Alternate Electoral Maps

[Catalunya]

So when will see Canadian states? And is Quebec independent or part of the Union?

 

[Aaaaasima]

If you're outlining a scenario where Canada is annexed by the United States fairly easily with a POD less than a decade earlier, I think a lot more detail is kind of a necessity.

And aside from the general problem of its plausibility, the United States invading Canada at the height of WWI would almost certainly be seen as the US joining the Central Powers (or at least supporting them) which, tensions with Canada or not, I doubt the Americans would do.

Well, Lusitania never sunk, and the President is Champ Clark, who supported the Canadian-American reciprocity treaty because, to him, it would mark the "end of Canada", and is the reason why the Conservatives won in 1911.

So when will see Canadian states? And is Quebec independent or part of the Union?

Part of the Union. Canadian states would appear in the 1940s

 

[True Grit]

Well, Lusitania never sunk, and the President is Champ Clark, who supported the Canadian-American reciprocity treaty because, to him, it would mark the "end of Canada", and is the reason why the Conservatives won in 1911.

I knew that, but it still seems too short on explanation. For instance, why, with a POD in 1912, would the American public suddenly embrace a war with Canada? Champ Clark can't do it without the support of the country, and in 1912 of OTL, when your POD is, relations between the two countries were relatively fine (worries about trade deals and so forth aside). Keep in mind there was opposition in America to Clark's OTL comments about the "end of Canada," and at least then he wasn't arguing for war.

And even if the Lusitania doesn't sink and the United States doesn't enter World War I (a fair assumption given Clark's OTL opposition), invading Canada during the middle of WWI is still a pretty overwhelming slap in Britain's face and by extension an endorsement of the Central Powers. I mean, they're basically giving Britain two options, abandon Canada (whose foreign affairs, it should be noted, Britain still controlled - including declarations of war) essentially without a fight or defend Canada and lose the war in Europe. Either way, they're effectively aligning with the Central Powers since either way it leaves the Allies with significantly fewer soldiers; they'd clearly be picking a side.

 

[Commissar From Kiev]

I was bored, so I did transplanted the latest presidential election onto the earliest EC map available on this site. Then I did a few more.

Spoiler: 2012 on 1840

Barack Obama: 195 EVs
Mitt Romney: 99 EVs

Spoiler: 2008 on 1844

Barack Obama: 200 EVs
John McCain: 75 EVs

Spoiler: 2004 on 1848

George W. Bush: 149 EVs
John Kerry: 141 EVs

 

[Wendell]

Taking back the state: Part III

Joe Biden/Barack Obama: 52,893,207 (40.28%), 308 EV
Rudy Giuliani/Mike Huckabee: 46,288,122 (35.25%), 199 EV
Tom Golisano/Lincoln Chafee: 29,690,055 (22.61%), 31 EV
Golisano announced his run in February of 2008 for the Independence Party, their first federal-level endorsement ever. His campaign gained little traction until August, when the stock market crash and oncoming recession led to a surge in the polls, peaking at 33%, barely ahead of Obama and Giuliani. running a vaguely centrist campaign, he blamed both the Democrats and Republicans for the recession, and touted his success as Governor to undermine Giuliani's own successes and Obama's inexperience. However, Biden's superior ground game and Obama's charisma won over voters in most states, and pulled him into a double-digit lead by October. Golisano's three divorces and mediocre debate performance also hurt him, although Giuliani and Biden made several gaffes throughout the debates as well. On election day, Golisano carried his home state of New York, which Biden had more or less ignored due to its strong Democratic lean, becoming the first third-party candidate to win a state since George Wallace. Additonally, he placed second in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Utah, and Vermont.
Golisano returned to New York to finish his term and ruled himself out for another run due to his age, leading to wild speculation on what would become of the New York Independence Party, a state party now eligible for federal funds...​

I would have expected a greater net effect beyond New York. Also, Lincoln Chafee? Really?

 

[kodak]

I would have expected a greater net effect beyond New York. Also, Lincoln Chafee? Really?

I couldn't think of any centrist independent types who would fit outside of New York.

 

[Wendell]

I couldn't think of any centrist independent types who would fit outside of New York.

Angus King
Douglas Wilder
David Boren
Richard Lamm
Chuck Hagel, who felt alienated by the way the GOP was moving
Larry Pressler
Jerry Brown, whose name came up as a possible Perot running mate back in the day.
Tim Penny
Jesse Ventura
Norm Coleman, who changed parties

 

[wilcoxchar]

Last night, looking at New York's elections, I had the idea of doing a series of maps for the gubernatorial elections with the Democrats and Republicans removed. Since New York has electoral fusion, it should be interesting. First up, 1994 and 1998 since 1994 is the furthest back the New York State Board of Elections site goes. For the vote percentages, I'm only showing parties that received at least 5% of the total third party vote.

