Hence I’m wondering why there hasn’t been a push toward removing the “first past the post” system in the US.I have a feeling that left wing voters more inclined towards social progressivism vote Democrat while those more inclined towards economic progressivism vote Whig. At the end of the day a two party system still necessitates big tent accommodations to some extent.
Leftists aren't really a unified group TTL. Some hold their noses and vote for the Whigs because of economics, and others gravitate to the Greens, which sees some success at the local level in Louisiana and Florida.Good lord, I remember now .
I figured under this new system, the US would've tried pushing for a different electoral system by now. I imagine there's an untapped potential for the various leftists,
This is awesome! Consider it the official logo of the Chetniks
The Democrats aren't exactly socially progressive, as President Breathitt rolled back elements of the Whigs' law legalizing gay marriage, but they aren't particularly socially conservative either. Left wingers would probably still vote for the Whigs on social issues like gay marriage, unless immigration reform is a top priority for them.I have a feeling that left wing voters more inclined towards social progressivism vote Democrat while those more inclined towards economic progressivism vote Whig. At the end of the day a two party system still necessitates big tent accommodations to some extent.
Lol blursed how?“Richmond Chetniks”
The blursed, oh god, the Blursed is too much 😂💀
Mostly because both the Whigs and Democrats benefit a lot from FPTP.Hence I’m wondering why there hasn’t been a push toward removing the “first past the post” system in the US.
1. Yeah, they're about as popular as pro football, but the South doesn't go as nuts for the Iron Bowl as they do for, say, a Tigers vs. Hawks game.I remember when I was attending my mother's methodist church and people getting ready to leave Sunday service to get home before the football game started. So here are some football questions ?
1. Is state and college football as popular as professional football.
2. Do the states allow sports betting?
3. Are there ever fights between groups of fans or do celebrations get out if control?
Just the idea of a football team named after Chetniks is in an otl context wonderfully blursed. Certainly not something I’d ever have even begun to consider hahaLeftists aren't really a unified group TTL. Some hold their noses and vote for the Whigs because of economics, and others gravitate to the Greens, which sees some success at the local level in Louisiana and Florida.
This is awesome! Consider it the official logo of the Chetniks
The Democrats aren't exactly socially progressive, as President Breathitt rolled back elements of the Whigs' law legalizing gay marriage, but they aren't particularly socially conservative either. Left wingers would probably still vote for the Whigs on social issues like gay marriage, unless immigration reform is a top priority for them.
Lol blursed how?
Mostly because both the Whigs and Democrats benefit a lot from FPTP.
1. Yeah, they're about as popular as pro football, but the South doesn't go as nuts for the Iron Bowl as they do for, say, a Tigers vs. Hawks game.
2. Sports betting is legalized nationwide and heavily regulated into two big cartels, kinda like Draft Kings and Fanduel.
3. Oh absolutely. TTL's US has its fair share of football hooliganism and drunken brawls.
Lol true, trueJust the idea of a football team named after Chetniks is in an otl context wonderfully blursed. Certainly not something I’d ever have even begun to consider haha
For Anglo names I either make them up, smash together names from contemporary figures, or borrow them from books I've read or TV shows (Berryhill, for instance, was a name I'd heard somewhere on The West Wing). For foreign names, I use the fantasy name generator and the names of contemporary figures from that country.Question to the writer: just thinking about the variety of alternate names in this TL, do you have any specific process behind their creation?
Howard Cameron | Richard Nelson | |
Electoral Vote | 361 | 177 |
Popular Vote | 22,527,164 | 19,139,290 |
Percentage | 51.2 | 43.5 |
Cameron, based on a wikibox that can be found on page 68, looks like the arch-segregationist Homer Martin Adkins, the 32nd Governor of Arkansas who was derisively called "Holy Homer" by his critics.What does Cameron look like, is he based on a historical person?
ive decided he looks like Howard Hamlin from better call Saul and no one can dissuade me of thisWhat does Cameron look like, is he based on a historical person?
“...but the Howard Cameron of 1948 was very different from the Howard Cameron of 1936. Cameron was, after his bid for a third consecutive term ended in a humiliating defeat at the convention in '44, embittered, angry, and driven by what his wife Hallie described to me as "an all-encompassing obsession" with returning triumphantly to the presidency. The young, optimistic reformer of 1936 who transformed a nation, and who I devoted my whole career in government to, was gone. His face had become sharper and meaner with age, and he grew very reactionary and suspicious of disloyalty from his allies. He once confessed in a moment of surprising self-reflection that he was terrified of dying without “some last great success.”
It was not only about ending on a high note for him. He told me often of how he wanted to punish those who had denied him the nomination in 1944. "They conspired against the movement," he would snarl whenever Ezra Stark's or Sam Wolcott's names were mentioned. And in Cameron's mind, he was the movement. The movement wouldn't exist -- couldn't exist -- without him. The idea of a betrayal from within the party had wounded him and left him unable to trust even his inner circle. His private denouncements of these erstwhile allies that he had considered friends boiled down to a simple theme: "They sacrificed the movement for their own petty ambitions. They had no concept of loyalty. They couldn't understand the great works that were incomplete.”
“I hope you're happy with your thirty pieces of silver” was Cameron's infamous declaration at the 1944 convention. He was widely criticized for it. Journalists couldn't understand how the man who had come to represent American Optimism could not only challenge the Washington Precedent, but be so bitter and unsportsmanlike in defeat. But those tendencies were already there, they simply became more dominant over time. Cameron had remade the political system: the south was more and more willing to vote for Whig candidates and he himself had been elected in impressive landslides both times -- why should he not seek a third term? As he began his re-entrance into presidential politics, "thirty pieces of silver" became a recurring theme. He had risen from the political dead to restore the Party to its rightful path and throw the sinful, self-serving Judas Iscariots out of power. I don't believe the association to Christ was a conscious one -- he had never been overtly self-serving, but it was revealing. It was clear to me and others in his inner circle that Cameron's political comeback was equally about settling scores and getting revenge on his enemies, both real and perceived, as it was about cementing a legacy that didn't end in failure, defeat, and humiliation. To Howard Cameron, the two goals were intertwined. And that's why the man I knew and considered a friend was so different -- so angry, bitter, and paranoid -- twelve years later."
-From THE TITAN OF HIS ERA: A PORTRAIT OF HOWARD CAMERON by David Cannon, published 1961
If Cameron will not ban a Democratic Party, rewrite Constitution and became President-For-Live, he will be not-so-villian))As the saying goes, you either die a hero or live long enough to become the villain. William McGovern, the other great progressive reformer of his age, died in office, but Howard Cameron still lived…”
Oh yeah, they might have to drag him out of the White House, kicking in screaming. He barely eeked out a win this time.Cameron is gonna be a hell of a mess this time, isn't he?
It will be interesting, I can assure youHoward Cameron is gonna go all Richard Nixon, I feel… This will be interesting
Lol thanks!Cameron as a much more sinister FDR type figure is amazing.
So tricky...Ah! Good old Richard Nixon....
Indeed he will, like the later years of Juan Peron, but no military coupCameron is gonna be a hell of a mess this time, isn't he?
He still won a pretty convincing victory, but it was more like Bill Clinton in 1996 than Ronald Reagan in 1984Oh yeah, they might have to drag him out of the White House, kicking in screaming. He barely eeked out a win this time.