Republicans, Democrats, and Populists, Oh My!

[Cylon_Number_14]

POD: Samuel Tilden (D-NY) wins the Electoral Votes of California by only 1003 votes, gaining him 51% of the Electoral College and 51% of the Popular Vote, regardless of the disputations in South Carolina, Florida, and Louisiana. In 1877 Samuel Tilden is inaugurated as President of the United States without any controversy. President Tilden is reelected in 1880.[FONT=&quot]

[/FONT] [FONT=&quot]1884 – 1892: [FONT=&quot]The Democratic candidate Grover Cleveland of New York wins the Presidential Elections of 1884 and 1888, both despite losing the popular vote to the Republican, but being elected only by winning the Electoral Votes of the state of New York; that state becomes the absolute focus of both parties’ political machinations, much to the detriment of the western states. The Republicans during this time hold the majority in the Senate while the Democrats hold the majority in the House of Representatives. The Populist Party is founded in 1888 by disaffected citizens primarily of the western states and territories. Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming are admitted as states in 1891; Dakota is not admitted until 1892 when it acquiesces to admittance as only one state, rather than as northern and southern components.[/FONT][/FONT]

View attachment 97771

This is a rough draft kind of political history TL with not too much depth, but I do have it written out to about 1925. I do not know how to post more than one picture per post so it will be posted in several units. Also, I hope my map shows up and is not too huge. Where do those very nice US Electoral Maps that everybody uses around here come from?
[FONT=&quot]


[/FONT]

 

[Cylon_Number_14]

The Election of 1892

[FONT=&quot]1892: [/FONT][FONT=&quot]The Populist Party contests the General Election of 1892 against the Democrats and Republicans, sending the Presidential Election into the Congress for the first time since 1824. Democrat David Hill of New York receives 217 EVs and 44.5 % of the popular vote; Republican John Sherman of Ohio receives 193 EVs and 41.5% of the popular vote; and Populist James Weaver of Iowa receives 32 EVs and 11.5% of the popular vote. Democrat David Hill is promptly elected to the Presidency while the Republican Adlai Stevenson of Illinois wins the Vice Presidency. This is the first “cohabitation” administration since the administration of John Adams and Thomas Jefferson prior to the 12th Amendment.

[/FONT]View attachment 97773


As you can see, the Populists have not done much better than OTL yet, but the Electoral Votes from other states fell differently, resulting in the election being finished in the Congress. This serves to show to the public that the Populists can have a national impact, encouraging their supporters to stick with them in 1894 and 1896, as we shall see. I am assuming (for now) that in broad strokes there has not been much change to US or world history compared to OTL in the 1870s and 1880s.

 

[NKVD]

How does the election of Tilden effect Reconstruction?

 

[OAM47]

Very interesting. I actually like your map better then the standard one everyone else uses.

 

[GreatScottMarty]

I'd love more depth. I agree this map is bigger and better than the standard one; which comes from Wikipedia.com FYI.

 

[Workable Goblin]

How does the election of Tilden effect Reconstruction?

It probably stops it earlier because the Democrats were really getting into their version of the 'Southern Strategy' around this time. OTL, of course, Hayes ended Reconstruction, but certain compromises had to be made. ITTL, not so much.

 

[Cylon_Number_14]

How does the election of Tilden effect Reconstruction?

I generally think it will end fairly quickly and without much fanfare or difference from OTL, but I would like input on this and other US major events from 1877 to 1897 that would be different with the Bourbon Democrats totally in charge.

I plan on posting these minimal, election-oriented rough draft entries first so my ultimate goal can be fullfilled: a path to serious electoral system reform and multi-party politics in the United States.

Hopefully I will then be able to flesh this out as a Mark II timeline that includes stronger butterflies and interesting details

 

[Cylon_Number_14]