1994:

Conservative (George Pataki): 42.40%
Independence (Tom Golisano): 28.07%
Liberal (Mario Cuomo): 11.86%
Right to Life (Robert T. Walsh): 8.75%
Tax Cut Now (George Pataki): 6.98%

1998:

Independence (Tom Golisano): 36.66%
Conservative (George Pataki): 35.12%
Liberal (Betsy McCaughey): 7.85%
Right to Life (Michael Reynolds): 5.71%
Green (Al Lewis): 5.29%
Working Families (Peter Vallone): 5.17%

Already it's interesting as you can see the replacement of the Liberals with the Working Families Party is already underway. The area outside of New York City, at this time dominated by Pataki and the Republicans, also becomes more varied with the increased prominence of the Independence Party. I'm surprised Working Families managed to win Manhattan when they only got just over 5% of the third party vote total. It turns out the Working Families received a quarter of their statewide vote from Manhattan in 1998.

 

[prime-minister]

And We Shall Overcome: 1984

1988

If Schlafly's first term was a high tide for American conservatism, her second was where that tide subsided dramatically. Her attitude to Russia, even with the reformative overtures of Gorbachev developing, remained steadfast, and she was unapologetic when the Iran-Contra affair came out, declaring America to be 'standing defiantly against the forces of socialism'. These remarks did not go down well with British Prime Minister Denis Healey, who soundly denounced her 'irresponsibility' and inflammatory language, with some commentators suggesting this could cause 'the breakdown of the Special Relationship'.

Worse, when Black Monday hit the US economy in October 1987, Schlafly not only adamantly denied there was any evidence of economic decline, but encouraged legislation fostering the decline of the S&L (savings and loan) businesses which, despite declining (as the Conservatives asserted), could have allowed for a rapid rebound. Their collapse effectively caused the crash to deepen into a recession by 1988.

Sensing the governing party's weakness, both the Democrats and the Republicans were quick to go on the attack. The Democratic nominee was populist Representative Dick Gephardt of Missouri, with his running mate being former Governor of Massachusetts Michael Dukakis. Despite running on an economically populist ticket, Dukakis' social liberalism came under heavy fire from his opponents.

Heading up the Republican side was Illinois Senator Paul Simon, who ran on a fiscally prudent and socially moralistic ticket (which he termed 'pay-as-you-go economics'), balancing out his apparent radicalism with the experienced Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords, who did his best to make his own mark on the ticket, although some have argued he caused the ticket to seem somewhat divided.

The Conservatives ended up shooting themselves in the foot, badly. The nomination came down to Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, a more standard fiscal and social conservative, and the white supremacist activist David Duke of Louisiana. In spite of his involvement with the KKK and intense hatred of him outside of Conservative circles, the primaries saw him gain a wafer-thin advantage over Gramm which allowed him to clinch the nomination, with President Schlafly's endorsement. His running mate was the Virginian televangelist Pat Robertson. In spite of enthusiasm from purist Conservatives, they had little chance of convincing the general public they did not espouse racism (in fact, Duke and Schlafly made no pretense about not caring about minority voters).

Simon/ Jeffords (Republican): 272 EVs, 45.8%
Gephardt/ Dukakis (Democratic): 200 EVs, 43.2%
Duke/ Robertson (Conservative): 66 EVs, 9.4%

The sheer scale of the collapse in the Conservative vote was staggering. What proved most surprising, however, was not the party's disastrous showing in the national popular vote, but the faltering of its chokehold on the South, with three ardently conservative states- Arkansas, Tennessee and North Carolina- falling to the Republicans by narrow margins, as well as the party holding Georgia in a tight three-way contest and all their other states being won by dramatically slashed pluralities (for they only won majorities in Alabama and Duke's native Louisiana).

As for the national race, Simon eeked out a victory in the Electoral College against a surprisingly strong Democratic challenge, with both benefiting from the Conservative collapse. The election was effectively decided in Texas, where a tight victory for Simon gave the Republicans an overall majority, although the Democrats trailed by less than three points in that state, plus Michigan and Ohio; winning all three would have put Gephardt in the White House.

Nevertheless, Republicans were delighted by their victory, despite the move to the right Simon somewhat represented. In complete contrast, the Conservatives seemed poised to split apart, with intense divisions between the social conservatives like Schlafly, racially motivated politicians like Duke (who there had been efforts to have expelled), and economic conservatives like their next nominee.

(Sorry I haven't updated this scenario in forever, and that it's kinda going off the rails now.)

