Other than Canada I just want to see how the changes in America affect the rest of the world.
Europe is still smarting from forced decolonization. Britain is still angry at Ireland after all this time, occasionally picking fights with them or sending in their ships a little too close. France is the hemegon over most of continental Europe. German is a rather loose confederation, with Prussia being the leading member and aspirant to be the one to one day get France off their backs. Russia went from monarchy to military regency to military republican to slowly liberalizing Republic. Oil money is really helping them out when it comes to repairing infrastructure and keeping the populace content.
Most of Africa is recovering from the effects of colonialism, assisted in terms of money, infrastructure, and establishing liberal constitutions from Asia and America. Some are dealing very well, like Morocco and Nigeria, others are fighting among themselves over various issues (revenge on locally strong minorities, bad leaders who tried to seize power, etc.).
Asia has the rising hemegon of the Five-Colored Republic of China (that's the standard translation of their name) looking to overtake the Empire of Japan as the "Caretaker of the East". Japan never really needed to go conquering when it could just "suggest" to their neighbors they'll protect them from Europe in exchange for some favorable trade deals. Or, you know, you can try and fight yourselves and die. In recent years there have been protests and attempted boycotts by anti-Japanese Asians who are sick and tired of the unfair advantages Japan retains to this day.
The Social Republic India is the crown jewel in Asia when it comes to Democracy and equality, or so they say. It's fairly good, but there is the age old problem of separatists in various parts of her borders. They might ask the IL to send in some anti-guerrilla experts to help them out.
Australia had an influx of white Africans who feared (rightly or wrongly) annihilation by the black lead independent African countries. The anti-Asian immigration country was happy to receive a large influx of people, but oppose their attempts not to properly integrate into the Southern Jewel of Britain.
A very cool TL!
I'll admit, I thought you'd have Kerry asking Romney to run.
In terms of questions... How does Quebec figure into Canadian-US relations here? What are US-European relations like post-World War? What's the International League membership look like, and is it a "World War victor's club" like the OTL UN?
Quebec doesn't like America because America is much more antagonistic to France, French-things, and Catholicism. Generally they know they'll have to stick with the rest of Canada if things got hot with America. Think of it, you had the Revolutionary War, the Liberation War in the 1850's, the American refusal to assist France and Britain during the Grand European War, and the World War. All of which pitted America against the interests of Britain and France. The French and Anglo-Canadians are going to have to stand together or be hung separately.
The biggest problem in Canada is they do take unfair advantage of their far flung territories, Alaska gets the worst of it. There really isn't much of a demand back east to stop the oil and mineral payments to them, nor much of a desire to make the low-population, underdeveloped, and culturally different Alaska an equal province. They might be a problem to Canada as time goes on, if they aren't already.
The International League is a mixture of the OTL U.N. and the Non-Aligned Movement. The non-Canadian Americas plus much of Asia+many Democratic African nations. They all go discuss peacekeeping efforts, helping new countries democratize, and how to better integrate with each other while keeping national sovereignty.
Two elements in your story I particularly like are your Federalist driven interpretation of the Constitution, and how you made the Vice Presidency actually powerful.
For the Constitution, you have the Federalists get the maximum possible effect out of the "Necessary and Proper Clause" so that very few Amendments were ever needed. That made a lot of sense and was a good bit of detail.
What you did with the Vice Presidency was very cool. You had the position truly remain as the President of the Senate, presumably with congressional rules and court rulings strengthening and expanding that role. This real authority then allowed VPs to challenge the Prez several times, which was awesome.
Precedent matters a lot. OTL only John Marshall was known as the hardcore Federalizer of the Constitution, here, plenty more are willing to expand the power of the Government in accordance to Federalist principles. The Vice-Presidency is similar, with Adams and Pinckney succeeding their predecessors, and King managing to oppose the latter; in addition to a series of competent and qualified men who could successfully do their job, well the office gets a lot more prestige. If the President of the Senate want's to block the President of the United State's policies, well then the latter is kind of fucked. The VP is thus sort of a chancellor or Prime Minster, but stuck with them for 4 to 8 years.