Election of 1896 and an Era of Divided Government

[FONT=&quot]1896: [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Former Democrat William Jennings Bryan of Kansas runs for President on the Populist ticket due to the continued domination of the Democratic Party by the New York Machine and Southern Redeemers, and the Republican obsession with seizing control of New York from the Democrats. Bryan earns the 89 Electoral Votes of the twelve states of the West plus Missouri and Kentucky, and 14.3% of the popular vote. The Republican candidate William McKinley of Ohio wins the election with 244 EVs and 40.8% of the popular vote; incumbent President David Hill receives only 112 EVs despite winning 42.0% of the popular vote. Perhaps unduly ominous is the Electoral Map which shows that the Democrats only won the Electoral Votes of the old Confederacy.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]1900 - 1912: [/FONT][FONT=&quot]William McKinley wins reelection to the White House against the Democratic and Populist nominees. In 1904 the Republican Philander Knox of Pennsylvania is elected President with a majority of Electoral Votes despite the Democrat winning the most popular votes; he is reelected in 1908 with the most popular votes.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The Populist Party under William Jennings Bryan campaigns continuously against the “machine politics” of the Democratic and Republican parties and works with Eugene Debs to merge with the moderate elements of his socialist party and urban organizations. The Populist Party of the early 20th Century mixes populism, agrarianism, and social liberalism to be the first ideologically “left wing” party to make serious gains in Congress. The number of Populist governors, state legislators, Congressmen, and Senators increases after each national election, with the Populists becoming a viable opposition party even in the Deep South. Due to Populist victories, there is no majority party in the Senate after 1906, though the Republicans are only one seat short. “First past the post” election rules translate numerous Republican pluralities into a House of Representatives majority maintained since 1893.[/FONT]
View attachment 97827

 

[Cylon_Number_14]

The Electoral College has some Issues

[FONT=&quot]1912: [/FONT][FONT=&quot]No Candidate wins the Presidential Election of 1912, sending the three-way contest into the Congress for the first time since 1892. Republican Charles Evans Hughes of New York won 191 EVs and 32.9% of the popular vote; Democrat Thomas Marshall of Indiana won 178 EVs and 32.6% of the popular vote; Populist Ignatius Klee of Missouri wins 162 EVs and 32.5% of the popular vote. This marks the first Presidential Election in which the candidate with the most popular votes won a smaller proportion than Abraham Lincoln did in 1860.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Due to the rules for block-votes in the House of Representatives, the Republican majority is incapable of selecting their candidate without outside help. Both the Democrats and Populists are wary of helping the other win the Presidency, as the Populist Party has since 1892 actively striven to replace the Democrats as the second major party in the United States’ two-party system. In the Senate, enough Populists vote for the Democratic candidate to elect him on a vote of forty-six to forty-four. Democratic members of the House of Representatives swing the state block-votes to the Populist, granting Ignatius Klee the twenty-three block-votes necessary for election to the Presidency with only a significant minority of individual votes. The Republican Party excoriates the results, pointing out that they had received the most popular and Electoral votes and that even though a majority of Representatives had voted for their candidate, he had lost.[/FONT]
View attachment 97828


[FONT=&quot]1914-1916: [/FONT][FONT=&quot]The Populists win enough seats in 1914 to leave neither chamber with a majority party. The Great War in Europe, which erupted in the summer of 1914, dominates the issues of the whole world.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]President Ignatius Klee runs for reelection. The Republicans re-nominate Governor Charles Evans Hughes of New York, while the Democrats nominate Senator George Chamberlain of Oregon. Again, no candidate wins a majority of Electoral Votes and the election is thrown into the Congress; Charles Evans Hughes again wins the most EVS with Ignatius Klee in second place. President Klee wins 206 EVs and 34.1% of the popular vote; Governor Hughes wins 185 EVs and 33.4% of the popular vote; Senator Chamberlin wins 145 EVs and 27.7% of the popular vote.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In the Congressional elections, the Populists add to their numbers in both chambers, and become the second largest party in Congress, behind the Republican plurality.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Left to choose between the Republican and Populist candidates for the Vice Presidency, the Democrats select the Republican despite the commanding plurality of EVs won by the Populist. In the House of Representatives, the Democrats cast the deciding votes that elect the Republican Charles Evans Hughes.


I admit to creating a historical character with a strange name; he is a kind of placeholder before I do more detailed research , and also I am one to believe in the butterfly effect placing some totally unknown people into places of power after a generation.
[/FONT]

 

[Cylon_Number_14]

The End of the TL so far: And yes, I glossed over WW1

[FONT=&quot]1920: [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Once again, no candidate earns a majority of Electoral Votes in United States Presidential Election. President Charles Evans Hughes wins 231 EVs and 35.0% of the popular vote; Populist Senator Joseph Socrates of Rhode Island wins 151 EVs and 32.8% of the popular vote; Democrat Senator John W. Davis of West Virginia wins 149 EVs and 26.2% of the popular vote.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Again, the Democratic members of Congress arrange for the candidates who did not win the most votes to be elected President and Vice President: the Populists take the White House even as the incoming Congress holds strong Republican pluralities. The Republicans and Populists realize that the Democrats plan to play eternal kingmaker and prevent either party from gaining power by alternating them through the Presidency.[/FONT]
View attachment 97829