 

[prime-minister]

America's Champ: Part II-1916
"I look forward to the time when the American flag will fly over every square foot of British North America up to the North Pole."
-Champ Clark, 1911

Champ Clark always wanted Canada inside the United States, everyone knew that. When he became president, he wanted Canada by "any means nessecary" (2nd pod)
but realized that public opinion was against the war, so he ditched the idea. However, it all changed one day, January 27th, 1915: Two brothers from
Littlefork, Minnesota, were chasing after their dog. However, when they got close to the Canadian border, they were shot by a Canadian border guard. The
story sent shockwaves across the country, and public opinion was against Canada (3rd pod). Clark realized that this was his oppurtinity, and asked congress
to declare war on Canada, and the United Kingdom in general. A vote of 289-146 in favor of war caused Clark to declare war. The central powers were
ecstatic, that the British were fighting another war. Also, Lusitiania was never sunk (4th pod). When 1916 arrived, the "rally around the flag" effect
happened to Clark. Many Republicans wanted to wait until 1920. In the end, at the convention, Martin G. Brumbaugh was nominated for President, while
James Gillett was nominated for Vice President. Brumbaugh/Gillett were in support of the war, and didn't dare criticize Clark for it. In the end, Clark
won a comfortable victory over his opponents.

Champ Clark/Judson Harmon (Democratic), 343 Electoral votes, 9,169,536 Popular votes
Martin G. Brumbaugh/James Gillett (Republican), 188 Electoral votes, 6,836,224 Popular votes

I'm sorry but that was literally the first thing that popped into my head when I read this scenario.

 

[wilcoxchar]

I ended up finishing the other maps pretty quickly so here's the rest!

2002:

Independence (Tom Golisano): 62.28%
Conservative (George Pataki): 16.84%
Working Families (Carl McCall): 8.62%

2006:

Independence (Eliot Spitzer): 32.28%
Conservative (John Faso): 28.55%
Working Families (Eliot Spitzer): 26.27%
Green Party (Malachy McCourt): 7.14%

It's very fair to say 2002 was the Independence Party's height. That map looks more like a recolored Pataki victory map if you ignore Manhattan and the Bronx. 2006 seems more "normal". It's interesting to see how quick the shift of western New York to solid Conservative territory is since the Independence Party got a lot of its early support in the Rochester area and Golisano actually won Monroe County in 2002 in OTL.


2010:

Conservative (Carl Paladino): 30.80%
Working Families (Andrew Cuomo): 20.54%
Independence (Andrew Cuomo): 19.44%
Green Party (Howie Hawkins): 7.95%
Libertarian (Warren Redlich): 6.42%
Rent is Too Damn High (Jimmy MacMillan): 5.46%

2014:

Conservative (Rob Astorino): 32.70%
Green Party (Howie Hawkins): 24.11%
Working Families (Andrew Cuomo): 16.47%
Independence (Andrew Cuomo): 10.15%
Women's Equality (Andrew Cuomo): 7.02%
Stop Common Core (Rob Astorino): 6.69%

Goodbye Independence Party, hello Green Party! The Hudson Valley was frequently very close between the Conservatives and the Greens, while the Conservative base in the western part of the state still pushed them into the lead. Hawkins' performance in 2014 was the best performance for a non-Democrat-or-Republican candidate since Tom Golisano. Also notable in 2010 is the height of the Libertarian Party. The Libertarians actually got second among the third parties in Albany County with 3,483 votes to the Conservatives' 4,819.

It's interesting how the Conservatives remain a constant powerful minor party in New York, while the minor leftist and centrist parties seem to come and go but don't quite have the staying power since the death of the Liberals.

Also with 2014: Cuomo has 33.64% total. Without the Democrats and GOP, Astorino would only win because of Stop Common Core.

 

[Superman]

The first of new set of electoral "basemaps" using 2012 as a base:

90% Democratic - D+20%
70% Democratic - D+15%
50% Democratic - D+10%
30% Democratic - D+5%
Grey - Between D+5% and R+5%
30% Republican - R+5%
50% Republican - R+10%
70% Republican - R+15%
90% Republican - R+20%

This set uses "racial" demographics. This first map is for "whites". Nationally, "whites" voted for Romney 58.5%-39.6%, and only voted for Obama in New England, New York, Iowa, DC, and Hawaii. This map shows how Democratic or Republican each states' "white" population was compared to the national "white" vote.

 

[Superman]

For "blacks":

This one was very boring because the "black" vote is very uniformly solid Democratic throughout the nation. I might go back and redo these two with more shades.

 

[Deblano]

Romney does 5% better in each county in 2012.

Romney/Ryan: 275 EV 49.7%
Obama/Biden: 263 EV 48.6%

 

[Superman]

"Hispanics":

 

[Zek Sora]

"basemaps" "racial" "whites" "blacks"

 

[Superman]

You're right, I forgot to put quotations around "Hispanics". Fixed.

 

[Superman]

"Asians"/"others":

 

[Archangel Michael]

What's with the quotation marks?

 

[Commissar From Kiev]

"Hispanics":

I think Trumpers will change that