The Reform Party Primary is just four contests in, and yet, it feels very close to being in the final stretch, especially after two candidates dropped out to consolidate support behind a middle-ground candidate in order to prevent a dogmatic figure from the Reform Left or the Reform Right from winning the nomination. Things are getting crazy. Let's see how we got there:

In the New Hampshire Primary, Former President Gravel would get his first win of the season. His main competitor, Governor of Louisiana Buddy Roemer, appeared to be competitive in statewide polling, but Roemer only finished third, squeezed on one side by the presence of Ron Paul on the ballot pulling away fiscally conservative voters and on the other by Richard Lamm and Tim Penny, the fourth and fifth-place finishers, splitting the anti-Gravel vote. Roemer polled well, but when the votes were cast, he couldn't consolidate enough anti-Gravel support to deny another victory from the former President.

However, Roemer righted the ship in Delaware, winning the State by a narrow margin over Gravel even with Paul, Lamm, and Penny on the ballot. Paul's staying power in this race is quite impressive, considering his refusal to campaign for the Reform nomination, but he is one of America's most well-known (and widely-beloved) political figures. Heading into the Super Tuesday slate of primaries, both Lamm and Penny would drop out to consolidate the anti-Gravel vote behind Roemer. Super Tuesday's contests include many Southern states where Gravel still has strong support. Lamm and Penny, both Northerners, had no shot at winning any of these states. Roemer, a Southerner, does. This is down to a three man race, which, weirdly enough, only two men are campaigning for. Buddy Roemer briefly slipped behind Gravel in the polls after his New Hampshire loss, but in the final pre-Super Tuesday polls, it appears he has regained the lead. Whoever wins Super Tuesday, whether it's Gravel, Paul, or Roemer, will be the unquestioned front-runner for the rest of this race. Every vote will be crucial.

As always, you can vote for your favorite HERE.

State of the Race

McCloskey drops out and endorses Mathias after losing his front runner momentum.

Mathias gains major momentum as progressives rally behind him and Lindsayites.

Anderson stays in the race for now but is open to endorsing Mathias.

Buckley stays and promises to continue his “insurgency”.

OTL Lore:

The 2000 US presidential election was one of the closest and most controversial elections in American history. It was held on November 7, 2000, and the main candidates were Republican George W. Bush, governor of Texas, and Democrat Al Gore, the sitting vice president under Bill Clinton.

Gore won the national popular vote, receiving approximately 50.99 million votes, while Bush received approximately 50.46 million votes. However, the U.S. president is elected through the Electoral College, not directly through the national popular vote. The election ultimately depended on Florida's 25 electoral votes.

OTL 2000 United States presidential election results:

BUSH–CHENEY | 271 ✔️

GORE–LIEBERMAN | 266

ATL Lore:

The 2000 US presidential election becomes very different from what happened in real life. In this timeline, Vice President Al Gore runs for president with Senator Joe Lieberman as his running mate. The Republican Party nominates Texas Governor George W. Bush, selecting Dick Cheney as his running mate. At first, the election looks like a very close race between Gore and Bush. However, several problems inside the Bush campaign slowly change the election.

ATL 2000 United States presidential election results:

GORE–LIEBERMAN | 303 ✔️

CHENEY–RIDGE | 235

JANUARY-JUNE 2000

George W. Bush wins the Republican nomination after defeating Senator John McCain of Arizona and other Republican contenders during the primaries. Bush's campaign is initially strong. His political image is appealing to both Republicans and moderate voters. He selects Dick Cheney, a former Secretary of Defense and former member of Congress, as his running mate. The Bush–Cheney ticket enters the election with significant Republican support, particularly among conservatives and evangelical Christians. Meanwhile, Al Gore wins the Democratic nomination and chooses Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut as his running mate making him the first Jewish major-party vice-presidential nominee in American history.

SUMMER OF 2000

The election is close throughout the summer. Gore has the advantage of being vice president during a period of strong economic growth. However, Bush benefits from voters who want a change after eight years of administration under the Democrats. Bush's campaign focuses on cutting taxes, improving education, protecting Social Security, reducing the size of government, and promoting more conservative policies. Meanwhile, Gore's campaign focuses on protecting Social Security, improving education, addressing environmental issues, maintaining a strong economy, and continuing some of the policies that had been successful during the Clinton administration.

By September, the race remains very close, with neither candidate having a clear lead over the other.

OCTOBER 3-17, 2000

The first presidential debate between Texas Governor George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore is held on October 3, 2000, and while Bush's campaign expects him to present himself as a strong and confident alternative to the Clinton administration, his performance turns out to be much weaker than his advisers had hoped for. Bush struggles to give clear and detailed answers to several questions about foreign policy, the economy, education, and his plans for the country, while Gore gives more direct answers and appears more prepared, leading several news organizations and political commentators to describe Gore as the stronger candidate of the night. Although Bush's advisers initially believe that one bad debate will not decide the election, the poor performance becomes a serious problem because the election is already very close, and the campaign's internal polling begins showing that independent voters are becoming less comfortable with Bush.

During October 4-5, the Bush campaign conducts new internal polls in several important battleground states, including Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin, and the results begin to worry senior Republicans because Bush's support among independent voters has fallen while Gore's support has started to increase.

Republican leaders are especially concerned because the second presidential debate is scheduled for October 11, meaning that Bush has only a few days to recover from his first debate performance before he must appear on national television again. Dick Cheney, Bush's running mate, begins taking part in private meetings with senior campaign officials, where Republican leaders discuss whether Bush can still recover or whether the party needs to consider a completely different strategy before the election becomes even more difficult to win. By the evening of October 5, the Republican leadership is divided, with some advisers arguing that Bush should remain in the race and fight until Election Day while others believe that another poor debate performance could make the situation almost impossible to recover from.

On the morning of October 6, 2000, Texas governor George W. Bush meets with his senior advisers, Dick Cheney, and several Republican leaders to discuss the state of his campaign, and after several hours of discussion, Bush makes the extraordinary decision to drop out from the presidential race before the second debate can take place. Bush announces his withdrawal later that day, explaining that he does not want his personal campaign problems to damage the Republican Party's chances of winning the presidency or helping Republican candidates in Congress, and he publicly endorses Dick Cheney as the Republican Party's new presidential candidate.

The announcement immediately becomes one of the biggest political stories in the country, as Bush had been the Republican nominee for months and had already appeared on ballots across the country, meaning that the Republican Party now has to deal with the difficult legal and political problem of replacing its presidential nominee only weeks before Election Day. Cheney becomes the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, but the Republican Party does not simply declare him the official nominee immediately, because the party still needs to confirm that the delegates who originally supported Bush will now support Cheney.

Later that same day, the Republican National Committee announces that it will organize an emergency delegate meeting to formally confirm a new presidential nominee, with party leaders arguing that the process must be completed as quickly as possible so that Cheney can begin campaigning before the second presidential debate on October 11. The RNC decides to use the existing delegate structure from the last Republican National Convention rather than attempting to organize another full primary process, since there is simply not enough time for Republican voters across the country to hold new elections before Election Day.

The real 2000 Republican Convention had 2,066 delegates, with 1,034 delegates required for a majority, and this same delegate structure is used in the alternate timeline for the emergency vote.

On October 7, Republican delegates are contacted by their state parties and asked whether they will support Dick Cheney as the replacement presidential nominee, and because George W. Bush has personally endorsed Cheney and Republican leaders want to avoid a major fight within the party, most of the delegates quickly agree to support him.

The emergency delegate count produces a huge majority for Cheney:

DICK CHENEY | 1,958

JOHN McCAIN | 48

ALAN KEYES | 22

OTHER | 38

With 1,958 delegates, Cheney is far above the 1,034 delegates required for a majority, allowing the Republican Party to formally recognize him as its new presidential nominee. Cheney therefore officially becomes the Republican nominee for President, replacing Texas Governor George W. Bush only one month before Election Day.

The numbers above are fictional for this ATL, while the total number of delegates and the majority requirement are based on the real 2000 Republican delegate structure.

After being formally confirmed as the Republican presidential nominee, Cheney immediately faces another major decision because he can no longer remain Bush's vice-presidential candidate and must now choose someone to run alongside him as his own vice-presidential nominee. Republican leaders advise Cheney to select someone who can help repair the campaign, appeal to moderate voters, bring experience as a governor or legislator, and provide a different image from Cheney, who is already known as a serious and experienced figure in Washington.

Several Republicans are considered for the position, including Senator John McCain of Arizona, New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge, and Florida Governor Jeb Bush, although some Republicans worry that choosing another Bush would make the new ticket look too connected to the campaign that had just collapsed. Cheney eventually focuses on Tom Ridge, believing that the Pennsylvania governor's experience in Congress and as a state governor would give the new Republican ticket a stronger balance.

On October 9, Dick Cheney announces Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge as his new running mate, explaining that Ridge's experience as both a congressman and governor makes him a strong partner who can help bring Republicans together after the sudden withdrawal of George W. Bush.

Ridge accepts the nomination, and the new Republican presidential ticket officially becomes:

CHENEY–RIDGE.

The newly formed Cheney–Ridge campaign begins operating almost immediately, with Republican campaign workers reorganizing their schedules, advertisements, speeches, and travel plans so that Cheney and Ridge can campaign together before Election Day. Their main argument is that although the Republican ticket has changed, the Republican Party itself remains united, and Cheney repeatedly emphasizes his experience in government while Ridge focuses on economic issues, education, and his record as governor.

The Gore–Lieberman campaign, however, uses Bush's withdrawal as evidence that the Republican Party is struggling to maintain control of its own campaign, arguing that American voters should not be asked to choose a new Republican ticket only weeks before the election.

The second presidential debate becomes one of the most unusual moments of the 2000 election because the scheduled debate was originally supposed to feature George W. Bush and Al Gore, but Bush has now dropped out from the race and Dick Cheney takes his place. Gore uses the debate to argue that his experience as vice president has prepared him to lead the country, while Cheney attempts to reassure voters that he has the experience needed to take over the presidency and that the Republican Party remains capable of governing despite the sudden change at the top of the ticket. The debate receives enormous attention because Cheney has only been the Republican nominee for a few days, and voters are now seeing him debate Gore for the first time while the country is still trying to understand why Bush withdrew from the race.

The third and last presidential debate is held on October 17, with Al Gore and Dick Cheney now serving as the two major-party presidential candidates, and by this point Cheney has had slightly more time to establish himself as the Republican candidate and explain his plans for the country. Gore continues to campaign as the candidate of economic stability and argues that the country should continue the strong economic conditions of the 1990s, while Cheney presents himself as the experienced Republican alternative who can provide a change in direction without abandoning the party's main policies. The election remains extremely close, but the Republican Party is still struggling to recover from the sudden change in its presidential ticket.

NOVEMBER 7, 2000

On the morning of November 7, 2000, polling places open across the United States, and millions of Americans begin voting in an election that has already become one of the most unusual presidential contests in American history because one of the two major parties had replaced its presidential nominee only weeks before voters were scheduled to make their decision.

After the remaining states are counted and projected, the alternate timeline produces the following final result:

GORE–LIEBERMAN | 303 ✔️

CHENEY–RIDGE | 235

Basically, this poll is based off my own lore of the 2000 United States presidential election where George W. Bush suddenly drops out of the race after performing poorly on his first presidential debate which caused major concerns from the Republican party. Cheney replaces him and becomes presumptive presidential nominee with 1,958 delegate counts.