[FONT=&quot]To rectify this situation, the Republican and Populist parties join forces to pass two Amendments through the Congress. The Seventeenth Amendment, passed by the Congress in 1921 and ratified by the states in 1922, mandates the direct election of Senators and mandates that elections for Representatives and Senators must use some form of run-off system; the states are left to choose between a simple two-round system and instant-runoff-voting.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The Eighteenth Amendment, passed by Congress in 1921 and ratified by the states in 1923, abolishes the Electoral College in favor of direct voting for a ticket of a Presidential and Vice Presidential candidate. In the event that no candidate ticket earns at least forty-five percent of the national popular vote, the incoming Congress assembles during the second week of January for the contingent election between the three tickets that received the most votes. Representatives and Senators sit together as one body and vote as individuals on secret ballots; on the eleventh ballot the ticket earning the fewest votes is eliminated; if after an additional eleven ballots no ticket has receive a majority (due to abstaining votes or absent members) the ticket who receives the most votes on the next ballot wins.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Having passed before the middle of 1923, these amendments take effect in time for the Elections of 1924.

So, this is as far as I have written; and my goal of serious electoral reform in the US is realized. How would such a system as described above affect politics in the US, if the world situation is substantially unchanged?

Speaking of that situation, I admit to not being sure what major changes there would be in the US and World due to this altered political climate during the Gilded Age; I know in broad strokes what happened, but honestly I don't feel that the US Congress here would act any different than OTL on issues of historical importance.
[/FONT]

 

[Workable Goblin]

This is probably going to lead to either a semi-presidential system or reform in the process of electing Presidents (or both) very quickly, what with Presidents constantly being elected by Congress.

 

[marl_d]

only thing is that you'll have States and people argue that a direct vote of the President will lead to a system where the Candidates only go the the most Populated portions of the country (IE East Cost, Chicago, Detroit, and parts of the West Cost) and leave out every where else

 

[NKVD]

What would be the Populist position on the Great War?

 

[Cylon_Number_14]

truth is life: I agree about the semi-presidential system because now when the Party selects Candidates, it has to seriously consider nominating someone that is liked by all the congressmen of his party, and has some bipartisan support.

marl_d: In a similar vein to the above, a Candidate has to be someone that Representatives and Senators from All Across the country can tolerate, since they will most likely be the ultimate electors.

Morgan: I would think the Populists will be quite against the war, but not too extreme. The President however may go so far as to call it a war of "Anachronistic Autocrats & Unscrupulous Industrialists drowning each other in the blood of the Common Man"

Here are my thoughts on the ultimate evolution of the Three Parties, to this day; the short Wikipedia categorization version:

Republicans: Classical Liberalism & Conservative Liberalism (Centrist)
Democrats: Conservative Liberalism & Liberal Conservatism (Center-Right)
Populists: Social Liberalism & Agrarianism (Center-Left)

 

[NKVD]

Morgan: I would think the Populists will be quite against the war, but not too extreme. The President however may go so far as to call it a war of "Anachronistic Autocrats & Unscrupulous Industrialists drowning each other in the blood of the Common Man"

With the number of Populists in Congress, a declaration of war would never pass. Unless of course they were convinced to jump on the bandwagon. Their agrarian base, though, would probably be more concerned about the situation at home, rather than what is going on in Europe.

Here are my thoughts on the ultimate evolution of the Three Parties, to this day; the short Wikipedia categorization version:

Republicans: Classical Liberalism & Conservative Liberalism (Centrist)
Democrats: Conservative Liberalism & Liberal Conservatism (Center-Right)
Populists: Social Liberalism & Agrarianism (Center-Left)

I like the sound of that, but as time goes on, each party would probably shift ideologically. The great ideological shifts we saw IOTL wouldn't happen, if you decide to leave the U.S. out of the Great War. That would mean no World War II (as we know it), no baby boom generation, no Cold War, etc.

 

[Yelnoc]

Did you mean these maps?

ex.

 

[NKVD]

If you're going to have popular vote decide the election, I'd suggest that from now on you shade each state, in accordance to percentage. Like on the Election Atlas website.

 

[OAM47]

only thing is that you'll have States and people argue that a direct vote of the President will lead to a system where the Candidates only go the the most Populated portions of the country (IE East Cost, Chicago, Detroit, and parts of the West Cost) and leave out every where else

And that's different then the current system how?

 

[NKVD]

And that's different then the current system how?

Well, in the current system, campaigns focus on a select few "swing states." In this system, campaigns would focus on states with the largest populations. It really is a weak argument, when you consider that there have been elections where one of the candidates didn't campaign at all. It's not like there would be a huge loss for the people in these states.

 

[OAM47]

Well, in the current system, campaigns focus on a select few "swing states." In this system, campaigns would focus on states with the largest populations. It really is a weak argument, when you consider that there have been elections where one of the candidates didn't campaign at all.

My point is that its still only a few regions. Big whoop if they change in location.