as well as Clinton. She's either going to win the 2008 election or she's not. And while the incumbent's VP is probably going to be running in 2016 I find it beyond the realm of possibility that Obama, Edwards, or even Richardson would tap Clinton to be their VP. Here's some of the candidates I would use- Democrats After serving President Obama for eight years Vice-President Bill Richardson runs for the nomination unopposed Republicans Ex-governor and former vice-presidential candidate in 2012- Mike Sanford (SC) Senator Jodi Rell (CT) Conservative Independents Senator Mark Warner Socialist Independents Senator Russ Feingold Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Lincoln Posted January 6, 2008 Author Share Posted January 6, 2008 Alright that sounds good, I'll edit the canidate post. Canidates edited Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 Mark Warner is NOT conservative! Trust me on that one. I'd put him as a moderate. Also, could we have Senator Al Franken running? It'd be fun. He could be a Democrat or Social Democrat. Also, instead of Roy Blunt, we could have Jay Nixon. Blunt is losing to Nixon. I tend to agree with FM that getting rid of the major parties would be more fun. The question is who is in charge of Congress? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Lincoln Posted January 6, 2008 Author Share Posted January 6, 2008 A couple upadates. Party camidates will have an edge in funds while independents will have an edge in support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 I think we should do away with the parties. It is too difficult to tell who would run as a Democrat as opposed to an indie. I think there should be five parties (obviously with better names): LIBERAL Sen. Russel Feingold Sen. Al Franken Gov. Deval Patrick Rep. John Hall CENTER LEFT Sen. Mark Warner Gov. Ted Strickland Rep. Rahm Emanuel Sen. Bob Casey Rep. Harold Ford CENTERIST Gov. Arnold Swarchenegger Sen. Mark Pryor Rep. Heath Shuler Fmr. Sen. Lincoln Chafee Gov. Lincoln Davis CENTER RIGHT Sen. Bob Corker Gov. Charlie Crist Gov. Christine Todd Whitman CONSERVATIVE Gov. Bobby Jindal Gov. Mike Sanford Sen. John Thune Mr. Sean Hannity Gov. Jeb Bush Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hcallega Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 That sounds like a great idea to me. Here are the names that would make sense: Liberal: Social Democrat Center Left: Progressive Center: Labor Center Right: Conservative Conservative: Little stuck here since there aren't that many Right-Wing political parties that are still mainstream (i.e. not fascist). I'm thinking something along the lines of Natural Law/Nationalist/Constitution Party Plus, it seems as though your a little light on the Right I would replace Lincoln Chafee with Florida Gov. Charlie Christ, as he is more relavent and Chafee is more center/center-left anyway Also, add in Lincoln Davis to the center. hes a democratic house member from tenn. who is the favorite for governor If you can send this to me i can add other candidates as well hcallega@yahoo.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 I added the guys you said. I want Chafee in; I think that he would do well under a non-partisan system. I know I'm a little thin on the Republican side. I need help there, I don't see too many up and coming Republicans. As far as party names, I like yours. I would tweak them, though. PROGRESSIVE NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY BLUE DOG INDEPENDENTS ???????????? CONSERVATIVE I'm trying to match them up a little with their respective Congressional Caucuses (Progressive is the left, New Dems are the center left and Blue Dog is the Center). I don't have a center right name, I would like to maybe seperate the Theocons from the Neocons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hcallega Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 The Chafee thing makes sense. As far as the center-right party how about constitution party. After all, it seems less conservative than conservative, but it seems like something that republicans would call it. Also, i think Blue Dogs seems rather odd for a party name, maybe labor since that is the moderate party in Europe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 The Chafee thing makes sense. As far as the center-right party how about constitution party. After all, it seems less conservative than conservative, but it seems like something that republicans would call it. Also, i think Blue Dogs seems rather odd for a party name, maybe labor since that is the moderate party in Europe. Constitution would work. Blue Dogs are the conservative wing of the Democratic party. It is an odd name, yes, but I think that it fits. I'm a little bit hesitant to name the party Labor, as Big Labor would be more inclined to endorse the Progressives or New Dems. Also, I think there is still room for more candidates. In such a huge reallignment, I think a lot of people would decide to give it a go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHorberg Posted January 6, 2008 Share Posted January 6, 2008 This is kind of a crazy idea I'm just throwing out there- Instead of grouping along partisan lines would candidates group around regional lines? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Lincoln Posted January 6, 2008 Author Share Posted January 6, 2008 I think we should do away with the parties. It is too difficult to tell who would run as a Democrat as opposed to an indie. I think there should be five parties (obviously with better names):PROGRSSIVE Sen. Russel Feingold Sen. Al Franken Gov. Deval Patrick Rep. John Hall NEW DEMOCRATS Sen. Mark Warner Gov. Ted Strickland Rep. Rahm Emanuel Sen. Bob Casey Rep. Harold Ford BLUE DOGS Gov. Arnold Swarchenegger Sen. Mark Pryor Rep. Heath Shuler Fmr. Sen. Lincoln Chafee Gov. Lincoln Davis CONSTITUION Sen. Bob Corker Gov. Charlie Crist Gov. Christine Todd Whitman CONSERVATIVE Gov. Bobby Jindal Gov. Mike Sanford Sen. John Thune Mr. Sean Hannity Gov. Jeb Bush I like your idea. Also I substitutired in the different names I think we're good on the canidates, but now we now we need issues. Here's mine so far. Political Parties Unions Free Trade Iran Middle East Tax Puerto Rico (it wants to become a state in this scenario) Global Warming Politican Wages Oil Russia China Draft I had a couple other ideas for the scenario. Realations with China and Russia are at a boiling point and with US troops still in the Middle East & at war with Iran things arn't looking good. They're considering a draft. If you have any ideas for more issues post them. Also I'm going to need a lot of help researching all the canidates. 1 more thing if you have an idea of what each poltical belief (Far-Left, Left, Center Left, Center, Center-Right, Right, Far-Right) should be for an issue (i.e. Far Right believe no taxs) please post it here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Posted January 7, 2008 Share Posted January 7, 2008 Political Parties Unions Free Trade Iran Middle East Tax Puerto Rico (it wants to become a state in this scenario) Global Warming Politican Wages Oil Russia China Draft I think that we need to determine who won the 2008 and 2012 elections before we continue. If we are at War with Iran, and Republican is likely in office. Also, who controls Congress? Odds are there will be quite a few ties in the electoral college. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Lincoln Posted January 7, 2008 Author Share Posted January 7, 2008 In that case let's say McCain won the 08' & '12 elections. Also let's say the Democrats control the House and the Republicans control the Senate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hcallega Posted January 8, 2008 Share Posted January 8, 2008 hmmmm........That makes matters more difficult. Honestly, it looks like Obama is the current favorite, but honestly, to be safe, just don't make either party the incumbent and leave out congressional and presidential endorsers. P.S.: I am doing a version of this for 2008. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHorberg Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 Yeah, well Clinton was the hands down favorite 6 months ago and look what happened there. Besides, the last time neither party had an incumbent president/VP running was 1952, what are the odds of it happening twice in less than a decade? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abe Lincoln Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 Also McCain is the leading strong pro-war canidate which best fits the scenario. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.