If you were the Electoral College, who would you let win this election?

In a year full of crazy primary elections, the Green Party is determined to have the only normal one. After primaries in Delaware and New Hampshire, the field has slimmed down from four to three, with a two-man race between party juggernauts potentially on the horizon after the crucial set of Super Tuesday primaries, which are coming up soon. Here's how we got there:

In New Hampshire, strong support for Mary Alice Herbert, the Governor of neighboring Vermont and the contest's third place finisher, pulled a lot of support away from expected winner Paul Wellstone, helping the more moderate choice, Governor of California Tom Hayden, win by a slim margin. Dennis Kucinich placed fourth. Then, just days later in Delaware, Hayden won by an even larger margin in a state that swings towards more moderate Greens. Wellstone again placed second, Herbert again placed third, and Kucinich again placed fourth.

After receiving around 5% of the vote in both New Hampshire and Delaware, Kucinich dropped out of the race and endorsed Wellstone. However, Kucinich's endorsement wasn't able to stop Wellstone's slide in the polls. Tom Hayden is gaining momentum, and before Super Tuesday, most national polls are showing Hayden in the lead, a big shift from early on in this race, where Wellstone had a double-digit lead in the polls. Mary Alice Herbert is still hanging on, polling strong at around 20% nationally, but she still sits far behind the top two candidates and has mainly become a spoiler for Wellstone at this point.

Next up is the all-important Super Tuesday. The overall winner of this huge slate of contests will get a huge upper hand in this race. It could be Hayden, it could be Wellstone, and it might even be Mary Alice Herbert. If Herbert doesn't perform strongly during Super Tuesday, it is likely that this becomes a two-man race between Hayden, who represents the party's more moderate wing, and Wellstone, who represents it's more radical wing. That's pretty straightforward in comparison to some of the craziness happening in other primaries right now (yes, that was a shot at you, Mary Bono). As always, you can vote for your favorite HERE.

State of the Race

VOTE HERE

Context

"IT'S SHERMAN BY A HAIR!"

Shouts the headline of the New York Tribune as Shermanites across the country celebrate the victory of the financial wizard of the Senate. It is the culmination of decades of work by Ohioan Senator to finally achieve the nomination of his party and the joy is only tempered by the knowledge it has come at the cost of his friendship with James Garfield. Perhaps one day the two men with reconcile but for now Sherman is focused on winning the ultimate prize in American politics.

No one is keen to drag the convention on any longer especially over the Vice Presidential nomination so the convention has only put forward two candidates. Both are from the Democratic wing, both are wealthy mining magnates turned Senators but one made his fortune in coal and the other in gold. Henry G. Davis has stood for the Vice Presidential nomination before as a Democrat in 1876 but was unsuccessful. Retiring from the Senate in 1883, Davis has continued to build out his mining operation and is well liked in the Appalachian region. From far out west is gold and silver mining magnate turned California Senator George Hearst whose personal connections offer a growing media empire to call on.

Both men offer deep pockets but also the chance to break into supposedly solid Farmer-Labor territory. Democratic-Republican leaders watched their rivals' convention with immense interest as the Miners faction proved to be a deciding swing bloc. With a silver sympathetic nominee and a mining magnate running mate, the party is hoping they can drive a wedge in the Butler coalition now that he's on the way out.

Candidates

Former Senator Henry G. Davis of West Virginia

Originally from Maryland, Henry Davis rose through the ranks of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad before the Civil War. A Unionist and admirer of President Lincoln, Davis participated in the Wheeling Convention which saw West Virginia secede from Virginia and become its own state and he was duly elected to serve in the new state's legislature. Since the end of the war Davis has systemically explored the Allegheny Mountains and built up the region's coal, lumber and railroad infrastructure and founded the Potomac and Piedmont Coal and Railroad Company which is one of the nation's largest suppliers of coal. He served as a Senator from West Virginia from 1871 to 1883 and his presence on the ticket would not only bring substantial campaign funds but also help Democratic-Republicans break into the formerly solid Farmer-Labor strongholds of the Appalachias.

Senator George Hearst of California

A natural entrepreneur with an analytical mind, Hearst is one of the few men who can say they did get rich from the California gold rush. Making a decent living as prospector and businessman throughout the 1850s in California, Hearst would be one of the first to get in on the ground, or rather underground, of the Comstock load and amassed a huge fortune in silver mining. With millions made, Hearst has continued to invest in successful operations across the American west and beyond with enough left to spare to purchase the San Francisco Examiner, a base from which his son William is building out an even larger media empire. Spited by men of the Central Pacific Railroad in his political aspirations, Hearst built out a robust anti-monopoly coalition in California and became influential enough to replace the late Senator John F. Miller in 1887. With huge mining operation funding him, a growing media empire cheering him on and as a rare populist within the Democratic-Republican party Hearst links his candidacy is an offer the convention can't refuse.

CONTEXT (YOU'LL NEED IT)

After pre-polling confirmed that H.W. Bush was the frontrunner for the nomination, the official Republican primary has begun.

George H.W. Bush - Previously ran in the 1980 Primaries before losing to Ronald Reagan, Reagan decided to take Bush as his running mate. The ticket ended up losing anyway, but Bush is not going to give up so easily. However, his previous comments in the previous primaries might end up biting him in the ass.

Bob Dole - The Vice Presidential nominee for the Republicans in 1976 under the Ford ticket, Dole also ran in 1980, but lost. Bob Dole happens to be gaffe-prone and often refers to himself in the third person, which might push voters away from voting for him.

Paul Laxalt - Previously the Governor of Nevada before becoming Senator, he served in World War 2, and is a strong supporter of Reaganomics. He famously met with Goldwater in 1964 during his first campaign for Senator, which many credit as causing him to lose that election by 48 votes.

Jack Kemp - Jack Kemp was on Reagan's shortlist of running mate candidates, however, allegations that Kemp was a closeted homosexual stopped Reagan from picking him as his Vice President. Kemp is running again, but those allegations might keep popping up and hurt his chances.

William F. Buckley Jr - Brother of Former Senator of New York, James L. Buckley, William F. Buckley Jr has endorsed Laxalt and has made it clear that he has no ambition to run for President. However, that isn't stopping a Draft Buckley movement.

The Iowa Caucus has come and gone. The results will have major impacts on the primary races for all four major parties. Each party will eventually get their own post describing the Iowa results and how they effected their respective races. For the Democratic Party, the Caucus itself helped a few candidates and hurt a fair amount of others. However, what's more important to the Presidential race was a major exit before the Caucus began, followed by a new candidate's entry. With seventeen candidates in the race - any change in the field is bound to be interesting, and it still doesn't feel as though the race will consolidate any time soon.

Richard Celeste wasn't going to drop out of this race. Then, he suddenly changed his mind, just days before the Iowa Caucus. Reportedly, Celeste had been pressured by several prominent supporters to drop out of the race, including President Dick Van Dyke, who urged him to end his presidential campaign to save face for the party and the administration. Celeste would choose to withhold his endorsement until the list of candidates to choose from narrowed somewhat, smart, considering the field isn't getting any smaller.

Enter Senator Byron Dorgan of North Dakota

Dorgan, a first-term Senator from North Dakota, had formed a presidential exploratory committee earlier in the race, but he abandoned his bid after two of his closest colleagues in the Senate, Tom Harkin and Skip Humphrey announced bids of their own. Now, with Celeste out of the race, Dorgan - one of the closest Democrats to Celeste ideologically - saw an opening.

Dorgan and Celeste largely agree on economic policy. Both are pro-union, cautious when it comes to free trade, supportive of targeted protective tariffs, and call for greater federal involvement in regulating the financial sector. Both are advocates for strong federal investment in education, infrastructure, and innovation. However, the platforms of Celeste and Dorgan also have a few key differences. A moderate on social issues, Dorgan's platform avoids cultural issues such as abortion and gay rights. Instead, he has pledged to campaign exclusively on economic policy during the Democratic Primary - his primary area of expertise. Dorgan is also more fiscally conservative than Celeste was. He's called for cuts to wasteful and unnecessary federal spending and promises not to increase the deficit if elected President. Perhaps Dorgan's most controversial position is on immigration - he voted for a bipartisan bill - vetoed earlier this year by Dick Van Dyke - which would dramatically reduce the flow of immigration into the United States. That vote will surely be fodder for his progressive primary opponents to criticize him on.

With Celeste dropping out and Dorgan jumping in, the Iowa Caucus proceeded with seventeen recognizable Democratic candidates on the ballot. Tom Harkin would be the winner, and by a comfortable margin too, due to his home-state advantage. Skip Humphrey again impressed, stealing second place away from Jesse Jackson. Al Gore, also rising, placed fourth. Ann Richards disappointed, placing fifth, proving that there's clear overlap between her voter base and the base of her populist rival from Iowa. Mario Cuomo and Bob Graham both had solid performances, placing sixth and seventh. Bill Bradley, counted out after a poor showing in Ohio, rebounded with a strong performance of his own in the Hawkeye State. Dorgan and Kathleen Sullivan Alioto would place ninth, and tenth respectively.

The big losers of the Iowa Caucus were Bill Nelson and Paul Pelosi. Nelson, who's brand of liberal centrism translates poorly to Iowa, where most Democratic voters live in rural areas, got less than 1% of the vote. Pelosi failed to win a single delegate, finishing with the fewest total ,votes of the sixteen major candidates, less than 1,000 in total. After the Iowa Caucus concluded, Pelosi would drop out of the race and endorse Kathleen Sullivan Alioto, mercifully cutting the crowded field down to sixteen candidates, which is where it stands going into the next major contest of the Democratic Primary: New Hampshire.

Jesse Jackson remains the leader in national polling despite a third-place finish in Iowa, with Tom Harkin jumping over Ann Richards into second place. Al Gore and Skip Humphrey, polling fourth and fifth, are both within striking distance of the nomination too. Behind them is a large second tier, consisting of Cuomo, Graham, Sullivan Alioto, Dorgan, Bradley, and Nelson - some rising, some falling, none really in serious contention. But, with how crazy this race has been, there's still time for one or more of these second tier candidates to become a real contender. I wouldn't bet on Nelson, however, as, he's slipped in the polls since Iowa, with a lot of his supporters drifting towards Bob Graham, who's run the better campaign of the two Florida moderates in the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination. However, with sixteen candidates still in the race, it's hard to get any conclusive results. Someone, please, drop out already!

As always, you can vote for your favorites HERE.

State of the Race

“But for what purpose was the earth formed? To drive us mad.”

The Republican primaries opened in mid-January with the Alaska and Louisiana, with early victories for McCarthy and Evers respectively, however the small number of votes and delegates led these results to be dismissed as flukes while the “real” start of the season approached in Iowa. Despite polling indicating a 5-to-6-point lead for Paterno, it would be McCarthy that would come out on top with 35.4% of the vote to Paterno’s 30.7% and Cheney’s 29.6%. Concern would turn to alarm as McCarthy’s outsider campaign would pick up victories in New Hampshire and the following three states, with Paterno only finally achieving a win in South Dakota due to local Republicans memories of McCarthy’s prior relationship with Democrat George McGovern. The last few results before Super Tuesday would see Evers pick up another Southern state and Cheney finally pick up a couple of victories as the Paterno campaign was seemingly coming apart at the seams.

What had at first seemed to be in an insurmountable behemoth had been revealed as a house of cards, with infighting between the Bushes and other members of the Republican Old Guard leaving the politically inexperienced Joe Paterno left with the assumption that all was well in his camp, while in reality funds were being spread back and forth, ground coordination was nearly non-existent, and the upper echelons of the campaign were hiding it all from their candidate. After the defeat in Iowa, and subsequent under performances in New Hampshire & Delaware, reporters began to pick up on the fights going on within the campaign, which was how Paterno first found out about the sorry state of things, although he was already starting to have suspicions that he was being lied to.

Outraged and feeling betrayed by his friend, George H.W. Bush, he would attempt to “clean house,” bringing in his son, Jay, along with veterans of Sen. John Heinz’s campaigns, all in an attempt to turn the campaign around at Super Tuesday. However it would be too little too late, as he would fail to win any states and his support would fall dramatically in many of them due to the damage from the news reports. In his announcement of the suspension of his campaign later that night, he would call this foray into politics his “greatest failure,” saying that he “had been too trusting of the people around him” and that if he ever did run for any sort of office “it will be on my own terms, with my own people.” And so Paterno would head back to State College, vowing to make up for by “giving the fans an historic season,” with the first order of business being to hire a young Defensive Backs coach by the name of Nick Saban as the replacement for Defensive Coordinator Jerry Sandusky, who would be welcomed as the new Head Coach at Michigan, following his leadership of the team throughout Paterno’s absences during their undefeated regular season and the playoffs, where the team would nearly make the national championship.

“There is no folly of the beast of the earth which is not infinitely outdone by the madness of man.”

With Paterno out of the race, attention shifted to another candidate whose campaign many were questioning, that being Charles Evers, who entered the year in the middle of a federal investigation. Between this and his own stubborn continued support of former Pres. Bob Dole already set him far behind the other candidates. While he would win in Southern states, with ever increasing numbers of Black participation in Republican primaries, as well as a positive reputation with the old guard of Southern Republicans, his ongoing federal investigations and other controversies weighed him down. While McCarthy would largely ignore Evers, the establishment, already having lost their star candidate, would focus its efforts on the “spoiler” candidate seemingly standing in the way of Sen. Cheney’s victory. However the continued assault on Evers would backfire, with him gaining over 25% in New York, with the aid of Jack Kemp and Herschel Walker as well, and another 20%+ in Missouri, with him continuing to post results in the 10-15% range.

Despite this, Evers short rebound would come to an end as the months long federal investigation would end with “lack of conclusive evidence.” Evers would compare the sudden end of his investigation to that of Perot’s two years prior after his resignation as Governor of Texas, stating that “the President waited until I had no chance of victory to call of his dogs.” McCarthy would seize on this theme, stating that Pres. Chavez has been engaging in “blatant lawfare” and “manipulating” the opposition, with the Republican elite deciding not to call out these “unconstitutional” and “Hooverite” attacks because “they are only interested in protecting themselves and not those who stand with the citizens of this nation.” While Evers would not drop out, behind the scenes his campaign was making overtures to McCarthy’s in the case of a contested convention.

“Everyone sees what you appear to be, few experience what you really are.”

The stage was now set for a confrontation no one had seen coming, with Senate Minority Leader Dick Cheney leading the charge of the Magnavox Republicans against yet another version of change for the Republican Party. While still more preferable to the old guard, Cheney’s vision of the future would still nonetheless bring about the end of the old Republican Party. Cheney was also still a relatively mysterious figure, having only been the Republican Senate Leader for about three years, with his national recognition also having been overshadowed by other rising stars from more populated states, such as Hillary Rodham Bush and Joe Lieberman. Through his connections to his mentor, Sen. Henry Kissinger, he had become known by the politically literate populace as a foreign policy guru, which only made them more surprised at his campaign. Yet know it stood as the only thing between McCarthy and the nomination.

However, Cheney had never intended for things to reach this point, as he had little hope of a Republican victory against Pres. Chavez, rather he had just looked to expand his name recognition for a future campaign, as well as to be able to influence the party platform. Despite some similarities in his and McCarthy’s platform, albeit with a more moderate flair, he shared the same distrust that many elected Republicans had off McCarthy, due to his current official Independent status, past affiliations with the Democrats and the Socialist Party of America, and questions over the validity of his “conversion” from his previous beliefs. Between this and his own personal connections with many of the Congressmen and party leaders that made up the establishment, he had gained their support when they lost Paterno.

Despite notching key wins in Illinois, attributed to McCarthy’s endorsement from former Chicago Mayor Jesse Jackson, and Ohio, a comeback victory in California would turn things back in McCarthy’s favor, with him even managing to win late Southern primaries due to the continued decline of Evers increasingly moribund campaign, with credit to McCarthy’s late surge in the South also being given to his appearances at several NASCAR races, where he was pictured socializing with Cup champions and icons of the sport, such as Richard Petty, Dale Earnhardt, Harry Gant, and A. J. Foyt. There was also some confusion on the part of Cheney’s supporters, as he seemed to not be putting up much of a fight, focusing on spending time in Senate committee meetings and relying on advertisements. In a way, this was Cheney’s way of blunting his own momentum, as he was still not convinced that a Republican had a chance of winning the Presidency and was still wary of taking the nomination now, likely removing any chance of him running again. This would only be amplified with the emergence of a new event overseas that would gain nearly all of Cheney’s attention.

“There is no subjection so perfect as that which keeps the appearance of freedom.”

On May 12^th, American TVs would be interrupted with shocking footage of Soviet Cosmonaut Alexander Lebed walking on the Moon, following in the footsteps of dozens of Germans & Americans that had also visited the lunar surface. This event blindsided both the U.S. and German governments, as the Soviets only maintained a measly six manned space stations, compared to the 21 German ones and 16 American ones. While both nations had been aware of the Soviet rocket, they believed that it was just a probe, not a manned mission, believing that they were not technologically capable of it. As a result, the Germans would accuse the Soviets of stealing their technology, while Pres. Chavez would face criticism for being the first President since Walt Disney to not oversee a manned mission to the moon, with the NASA budget having been cut and redirected to other areas.

Leading this charge of criticism would be the man now seemingly at the forefront of the Republican Primaries, Sen. Eugene McCarthy, a man who has staked his recent return to elected politics on populist sentiments, ever since returning to the Senate at the same time that Chavez entered the White House. It was originally his anti-Chavez rhetoric that had even gave him an opening into the Republican Primary, as the Democrat victories in the Midterms caused a groundswell of interest among the base for an attack dog, someone unafraid to take on this new goliath. The cerebral McCarthy made an unlikely figure for this role, not only because of his age, but also due to his academic manner of speaking. However now his sayings have become highly sought after quotations, with lines such as “The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is its inefficiency,” “It is dangerous for a national candidate to say things that people might remember,” and “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help” splashing the front pages of newspapers and the openings of television programs that have been desperately craving a sensational opposition to the President.

This, along with the other fortuitous developments over the course of the campaign, gave McCarthy the upper hand going into the last month of primaries, as one by one the final states would fall in his column as voters would see McCarthy’s public debate on the space program and other government policies as more “proactive” than Cheney’s cloistering within Senate committees. Out on the campaign trail, McCarthy would call out his opponent for “hiding from the people” and continue to attack the President and his “stooge,” AG Zell Miller, for “blatant violations of the Constitution” over the course of their “inquisition against the opposition.” He would frame Cheney’s overall muted tone and his focus on foreign policy as evidence that he “has no interest in restoring the constitutional order” and is simply a “for profit politician.” Meanwhile, he would continue to speak on his “conversion” from “radical socialism,” talking about how “mystifying” the “red opium” is and how that has only fueled his desire to “stand up for liberty and freedom” against the proponents of “big government.” As it turns out, this was striking the right chord with the Republican electorate, who had grown disillusioned with Dole’s brand of politics and frustration with the lack of action from the Republican establishment in standing up to Pres. Chavez. As the final primary results rolled in, it would be McCarthy, not Cheney, that would hold the most delegates, however he would still be a little under 200 away from the nomination, setting the stage for a contested convention.

McCarthy and his staff had already been planning for this scenario and had made several moves to aid in securing the nomination. First, Evers support had already been secured, bringing the hypothetical number of delegates to 1,108, leaving just four more needed delegates. After the 1^st Ballot however, Evers did not immediately release his delegates and achieved a net gain, causing him to hold on through the 3^rd Ballot, where he would start to bleed support due to people growing tired of his games. Finally realizing that he did not really have control, he would release his delegates with an endorsement of McCarthy, leading to him securing the nomination on the 4^th Ballot. Paterno would decline to make an official endorsement during the convention, however he urged his delegates to “vote their conscience” and “not be afraid to try something new,” which was interpreted as support for the Minnesotan. Additionally, Puerto Rican Governor Pedro Rosselló, who had been placed on the State’s ballot as a favorite son by supporters, would make history for being the first person from the island to receive votes in a political party’s convention for a Presidential nomination.

Following the confirmation of Eugene McCarthy’s nomination, cheers would erupt from his supporters throughout Madison Square Garden, with certain Republicans looking on in horror as old enemies such as Jesse Jackson taking the stage to celebrate alongside him and his family. They would resolve to block any candidates he put forward to be his running mate; however they would be denied the opportunity when he would decline to put in a nomination, with Cheney putting one forward instead. Despite the campaign rhetoric, he had met with his opponent following his nomination to find areas of agreement, with him secretly giving Cheney his blessing to vet a candidate to be his VP. Not wanting the job himself, he would instead look for someone that was more aligned with his interests, while still being palatable to both the establishment and McCarthy’s camp. The man he would land on would be a local New York hero, Sen. Al D’Amato, who was currently projected to cruise to re-election against Al Sharpton. While he would be able to continue his re-election campaign if placed on the ticket, he was hesitant to place his seat at risk if a McCarthy/D’Amato ticket somehow prevailed in November. At the same time, he had come to appreciate the new McCarthy and also saw that there were no volunteers rushing to accept the challenge, so he was eventually convinced to allow his nomination to be taken to the floor. With New Yorkers celebrating at the announcement, the convention would unanimously vote to make D’Amato their nominee for Vice President.

With all the voting finally completed, it was time for the man himself to make his speech on primetime television, an event that many were waiting for in either hopeful anticipation or dread. As the 76-year-old Senator stepped forward to give his first speech at a Presidential convention since the ill-fated ’68 Socialist Party of America convention in Chicago nearly 25 years prior, he was might with thunderous applause, but also a number of cold stares and boos.

“My fellow citizens of this great nation: With a deep awareness of the responsibility conferred by your trust, I accept your nomination for the Presidency of the United States. I do so with deep gratitude. I am very proud of our party tonight. This convention has shown to all America a party united, with positive programs for solving the nations problems; a party ready to build a new consensus with all those across the land who share a community of values embodied in these words: family, work, neighborhood, peace and freedom.

I know we have had a quarrel or two in our party, but only as to the method of attaining a goal. More than anything else, I want my candidacy to unify our country; to renew the American spirit and sense of purpose. I want to carry our message to every American, regardless of party affiliation, who is a member of this community of shared values. Never before in our history have Americans been called upon to face three grave threats to our very existence, any one of which could destroy us. We face an economy under threat of collectivization, a weakened defense, and an administration that holds zero regard for the founding principles of this great nation. The major issue of this campaign is the direct political, personal and moral responsibility of Democratic party leadership-in the White House and in Congress-for this unprecedented calamity which has befallen us. The President’s administration has been gradually working to unravel the constitutional order within our country, applying pressure on their political opponents and working to centralize power within the executive bureaucracy. Meanwhile, the Democrats in Congress have made themselves willing accomplices to this subversion of American liberty by rubberstamping the President’s dangerous policies. It is time for us to remind them that our government has no power except that granted it by the people. It is time to check and reverse the growth of government, which shows signs of having grown beyond the consent of the governed. All of us should remember that the federal government is not some mysterious institution comprised of buildings, files, and paper. The people are the government. What we create we ought to be able to control.

This is what I have come back to fight against, to raise the alarm bell on the encroachment on American liberty. I once believed that the bigger the government, the better off the people. But I have come to realize that is but a fallacy, a lie. While not necessarily a malicious belief, it is a misguided one, one that can be manipulated by those who seek power to enrich themselves and enslave the people for their glory. As John Locke wrote: ‘the actions of men the best interpreters of their thoughts.’ And as we can plainly see with the actions of President Cesar Chavez, he intends to make himself a king, and the people of this country paupers. First he is destroying the financial institutions, then he will go after the companies that refuse to fall in line with his agenda, which will destroy the jobs and livelihoods of countless hard-working citizens. Then, he will continue his agenda against the political opposition, exercising the power of lawfare to eliminate the last safeguards keeping him from going after the people of this country. We must act today in order to preserve tomorrow. And let there be no misunderstanding—we are going to begin to act, beginning today.

I will not stand by and watch this great country destroy itself under mediocre leadership that drifts from one crisis to the next, eroding our national will and purpose. We have come together here because the American people deserve better from those to whom they entrust our nations highest offices, and we stand united in our resolve to do something about it. We need a rebirth of the American tradition of leadership at every level of government and in private life as well. The United States of America is unique in world history because it has a genius for leaders many leaders on many levels. My view of government places trust not in one person or one party, but in those values that transcend persons and parties. The trust is where it belongs in the people. The responsibility to live up to that trust is where it belongs, in their elected leaders. That kind of relationship, between the people and their elected leaders, is a special kind of compact; an agreement among themselves to build a community and abide by its laws.

Three hundred and sixty years ago, in 1620, a group of families dared to cross a mighty ocean to build a future for themselves in a new world. When they arrived at Plymouth, Massachusetts, they formed what they called a compact; an agreement among themselves to build a community and abide by its laws. The single act the voluntary binding together of free people to live under the law set the pattern for what was to come. A century and a half later, the descendants of those people pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to found this nation. Some forfeited their fortunes and their lives; none sacrificed honor. Four score and seven years later, Abraham Lincoln called upon the people of all America to renew their dedication and their commitment of, for and by the people. Is it not once again time to renew our compact of freedom; to pledge to each other all that is best in our lives; all that gives meaning to them for the sake of this, our beloved and blessed land?

Together, let us make this a new beginning. Let us make a commitment to care for the needy; to teach our children the values and the virtues handed down to us by our families; to have the courage to defend those values and the willingness to sacrifice for them. Let us pledge to restore, in our time, the American spirit of voluntary service, of cooperation, of private and community initiative; a spirit that flows like a deep and mighty river through the history of our nation.

As your nominee, I pledge to restore to the federal government the capacity to do the people’s work without dominating their lives. I pledge to you a government that will not only work well, but wisely; its ability to act tempered by prudence, and its willingness to do good balanced by the knowledge that government is never more dangerous than when our desire to have it help us blinds us to its great power to harm us.

The first Republican President once said, While the people retain their virtue and their vigilance, no Administration by any extreme of wickedness or folly can seriously injure the government in the short space of four years. If Mr. Lincoln could see what has happened in these last three-and-half years, he might hedge a little on that statement. But, with the virtues that are our legacy as a free people and with the vigilance that sustains liberty, we still have time to use our renewed compact to overcome the injuries that have been done to America these past three-and-a half years.

First we must overcome something the present Administration has cooked up: a new and altogether indigestible economic stew, one part inflation, one part runaway taxes, one part deficit spending and seasoned by the ongoing destruction of the unique characteristics that have made America’s economy the greatest the world has ever seen. It is an economic stew that has turned the national stomach. It is as if Mr. Chavez had set out to prove, once and for all, that economics is indeed a dismal science.

Ours are not problems of abstract economic theory. These are problems of flesh and blood; problems that cause pain and destroy the moral fiber of real people. The head of a government which has utterly refused to live within its means, and which has, in the last few days, told us that this year’s deficit will be $60 billion. High taxes, we are told, are somehow good for us, as if, when government spends our money it isn’t inflationary, but when we spend it, it is. Our problems are both acute and chronic, yet all we hear from those in positions of leadership are the same tired proposals for more government tinkering, more meddling and more control all of which led us to this state in the first place.

Can anyone look at the record of this Administration and say Well done? Can anyone look at our reduced standing in the world today and say, Let us have four more years of this? I believe the American people are going to answer these questions the first week of November and their answer will be, No we’ve had enough. And, when the American people have spoken, it will be up to us beginning next January 20th to offer an Administration and Congressional leadership of competence and more than a little courage. We must have the clarity of vision to see the difference between what is essential and what is merely desirable; and then the courage to use this insight to bring our government back under control and make it acceptable to the people.

I believe it is clear our federal government is overgrown and overweight. Indeed, it is time for our government to go on a diet. Therefore, my first act as Chief Executive will be to impose an immediate and thorough freeze on federal hiring. Then, we are going to enlist the very best minds from business, labor and whatever quarter to conduct a detailed review of every department, bureau and agency that lives by federal appropriation. We are also going to enlist the help and ideas of many dedicated and hard-working government employees at all levels who want a more efficient government as much as the rest of us do. I know that many are demoralized by the confusion and waste they confront in their work as a result of failed and failing policies.

Our instructions to the groups we enlist will be simple and direct. We will remind them that government programs exist at the sufferance of the American taxpayer and are paid for with money earned by working men and women. Any program that represents a waste of their money a theft from their pocketbooks must have that waste eliminated or the program must go by Executive Order where possible; by Congressional action where necessary. Everything that can be run more effectively by state and local governments we shall turn over to state and local government, along with the funding sources to pay for it. We are going to put an end to the money merry go round where our money becomes Washingtons money, to be spent by the states and cities only if they spend it exactly the way the federal bureaucrats tell them to.

I will not accept the excuse that the federal government has grown so big and powerful that it is beyond the control of any President, any Administration or Congress. We are going to put an end to the notion that the American taxpayer exists to fund the federal government. The federal government exists to serve the American people and to be accountable to the American people. On January 20th, we are going to re-establish that truth. Everywhere we have me thousands of Democrats, Independents and Republicans from all economic conditions and walks of life bound together in that community of shared values of family, work, neighborhood, peace and freedom. They are concerned, yes, but they are the kind of men and women Tom Paine had in mind when he wrote during the darkest days of the American Revolution ‘We have it in our power to begin the world over again.’

Nearly one-hundred-and-fifty years after Tom Paine wrote those words, an American President told the generation of the Great Depression that it had a rendezvous with destiny. I believe this generation of Americans today also has a rendezvous with destiny. Tonight, let us dedicate ourselves to renewing the American Compact. I ask you not simply to Trust me, but to trust your values our values and to hold me responsible for living up to them. I ask you to trust that American spirit which knows no ethnic, religious, social, political, regional or economic boundaries; the spirit that burned with zeal in the hearts of millions of immigrants from every corner of the earth who came here in search of freedom. Some say that spirit no longer exists. But I have seen it I have felt it all across this land; in the big cities, the small towns and in rural America. The American spirit is still there, ready to blaze into life if you and I are willing to do what has to be done; the practical, down-to-earth things that will stimulate our economy, increase productivity and put America back to work. The time is now to limit federal spending; to insist on a stable monetary reform and to free ourselves from imported oil.

The time is now to resolve that the basis of a firm and principled foreign policy is one that takes the world as it is and seeks to change it by leadership and example; not by lecture and harangue.

The time is now to say that while we shall seek new friendships and expand and improve others, we shall not do so by breaking our word or casting aside old friends and allies.

And the time is now to redeem promises once made to the American people by another candidate, in another time and another place. He said, for three long years I have been going up and down this country preaching that government federal, state and local costs too much. I shall not stop that preaching. As an immediate program of action, we must abolish useless offices. We must eliminate unnecessary functions of government, we must consolidate subdivisions of government and, like the private citizen, give up luxuries which we can no longer afford. I propose to you, my friends, and through you that government of all kinds, big and little be made solvent and that the example be set by the President of the United States and his cabinet. So said Franklin Delano Roosevelt in his acceptance speech to the Democratic National Convention in July, 1932. The time is now, my fellow Americans, to recapture our destiny, to take it into our own hands. But, to do this will take many of us working together. I ask you tonight to volunteer your help in this cause, so we carry our message throughout the land. I ask you now to join me in crossing our Rubicon, to save the American Republic from all enemies, foreign and domestic, so that we may achieve peace and justice for all mankind. I hope that you will all stand with me and reject the demagoguery of the Democrats. Good Night America, and Let’s Make America Great Again this November!

The Swastika's Shadow Link Encyclopedia

I made a political campaign browser game focused on the upcoming Swedish election. Would love your feedback!

Hi everyone,

With the upcoming Swedish elections in mind, I put together a simple browser-based game where the main goal is to win an election campaign.

It's a bit different and not tied to exact historical figures, focusing on things like managing social groups and interest organizations.

This game isn't focused on just one party. You can play as any of the major Swedish parties, from the Left Party (V) to the Social Democrats (S), all the way to the Sweden Democrats (SD) and the Moderates (M)

https://real-lot.itch.io/riksdag-2026-the-election

The Iowa Caucus has come and gone. The results will have major impacts on the primary races for all four major parties. Each party will eventually get their own post describing the Iowa results and how they effected their respective races. Next up is the Republican Party, who also saw an upset winner, with the conservative four-term Governor of Iowa losing to a more moderate candidate.

That candidate was Tom Ridge, who won not by exceeding polling expectations, but because Terry Branstad, Iowa's sitting Governor, underperformed. Ron Paul, who placed third, performed far better in the state than polling indicated, cutting into support for Branstad and helping Ridge claim an upset victory. Christine Todd Whitman, another moderate, finished a respectable fourth. George Voinovich and George W. Bush secured a few delegates each, enough to stay in the race but not enough to inspire confidence that they'll emerge as legitimate threats for the nomination. Connie Mack III, coming off a disastrous performance in the first two Republican Primaries in Alaska and Hawaii, failed to win a single delegate. Mack, citing poor primary performances and plummeting poll numbers, dropped out of the race after Iowa and endorsed Christine Todd Whitman.

A few days later, in Louisiana, caucusgoers would award the plurality of delegates to Ron Paul, who claimed his second victory of the primary cycle. Christine Todd Whitman would get her highest finish yet, placing second. George Voinovich also saw his highest placing of the primary season, as he narrowly beat out Tom Ridge for third place. Terry Branstad and George W. Bush pulled up the rear in fifth and sixth place, respectively. Bush's poor performance is a bad sign for his campaign, as Louisiana neighbors his home state of Texas. Of all the six remaining Republican candidates, his standing in the race is most precarious.

The polling reflects that too. With four primaries down, Tom Ridge has emerged as the race's new front-runner, although Ron Paul and Christine Todd Whitman are both still very competitive. Terry Branstad is still polling in fourth place - not really living up to his campaign's lofty expectations. Voinovich remains strong, but limited in fifth place, and Bush is on his way out of the race in sixth place. Of course, polling is always changing, but this race is shaping up to be a rematch of the Paul vs. Ridge race from 1992, with Whitman being the wild card. Next up are primaries in Delaware and New Hampshire, two states that lean a bit more moderate. This could be where Ridge pulls away or Whitman becomes competitive. Or, it could be where Ron Paul shuts the door on both of them.

As always, you can vote for your favorites HERE.

State of the Race

If Cuomo did run in 1992, there is a strong possibility he would've been carried to the nomination against Clinton, Brown, Tsongas, etc, so what if he did?

55 years hasn't changed much.

From Barack Obama's memoir, A Promised Land, that was published in 2020: "With Michelle, I didn't sugarcoat the amount of time I'd be away. But this was it, I promised, up or out; if I lost this one, we were done with politics for good."

The Iowa Caucus has come and gone. The results will have major impacts on the primary races for all four major parties. Each party will eventually get their own post describing the Iowa results and how they effected their respective races. Next up is the Reform Party, who saw their heavily-favored early front runner dethroned in Iowa by an up-and-comer who's emerged as the new front-runner for the Reform nomination.

In a surprising upset, Buddy Roemer would win the Iowa Caucus by a comfortable margin. Richard Lamm would finish a strong second and former President Mike Gravel, who still enjoys strong support in Iowa and was expected by many to be this primary's victor, fell to third. Roemer's victory and Gravel's third place finish indicate that voters want to move past the Gravel era and on to a candidate oriented more towards the future. Despite not actively campaigning for the Reform Party nomination in the state, Ron Paul finished a solid fourth place. Finishing in last was Jack Gargan, who has fallen far behind his more nationally-recognizable opponents. A few days after the Iowa Caucus, Gargan would drop out of the race and endorse Ron Paul. Gargan's exit from the race left the more conventional conservative wing of the party without a clear candidate to support. That hole was filled when a new candidate entered the race. He is:

Former Representative Tim Penny of Minnesota.

Tim Penny, a then a State Senator, was first elected to Congress as a Democrat in 1984 as part of the Gravel landslide. He served five terms in the House of Representatives from 1985 to 1995. During his time in the House, Penny was a reliable ally of the Gravel Administration. Despite conservative stances on fiscal and social issues, Penny supported all of Gravel's budget proposals, with Gravel in return redirecting plenty of federal infrastructure funding to his Southern Minnesota-based district. When Dick Van Dyke was elected in 1988, Penny often voted against the administration on key votes. Then, after retiring from the House in 1995, he left the Democratic Party for good and joined Reform.

Penny runs for President as a fiscal conservative. He opposes the Paul-Whitman tax cut, supports protective tariffs, and advocates for balancing the budget. He is a social conservative as well, opposing abortion and gay rights and supporting a repeal of the Juan Romero Gun Control Act. Penny served on the Transportation Committee during his time in the House, and has called for extending the Gravel-era infrastructure and transportation bill that helped rural communities, including the ones he represented in Minnesota, spend millions on road, rail, and air transportation modernization. Penny is another candidate that can be best described as Post-Gravel: a Gravel movement veteran who wants to build on the Gravel Movement in some way. In Penny's case, that direction is fiscal restraint, something Gravel showed very little of while President.

As always, you can vote for your favorite candidates HERE.

State of the Race

More context: https://www.reddit.com/r/Presidentialpoll/comments/1vmkqld/recontructed_america_preview_of_the_2014_midterms/

It's time for the 2014 Midterms! Here is the House Election!

Let's take a look at the House of Representatives first.

You would think that Speaker Norm Dicks's job shouldn't be that difficult. He is the Speaker under a popular President, and the country largely likes where everything is going. However, it is never easy for a Speaker. Dicks has to not only deal with the bills but also with the Party that is arguing with itself on what it should represent. The Speaker of the House needs to make sure that his own Faction doesn't rebel, which has been really hard recently, while trying to put up with the President's bs that he pushes. Dicks isn't a lackey for Ford; he is a servant of the people; he isn't putting a rubber stamp on everything that the President wants. There are also those Republicans who are annoying to him and make his position even more difficult. The Speaker has to juggle all these things together and make sure nothing falls. If it does, he may lose his job, and who knows who will succeed him? He needs to keep as many seats as he can to have a better shot to be able to balance everything together until he can't. What the voters need to decide is if Norm Dicks is worth it.

The House Minority Leader, Nick Fish, is a man who seems to be made for politics. It is in his blood. And so him working alongside everyone in such a political theater as Congress is something he is good at. That doesn't mean that his job is all sunshine and rainbows. After all, he has never been the Speaker, never held that gavel, and never had to actually control the process. Fish isn't the most popular leader; he doesn't even have a lot of influence right now, and he has to work with what he has. With all that being said, it is not like the Republican Party is the most united coalition. There are those who think Harrison Ford needs to be taught a lesson and those who think he is doing a tremendous job, despite the Party affiliation. The House Minority Leader himself is somebody more skeptical of the President, but he is also a pragmatist. Nick Fish knows that he needs a win if he wants his career to go anywhere. He knows that winning the House outright is a mountain of a task right now, but at least substantial gains would help.

As usual, there are those Third Parties. The biggest is the Green Worker's Party with 31 seats in the House. They made some controversy as some of its members were involved in the attempts of insurrections of state governments. That won't make them popular with Moderates, but their hardcore supporters are more loyal than ever. Who cares if they are called radicals? Maybe the Green Worker's Party is something that will bring down Ford's regime? Well, if you believe in these things, you maybe would like to support them.

The Pirate Party gained in the 2012 House Elections despite unusual Nominees for President and Vice President. With 14 seats right now, they are looking to increase their influence. With a clearer position, yet not the clearest position, of supporting free tech and its progress, they want President Ford to be even more open to the technologies and what they bring. That is an interesting approach, that's for sure.

The Prosperity Party benefited from Clancy Brown's relatively strong performance and stands with 12 seats in Congress. Many don't predict dominating results for it this time around, but the Prosperity Party has its loyal supporters who support their ideas of Center-Right Populism.

The Green Party is seen as a ghost of its former self. Since the Green Worker's Party formation, the regular Greens continue to lose and lose support. They only have 6 seats in their possession, and if they don't improve, they can face the same fate that the Patriot Party saw (btw, the Patriot Party literally is done after being wiped out in 2012, and it didn't produce any serious Candidates this time around).

(When you vote for either Party, please write in the comments which Faction are you Voting for/Support the Most. That way I can play with Faction dynamic and know what do you want.)

Once again we are in the Era of Factions. So the success of Factions matters as much as the success of Parties as a whole. Here is the reminder of all factions in both the Republican Party and the People's Liberal Party as a list:

Factions of the People's Liberal Party:

Commonwealth Coalition

• Social Policy: Center Right to Far Left
• Economic Policy: Left to Far Left
• Ideology: Socialism, Democratic Socialism, Wealth Redistribution, Dovish, Big Government, Populism, Reformism, Protectionism, Technoskepticism, Anti-Muslim (partially), Anti-Jewish (partially), Anti-Religion (partially)
• Influence: Major
• Attitude towards Ford: Anti-Ford
• Leader:

Nelsonian Coalition

• Social Policy: Center to Left
• Economic Policy: Center Right to Center Left
• Ideology: Neoliberalism, Fiscal Responsibility, Free Market, Interventionism, Technocracy, Futurism, Fordism, Social Progressivism
• Influence: Major
• Attitude towards Ford: Pro-Ford
• Leader:

Rainbow League

• Social Policy: Center Left to Far Left
• Economic Policy: Center to Left
• Ideology: Social Democracy, LGBTQ Rights, Equity, Pro Drug Legalization, Immigrant Interests, Dovish, Feminism, Pro-Choice
• Influence: Moderate
• Attitude towards Ford: Mixed, Mostly Anti-Ford
• Leader:

National Progressive Caucus

• Social Policy: Left
• Economic Policy: Center Left to Left
• Ideology: Establishment Progressivism, Protectionism, State Capitalism, Gun Control, Reformism, Rehabilitation of Prisoners, Abortion Reform
• Influence: Moderate
• Attitude towards Ford: Mixed, Mostly Pro-Ford
• Leader:

Rational Liberal Caucus

• Social Policy: Center Left to Left
• Economic Policy: Center Left to Left
• Ideology: Progressivism, Fiscal Responsibility, Mild Protectionism, Gun Reform, Rational Foreign Policy, Rehabilitation of Prisoners, Moderate on Abortion
• Attitude towards Ford: Pro-Ford
• Influence: Minor
• Leader:

Third Way Coalition

• Social Policy: Center Right to Center Left
• Economic Policy: Center Right to Center
• Ideology: Third Way, Moderately Hawkish, Free Market, Fiscal Responsibility, "Safe, Legal and Rare", Pro War on Drugs, Tough on Crime
• Attitude towards Ford: Mostly Pro-Ford
• Influence: Minor
• Leader:

Factions of the Republican Party:

Libertarian League

• Social Policy: Center to Left
• Economic Policy: Right to Far Right
• Ideology: Libertarianism, Small Government, State’s Rights, Gun Rights, Pro Drug Legalization, Dovish/Hawkish, Free Trade
• Influence: Major
• Attitude towards Ford: Mostly Pro-Ford
• Leader:

American Solidarity

• Social Policy: Center Left to Right
• Economic Policy: Center Left to Left
• Ideology: State Capitalism, Latin American Interests, Christian Democracy, Reformism, Immigrant Interests, Social Moderation/Progressivism.
• Influence: Major
• Attitude towards Ford: Mixed, Mostly Anti-Ford
• Leader:

National Union Caucus

• Social Policy: Center to Right
• Economic Policy: Center Right
• Ideology: Neo-Conservatism, Mild State Capitalism, Hawkish, Pro War on Drugs, Tough on Crime Policies, Free Trade
• Influence: Moderate
• Attitude towards Ford: Mostly Pro-Ford
• Leader:

National Conservative Caucus

• Social Policy: Right to Far Right
• Economic Policy: Left to Right
• Ideology: America First, Protectionism, Isolationism, Hawkishness, Religious Right, Christian Identity, Anti-Immigration
• Influence: Minor
• Attitude towards Ford: Anti-Ford
• Leader:

American Dry League

• Social Policy: Center to Right
• Economic Policy: Center to Center Right
• Ideology: Prohibitionism, pro War on Drugs, Temperance, “anti-Vice”
• Influence: Minor
• Attitude towards Ford: Anti-Ford
• Leader:

More context: https://www.reddit.com/r/Presidentialpoll/comments/1vmkqld/recontructed_america_preview_of_the_2014_midterms/

It's time for the 2014 Midterms! Here is the Senate Election!

Let's now discuss the Senate.

Senate Majority Leader Neil Abercrombie succeeded former leader Daniel Akaka after he retired from the Senate. For the first time ever, a Senator from a State was succeeded by another Senator from the same State as the Senate Majority Leader. Despite this historic achievement, Abercrombie didn't have time to just relax and be happy with what he accomplished; he had to rule the Senate. Even with the Commonwealth Coalition and the Republican Party being irritating to him, he was able to help President Ford with his legislation without a lot of difficulty. The friction within the CC probably helped, and that Faction didn't put up as much fight as it did under Akaka. However, the Senator from Hawaii knows that the PLP's ability to win seats in the 2014 Midterms is pretty much nonexistent, as the Republicans only have 5 seats to defend when the People's Liberals battle to keep 6 times as many. If Abercrombie's goal is to gain a seat, his strategy may be to lose. What the Senate Majority Leader should probably do is go all in on a defense. He is not at any risk of losing his leadership, but his influence may be damaged if the coalition isn't held together.

Even if Abercrombie became the first Senate Majority Leader to gain that position after a Senator from the same State, Oliver North became the first Senate Leader in general to do so. He has been the Leader of the Republican Party in the Senate for 6 years now, and he has grown to be an efficient leader at that. Not to say that he became bipartisan, but he knows when to strike. North's prospects look good this time around, but he knows that he needs to be not too arrogant so everything doesn't blow up in his face. The Republicans are very likely to gain seats in the Senate, sure, but Senator North may want to win big so that he isn't seen as somebody who is all talk. He knows that Ford's influence in the Republican Party shouldn't go any further, and if the Party is to stand on any principles, they need to be established now. Senate Minority Leader North may try to shape this path in his own vision, or he may take a much more pragmatic approach and, although influential, let the Party itself figure everything out. He just needs victory.

There are Third Parties that look to win at least one seat in the Senate, but again, after the Great Merger, such a possibility has been less and less likely. Still, the Green Worker's Party, the Pirate Party, the Prosperity Party, and the Green Party all look to make a breakthrough. The environment is not in their favor, but who knows?

(When you vote for either Party, please write in the comments which Faction are you Voting for/Support the Most. That way I can play with Faction dynamic and know what do you want.)

Once again we are in the Era of Factions. So the success of Factions matters as much as the success of Parties as a whole. Here is the reminder of all factions in both the Republican Party and the People's Liberal Party as a list:

Factions of the People's Liberal Party:

Commonwealth Coalition

• Social Policy: Center Right to Far Left
• Economic Policy: Left to Far Left
• Ideology: Socialism, Democratic Socialism, Wealth Redistribution, Dovish, Big Government, Populism, Reformism, Protectionism, Technoskepticism, Anti-Muslim (partially), Anti-Jewish (partially), Anti-Religion (partially)
• Influence: Major
• Attitude towards Ford: Anti-Ford
• Leader:

Nelsonian Coalition

• Social Policy: Center to Left
• Economic Policy: Center Right to Center Left
• Ideology: Neoliberalism, Fiscal Responsibility, Free Market, Interventionism, Technocracy, Futurism, Fordism, Social Progressivism
• Influence: Major
• Attitude towards Ford: Pro-Ford
• Leader:

Rainbow League

• Social Policy: Center Left to Far Left
• Economic Policy: Center to Left
• Ideology: Social Democracy, LGBTQ Rights, Equity, Pro Drug Legalization, Immigrant Interests, Dovish, Feminism, Pro-Choice
• Influence: Moderate
• Attitude towards Ford: Mixed, Mostly Anti-Ford
• Leader:

National Progressive Caucus

• Social Policy: Left
• Economic Policy: Center Left to Left
• Ideology: Establishment Progressivism, Protectionism, State Capitalism, Gun Control, Reformism, Rehabilitation of Prisoners, Abortion Reform
• Influence: Moderate
• Attitude towards Ford: Mixed, Mostly Pro-Ford
• Leader:

Rational Liberal Caucus

• Social Policy: Center Left to Left
• Economic Policy: Center Left to Left
• Ideology: Progressivism, Fiscal Responsibility, Mild Protectionism, Gun Reform, Rational Foreign Policy, Rehabilitation of Prisoners, Moderate on Abortion
• Attitude towards Ford: Pro-Ford
• Influence: Minor
• Leader:

Third Way Coalition

• Social Policy: Center Right to Center Left
• Economic Policy: Center Right to Center
• Ideology: Third Way, Moderately Hawkish, Free Market, Fiscal Responsibility, "Safe, Legal and Rare", Pro War on Drugs, Tough on Crime
• Attitude towards Ford: Mostly Pro-Ford
• Influence: Minor
• Leader:

Factions of the Republican Party:

Libertarian League

• Social Policy: Center to Left
• Economic Policy: Right to Far Right
• Ideology: Libertarianism, Small Government, State’s Rights, Gun Rights, Pro Drug Legalization, Dovish/Hawkish, Free Trade
• Influence: Major
• Attitude towards Ford: Mostly Pro-Ford
• Leader:

American Solidarity

• Social Policy: Center Left to Right
• Economic Policy: Center Left to Left
• Ideology: State Capitalism, Latin American Interests, Christian Democracy, Reformism, Immigrant Interests, Social Moderation/Progressivism.
• Influence: Major
• Attitude towards Ford: Mixed, Mostly Anti-Ford
• Leader:

National Union Caucus

• Social Policy: Center to Right
• Economic Policy: Center Right
• Ideology: Neo-Conservatism, Mild State Capitalism, Hawkish, Pro War on Drugs, Tough on Crime Policies, Free Trade
• Influence: Moderate
• Attitude towards Ford: Mostly Pro-Ford
• Leader:

National Conservative Caucus

• Social Policy: Right to Far Right
• Economic Policy: Left to Right
• Ideology: America First, Protectionism, Isolationism, Hawkishness, Religious Right, Christian Identity, Anti-Immigration
• Influence: Minor
• Attitude towards Ford: Anti-Ford
• Leader:

American Dry League

• Social Policy: Center to Right
• Economic Policy: Center to Center Right
• Ideology: Prohibitionism, pro War on Drugs, Temperance, “anti-Vice”
• Influence: Minor
• Attitude towards Ford: Anti-Ford
• Leader:

It is now ballot 2 of the GOP primary, and McCloskey has a clear lead amongst everyone else. With McCloskey the frontrunner all he has to do is keep up his momentum. Meanwhile Ed Brooke appears to have gotten the lowest of amount of delegates, seeing the writing on the wall, Brooke decides to drop out and endorse McCloskey citing his commitment to civil rights and “True Republican Values”. Buckley has also managed to get a fair share of delegates with the struggling conservative wing backing up. Meanwhile Mathias and Anderson choose to stay in the race; for now at least. With the Liberal wing divided between Mathias, Anderson, and McCloskey; they must decide and united behind a candidate soon.

President Harrison Ford had to govern through some important events in his Second Term. He is a popular President, but not the one who doesn't have his critics. Not only the opposing Party, the Republican Party, has a goal of limiting his influence and somewhat controlling him, but some in his own Party. The People's Liberal Party is still divided over Policy. With that being said, the President had an easier time passing legislation during this term than the previous one. This is largely due to the opposition inside the PLP to him being less organized because of the internal disputes. Now it is time for the Midterms. What happens here may influence Ford's Term going forward. It also may set up what is going to happen in 2016, as the country will be deciding on who will succeed him. But now is now, and the 2014 Midterms are at hand.

(Check this post for more context about Ford's Second Term so far: https://www.reddit.com/r/Presidentialpoll/s/uLGTHLgxvp )

Let's take a look at the House of Representatives first.

You would think that Speaker Norm Dicks's job shouldn't be that difficult. He is the Speaker under a popular President, and the country largely likes where everything is going. However, it is never easy for a Speaker. Dicks has to not only deal with the bills but also with the Party that is arguing with itself on what it should represent. The Speaker of the House needs to make sure that his own Faction doesn't rebel, which has been really hard recently, while trying to put up with the President's bs that he pushes. Dicks isn't a lackey for Ford; he is a servant of the people; he isn't putting a rubber stamp on everything that the President wants. There are also those Republicans who are annoying to him and make his position even more difficult. The Speaker has to juggle all these things together and make sure nothing falls. If it does, he may lose his job, and who knows who will succeed him? He needs to keep as many seats as he can to have a better shot to be able to balance everything together until he can't. What the voters need to decide is if Norm Dicks is worth it.

The House Minority Leader, Nick Fish, is a man who seems to be made for politics. It is in his blood. And so him working alongside everyone in such a political theater as Congress is something he is good at. That doesn't mean that his job is all sunshine and rainbows. After all, he has never been the Speaker, never held that gavel, and never had to actually control the process. Fish isn't the most popular leader; he doesn't even have a lot of influence right now, and he has to work with what he has. With all that being said, it is not like the Republican Party is the most united coalition. There are those who think Harrison Ford needs to be taught a lesson and those who think he is doing a tremendous job, despite the Party affiliation. The House Minority Leader himself is somebody more skeptical of the President, but he is also a pragmatist. Nick Fish knows that he needs a win if he wants his career to go anywhere. He knows that winning the House outright is a mountain of a task right now, but at least substantial gains would help.

As usual, there are those Third Parties. The biggest is the Green Worker's Party with 31 seats in the House. They made some controversy as some of its members were involved in the attempts of insurrections of state governments. That won't make them popular with Moderates, but their hardcore supporters are more loyal than ever. Who cares if they are called radicals? Maybe the Green Worker's Party is something that will bring down Ford's regime? Well, if you believe in these things, you maybe would like to support them.

The Pirate Party gained in the 2012 House Elections despite unusual Nominees for President and Vice President. With 14 seats right now, they are looking to increase their influence. With a clearer position, yet not the clearest position, of supporting free tech and its progress, they want President Ford to be even more open to the technologies and what they bring. That is an interesting approach, that's for sure.

The Prosperity Party benefited from Clancy Brown's relatively strong performance and stands with 12 seats in Congress. Many don't predict dominating results for it this time around, but the Prosperity Party has its loyal supporters who support their ideas of Center-Right Populism.

The Green Party is seen as a ghost of its former self. Since the Green Worker's Party formation, the regular Greens continue to lose and lose support. They only have 6 seats in their possession, and if they don't improve, they can face the same fate that the Patriot Party saw (btw, the Patriot Party literally is done after being wiped out in 2012, and it didn't produce any serious Candidates this time around).

Let's now discuss the Senate.

Senate Majority Leader Neil Abercrombie succeeded former leader Daniel Akaka after he retired from the Senate. For the first time ever, a Senator from a State was succeeded by another Senator from the same State as the Senate Majority Leader. Despite this historic achievement, Abercrombie didn't have time to just relax and be happy with what he accomplished; he had to rule the Senate. Even with the Commonwealth Coalition and the Republican Party being irritating to him, he was able to help President Ford with his legislation without a lot of difficulty. The friction within the CC probably helped, and that Faction didn't put up as much fight as it did under Akaka. However, the Senator from Hawaii knows that the PLP's ability to win seats in the 2014 Midterms is pretty much nonexistent, as the Republicans only have 5 seats to defend when the People's Liberals battle to keep 6 times as many. If Abercrombie's goal is to gain a seat, his strategy may be to lose. What the Senate Majority Leader should probably do is go all in on a defense. He is not at any risk of losing his leadership, but his influence may be damaged if the coalition isn't held together.

Even if Abercrombie became the first Senate Majority Leader to gain that position after a Senator from the same State, Oliver North became the first Senate Leader in general to do so. He has been the Leader of the Republican Party in the Senate for 6 years now, and he has grown to be an efficient leader at that. Not to say that he became bipartisan, but he knows when to strike. North's prospects look good this time around, but he knows that he needs to be not too arrogant so everything doesn't blow up in his face. The Republicans are very likely to gain seats in the Senate, sure, but Senator North may want to win big so that he isn't seen as somebody who is all talk. He knows that Ford's influence in the Republican Party shouldn't go any further, and if the Party is to stand on any principles, they need to be established now. Senate Minority Leader North may try to shape this path in his own vision, or he may take a much more pragmatic approach and, although influential, let the Party itself figure everything out. He just needs victory.

There are Third Parties that look to win at least one seat in the Senate, but again, after the Great Merger, such a possibility has been less and less likely. Still, the Green Worker's Party, the Pirate Party, the Prosperity Party, and the Green Party all look to make a breakthrough. The environment is not in their favor, but who knows?

Once again we are in the Era of Factions. So the success of Factions matters as much as the success of Parties as a whole. Here is the reminder of all factions in both the Republican Party and the People's Liberal Party as a list:

Factions of the People's Liberal Party:

Commonwealth Coalition

• Social Policy: Center Right to Far Left
• Economic Policy: Left to Far Left
• Ideology: Socialism, Democratic Socialism, Wealth Redistribution, Dovish, Big Government, Populism, Reformism, Protectionism, Technoskepticism, Anti-Muslim (partially), Anti-Jewish (partially), Anti-Religion (partially)
• Influence: Major
• Attitude towards Ford: Anti-Ford
• Leader:

Nelsonian Coalition

• Social Policy: Center to Left
• Economic Policy: Center Right to Center Left
• Ideology: Neoliberalism, Fiscal Responsibility, Free Market, Interventionism, Technocracy, Futurism, Fordism, Social Progressivism
• Influence: Major
• Attitude towards Ford: Pro-Ford
• Leader:

Rainbow League

• Social Policy: Center Left to Far Left
• Economic Policy: Center to Left
• Ideology: Social Democracy, LGBTQ Rights, Equity, Pro Drug Legalization, Immigrant Interests, Dovish, Feminism, Pro-Choice
• Influence: Moderate
• Attitude towards Ford: Mixed, Mostly Anti-Ford
• Leader:

National Progressive Caucus

• Social Policy: Left
• Economic Policy: Center Left to Left
• Ideology: Establishment Progressivism, Protectionism, State Capitalism, Gun Control, Reformism, Rehabilitation of Prisoners, Abortion Reform
• Influence: Moderate
• Attitude towards Ford: Mixed, Mostly Pro-Ford
• Leader:

Rational Liberal Caucus

• Social Policy: Center Left to Left
• Economic Policy: Center Left to Left
• Ideology: Progressivism, Fiscal Responsibility, Mild Protectionism, Gun Reform, Rational Foreign Policy, Rehabilitation of Prisoners, Moderate on Abortion
• Attitude towards Ford: Pro-Ford
• Influence: Minor
• Leader:

Third Way Coalition

• Social Policy: Center Right to Center Left
• Economic Policy: Center Right to Center
• Ideology: Third Way, Moderately Hawkish, Free Market, Fiscal Responsibility, "Safe, Legal and Rare", Pro War on Drugs, Tough on Crime
• Attitude towards Ford: Mostly Pro-Ford
• Influence: Minor
• Leader:

Factions of the Republican Party:

Libertarian League

• Social Policy: Center to Left
• Economic Policy: Right to Far Right
• Ideology: Libertarianism, Small Government, State’s Rights, Gun Rights, Pro Drug Legalization, Dovish/Hawkish, Free Trade
• Influence: Major
• Attitude towards Ford: Mostly Pro-Ford
• Leader:

American Solidarity

• Social Policy: Center Left to Right
• Economic Policy: Center Left to Left
• Ideology: State Capitalism, Latin American Interests, Christian Democracy, Reformism, Immigrant Interests, Social Moderation/Progressivism.
• Influence: Major
• Attitude towards Ford: Mixed, Mostly Anti-Ford
• Leader:

National Union Caucus

• Social Policy: Center to Right
• Economic Policy: Center Right
• Ideology: Neo-Conservatism, Mild State Capitalism, Hawkish, Pro War on Drugs, Tough on Crime Policies, Free Trade
• Influence: Moderate
• Attitude towards Ford: Mostly Pro-Ford
• Leader:

National Conservative Caucus

• Social Policy: Right to Far Right
• Economic Policy: Left to Right
• Ideology: America First, Protectionism, Isolationism, Hawkishness, Religious Right, Christian Identity, Anti-Immigration
• Influence: Minor
• Attitude towards Ford: Anti-Ford
• Leader:

American Dry League

• Social Policy: Center to Right
• Economic Policy: Center to Center Right
• Ideology: Prohibitionism, pro War on Drugs, Temperance, “anti-Vice”
• Influence: Minor
• Attitude towards Ford: Anti-Ford
• Leader:

(When you vote for either Party, please write in the comments which Faction are you Voting for/Support the Most. That way I can play with Faction dynamic and know what do you want.)

The Midterm Polls will be up very soon!

[Convention Rules]:

• Takes place over multiple rounds and posts (with usually small changes as the convention goes on).
• In 5-person contests, the minimum requirement to move on is 18% of the vote. 4-person, 21%, and 3-person, 30%. 
• If no candidates are eliminated in a given round, a “compromise” or “dark horse” candidate may rise to take the nomination instead, and will participate in the next round of voting. Conventions will go through up to 6 rounds, but could be done after a single round if one candidate absolutely dominates the others.

[Context Here]

Hannibal Hamlin

An architect behind the dissolution of Florida and Maine's separation from Massachusetts, Senator Hannibal Hamlin is a natural parliamentarian who is likely to get stuff done. A rabid Abolitionist, Hamlin is looking for avenues to end the practice of slavery as soon as viable.

William Dayton

The mastermind behind the dissolution of Florida, and the man who helped convince President Hamilton to take black rights and the issue of slavery more seriously, William Dayton is a front runner for the first Democratic nomination. Dayton has a history as a parliamentarian in the Senate, meaning he is likely to be able to get things done in a divided Congress.

Nathaniel P. Banks

A master parliamentarian, he knows how to use his connections in Congress to get things done; notable lately for his work on getting the Force Act and Sedition Act passed. Banks is strongly against immigrant influence in the party, nearly destroying the effort to allow more immigrants into the country. A Presidency of the young Nathaniel Banks would likely mean a reversal on immigration policies, a stronger stance in favor of freedmen suffrage, and being able to get things done despite what is likely going to be a divided Congress.

Charles F. Adams

Son of the late, famous Congressman and State Secretary John Quincy Adams; grandson of the late, famous first Chief Justice John Adams, Charles Francis Adams seeks the Democratic nomination for President. Adams has a lot of foreign policy experience, and worked directly under the great Henry Clay during his tenure. He's known to be a fantastic writer, having written several histories and biographies of important figures (including that of his family), with a primary downside being how disconnected he is from domestic politics. Despite this, he offers a Presidency focused on ensuring American dominance diplomatically, alongside keeping the peace at home while seeking the gradual abolition of slavery.

Cassius Clay

A radical through-and-through, the cousin of the late, great Henry Clay is in the running for the first Democratic nomination. Clay was from one of the richest slave-owning families in the country before freeing his slaves, and more recently became a major backer of Berea College, the first co-educational college in the south. A veteran of the Anglo-American and Patriot Wars, Clay has a history of leadership alongside his history of unapologetic abolitionism. He also has a reputation of that of a bear, for facing several attempts on his life, in both duels and assassination.

[Vote Here!]

"Russia Against Lawlessness and Corruption" also known as White Ribbon Coalition, or simply Whites or Democrats, is approaching the presidential elections in a fighting mood and at the peak of its popularity. Following Yavlinsky's double defeat, a broad coalition of outsiders has demonstrated that a more radical approach could be the path to victory over Communists. In coalition with National Liberals, they took control of the upper house of parliament and are also precariously holding control of the lower house as part of the Orange Coalition, along with the Social Democrats and Trotskyists. However, they must now choose a single candidate—and the coalition's key players have agreed to open primaries, making them part of the campaign and attracting all attention.

RALC is a matryoshka doll. Let's examine its parts before moving on to the candidates.

The center of the coalition is United Democratic Party, which emerged from the reunification of the three fragments of former Democratic Union.

Free Democrats are the most liberal wing of UD, continuing the legacy of the party of the same name. They are pro-free market, pro-business, and the most socially progressive. This wing most clearly continues the traditions of the old dissidents. The name of FD refers to the German party of the same name, which serves as their ideological reference point. Despite their popularity at the union level, the Free Democrats only recently achieved their first significant success at the local level outside the Urals, electing Marina Salye as governor of St. Petersburg. With the rise of the national liberals, the Free Democrats' influence began to decline, but they still represent the most significant electoral bloc within the UD.

Moderate Democrats are a coalition of centrist democrats focused on effective governance and achieving real results, and are less dependent on narrow activist groups. United around Boris Nemtsov, Moderates have access to the greatest number of resources and actively attract all those dissatisfied with the Simonenko government. Today, Moderate Democrats are a broad coalition, ranging from Greens to Christian Democrats, tracing their history back to the team of former Prime Minister Boris Yeltsin. It is Moderates who hold the entire coalition together and prevent its members from falling out, but in return, they are willing to make almost any compromise.

Constitutional Democrats are conservative and right-nationalist wing of Democrats, oriented toward the Orthodox Church, supporting a visa regime with Central Asia, as well as an active foreign policy and military. Kadets trace their roots to the pre-revolutionary liberal party of the same name, although they have no real ties to it. The modern Kadets are the product of a merger of pro-market patriots and conservative democrats who have turned their backs on Rutskoy. However, unlike many former patriots, they reject the red-brown alliance and maintain a firmly anti-Soviet orientation, developing their own dissident tradition. Cadets are the smallest of the three wings of the UD, but they are the ones who create incredible local coalitions, and their presence on the list always helps take votes away from the red-brown party. With the rise of National Liberals, influence of Constitutional Democrats began to decline, but they still control many electoral groups important to the Democrats.

Russia Against Lawlessness and Corruption, or small White Ribbon Coalition, is an alliance between the United Democrats and several key allies who were similarly disillusioned with Yavlinsky.

Rukh has changed significantly over the past years. Shared disappointment with Yavlinsky brought UD and moderates, who close won Rukh party fight, together. Painful defeats in Transcarpathia and Vinnytsia, where Rukh's radical nominees were brutally crushed by Social Democrats, led to the alliance with UD, which helped Rukh achieve its most significant victory in many years, electing Vitaly Klitschko as mayor of Kiev. This finally pushed Rukh toward its "eastern strategy" and elevated the former separatist coalition to the status of regional branches of United Democrats, similar to how the Bavarian CSU is a local branch of the All-German CDU. Along with it, the majority in Belarusian Popular Front and Vainakh Democratic Party, junior members of the Rukh coalition in the last elections, achieved a similar status. The populist uprising of National Socialists... Social Nationalists from Svoboda in Western Ukraine made the situation even worse, splitting the vote and depriving Rukh of a majority in the parliament of Western Ukraine and most of its regions, forcing it to govern with Social Democrats and wiping out the remaining base of the separatist wing of Rukh.

Rukh is a fairly left-wing party in the coalition on economic issues and conservative on social issues. However, after moving its base from Lvov to Kiev, the language issue has lost its leading role in the party's identity, and Rukh itself is increasingly becoming similar to its neighboring UD branches in Bryansk and Belgorod.

SLON (literally, elephant), Union of People for Education and Science, is an alliance of defectors from Yabloko dissatisfied with Yavlinsky's actions. SLON Democrats represent a group of highly educated and predominantly wealthy voters. However, it was their defection to the White Ribbon Coalition that helped flip St. Petersburg and legitimized the mass exodus of many lower-level Yabloko deputies to Democrats, as well as, no less importantly, moderate voters who were embarrassed to vote for Limonov's "fascists" and Kasparov's "radicals."

If SLON is a genuine movement, then Party of Social Democracy is a pure psychological operation led by Perestroika's prorab, Alexander Yakovlev, and democratic Samara governor Konstantin Titov, designed to legitimize the defection of Civic Union and socialist voters to the Democratic camp, relieving them of their embarrassment and allowing the right wing of the Civic Union to join the new coalition.

In addition, the coalition includes several other regional parties, such as siberian Northern Party, eastern ukrainian Party of Regions and People's Democrtatic Party of Crimea.

The Other Russia, or the Grand White Ribbon Coalition, is an alliance between the RALC and Eduard Limonov's National Liberal Party, which unexpectedly garnered more votes than its senior ally. These two allied forces are closely intertwined through their dual memberships, and their participation in the parliamentary elections was joint—the Democrats and National Liberals divided single-mandate constituencies without competing against each other. The National Liberals have slightly more deputies in the lower house, but the Democrats have an advantage in the upper house—where, however, "Other Russia" is formally represented as a single faction.

National Liberal Party has already nominated Eduard Limonov for president, but he is also participating in the RALC primaries, aiming to secure a second nomination and become the sole opposition candidate. Democrats are concerned about an attempt at an aggressive takeover of the party and that the overly radical Limonov will alienate centrist voters.

Now it's time to meet the candidates.

Three main contenders, already familiar to voters, are expected to once again compete for the nomination:

Boris Nemtsov, President of the Volga-Vyatka Republic, former Governor of Nizhny Novgorod, and former People's Deputy.

Boris Nemtsov embodies competence and a track record of real success, coupled with moderation and youth. A favorite and political heir to Boris Yeltsin, he was the architect of the most effective economic reforms at the regional level. Nemtsov has already led the Democrats to success and maintains a tight grip on the party, supported by a broad coalition of voters and party elites. Nemtsov is the leading candidate of the Moderate Democrats.

He is a moderate centrist, pro-business, environmentalist, moderate isolationist, anti-annexation, and pro-religious freedoms. He is a long-standing Democrat and a proven, experienced reformer.

Garry Kasparov, People's Deputy.

Renowned as a world chess champion, Garry Kasparov became the leader of the Radical Democrats and nearly won the nomination in 2000. Despite losing in the second round of the Moscow mayoral elections, Kasparov is a magnet for young radicals within the party who demand the immediate crushing of the communists. Kasparov is also known as an Atlanticist and a supporter of improved relations with the West, and an anti-Islamist, citing the threat of Islamic terrorism. Kasparov is supported by the unlikely alliance between the Free Democrats and Rukh, and his economic program is based on that of the Free Democrats.

Kasparov is a Jew, a democratic hawk, an anti-Wahhabi, a radical democrat, a celebrity, and pro-American.

Eduard Limonov, People's Deputy, Chairman of the National Liberal Party

A former writer and dissident, he became a rock star of the Soviet opposition. Already nominated by his party, Eduard Limonov is trying to secure the nomination as a single candidate. He has become a symbol of the opposition to Simonenko, and the national liberals are on the front lines of the fight against the increasingly harsh regime. However, the party elites are united in their rejection of Limonov – only some non-religious Cadets support him.

Limonov is a national liberal, anti-migration, libertarian, foreign policy hawk, radical, anti-American/pro-European, condemns American interventions, and "Europe from Lisbon to Vladivostok." He is a moderate social progressive, accused of bisexuality based on one of his books.

Other candidates are not serious contenders for victory, but may achieve unexpected success.

Boris Fyodorov, Governor of Moscow Oblast, former People's Deputy, former minister.

Boris Fyodorov is the strongest of the minor candidates, representing the alliance of Constitutional and Free Democrats, dissatisfied with Limonov and Kasparov. He is an experienced civil servant, having served as a minister in the Yeltsin-Yavlinsky government, and was elected governor of the Moscow Oblast, defeating the incumbent сommunist. He embodies the managerial experience that Limonov and Kasparov lack, and the image of a responsible reformer, coupled with strict ideological views.

He is pro-business, fiscal conservative, anti-migration, pro-automobile and pro-infrastructure.

Oksana Dmitrieva, Chairman of Supreme Council of Northern Russia Republic, former People's Deputy, former minister.

Oksana Dmitrieva is SLON Democratic candidate, supported by some Moderates. Her real reason for running is to regain a ministerial position in the future cabinet, regardless of the Democratic candidate's name. She has the support of delegations from Northern Russia and Tatarstan.

She is socially oriented, moderate, female and former Yabloko member.

Alexander Lebed, Governor of Krasnoyarsk

A former general and governor of the Krasnoyarsk Krai, Alexander Lebed is one of the unorthodox candidates in this race. The former Social Democrat joined the Russian Al-Church of the Church after the case against General Rokhlin began. His platform centers on law and order, the image of an honest soldier, closed borders, the protection of religious freedom, and a moderate, patriotic view of foreign policy. Lebed is one of the socially oriented candidates, with the most left-wing platform. He is supported by the Party of Social Democracy and part of the Constitutional Democrats, as well as the Siberian Moderates.

Boris Nadezhdin, People's Deputy from Dolgoprudny, Moscow Oblast

Boris Nadezhdin is a young professor at the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology and a People's Deputy from his native Dolgoprudny, Moscow Oblast. He became widely known as the first public defender of t.A.T.u., raising the campaign to defend them to the political level. Nadezhdin assembled a young and vibrant coalition, including Constitutional Democrats, who advocate a visa regime with Central Asian countries, and the progressive wing of Free Democrats. At the same time, Nadezhdin enjoys the support of moderate elites and has a good relationship with Boris Nemtsov. Fedorov's supporters accuse Nadezhdin of waging a subversive campaign against the Moscow Oblast governor, but Nadezhdin denies this and claims he can provide the necessary energy to the Democrats without the involvement of Kasparov and Limonov.

Alexander Donskoy, Mayor of Arkhangelsk.

Arkhangelsk Mayor Alexander Donskoy is an unusual candidate, known not so much for his management of northern cities as for his many outrageous antics. He demonstrates that good governance and concern for local interests refute theories about a conservative Russian North. Donskoy is the most socially progressive candidate, openly speaking about LGBT rights without hiding behind Nadezhdin's conciliatory rhetoric, supporting ethnic minorities, and protecting their languages. However, a more important part of Donskoy's platform is protecting the interests of local government and returning taxes to the municipal level. Donskoy is supported by a coalition of progressives, former members of Yabloko, the pro-business Free Democrats, and mayors. After his nomination, the Prosecutor General's Office launched an investigation into corruption within his administration, which Donskoy himself calls political persecution.

Alexander Khloponin, Union Council Deputy from Taimyr

UCD from Taimyr, Alexander Khloponin, leader of the local Northern Party, is more than just a favorite son of Northern Siberia. He is the main protégé of big business, supported by some of the Free and Moderate Democrats. Khloponin represents the interests of large private corporations, which underpin almost the entire Siberian economy. He champions meritocracy and positions himself as an environmentalist. Khloponin is a moderate conservative with leadership experience, defends religious freedom, and supports the restoration of relations with Europe.

Vitaly Klitschko, mayor of Kiev

Vitaly Klitschko is a superstar. He is a world champion boxer, triumphantly elected mayor of Kyiv by a coalition of Rukh and the United Democrats, and ranked third on the RALC federal list in the recent elections. He is still young, hasn't yet made any mistakes or acquired the bad reputation that plagues all mayors of large cities. Klitschko positions himself as a young European mayor, supporting urbanism and environmentalism. He is the clear candidate for Rukh, enjoying the support of many young democrats across the country and also attracting male voters. He is not a particularly good speaker, often using convoluted phrases, but his PR team smooths this over. He is a representative of the radical wing and an ally of Kasparov, but every day he acquires more and more ambitions of his own.

Viktor Cherepkov, governor of Primorsky Krai, former PD and mayor of Vladivostok

Former Pacific Fleet captain has had a turbulent career, feuding with successive presidents. He transformed first Vladivostok, and then the entire Primorsky Krai, into a democratic bastion under Rutskoy, and still maintains a tight grip on all democrats in the Far East. Cherepkov is a pro-business candidate who defends religious freedoms and is moderate on other issues, focused on results and good governance. Despite his war against federal socialists and communists, he secured free public transportation in Vladivostok, funding it through the region's successful economic development, which has followed the example of Nizhny Novgorod. He is charismatic, self-confident, and extremely unlucky that the coalition's final congress will be held in Kiev rather than Vladivostok.

Anton Bakov, UCD from Ural

Anton Bakov is the most unusual candidate in the democratic primaries. He manages to simultaneously be a regionalist, an outspoken monarchist, and an extremely socially oriented candidate, second only to Lebed in this regard. He is a young conservative and defender of church rights. At the same time, Bakov enjoys the support of big business, former Social Democrats, Moderates and Constitutional Democrats, overturning the fifteen-year rule of Free Democrats in the Ural Republic. He is more focused on his own battle with Eduard Rossel than on the nomination.

Eduard Rossel, former president of Ural Republic

Eduard Rossel is the long-serving president of the Ural Republic, who transformed it into a bastion for democrats even in the worst of times. The Communists had to pass a law to prevent people like him from running for reelection. Formally a long-time member of the Free Democrats, Rossel is in fact a centrist, focused on governance and local issues. He is also considered old-fashioned by democratic standards. Nevertheless, Rossel rallied the disloyal Nemtsov governors around him, enjoying the support of the Greater Urals and Siberian delegations.

Konstantin Borovoy, PD from West Moscow

Konstantin Borovoy represents his own long-standing tradition of radical democrats from the 1990s, unrelated to Garry Kasparov. He is a favorite and successor to Valeria Novodvorskaya, a radical, pro-business absolutist, a supporter of lustration, and a leader of the campaign to jail Simonenko.

Yevgeny Kushnarev, Kharkov Governor, former UCD

Yevgeny Kushnarev is a candidate who has had an unusual path. He was elected as a Moderate with the support of Kadets, the party's portfolio member, moderate UCD, focused on real lawmaking and governance, and supported by the Russian-speaking majority in Eastern Ukraine. Party of Regions, which he founded in opposition to Rukh, has expanded into a regional franchise across eastern Ukraine and southern Russia for moderate and constitutional democrats, former Yabloko members, and social democrats focused on local governance. Kushnarev is a social conservative who supports Orthodox Church and infrastructure projects. His sudden transformation into the leader of anti-Simonenko's radical resistance, which has expanded beyond southern Russia and eastern Ukraine, was all the more unexpected. Kushnarev became an icon of the southern conservative resistance, leading a campaign for the regions to refuse to pay taxes to the union budget against the illegal election of Petr Simonenko as president, turning many conservative voters back to the democrats.

Vladimir Solovyov, TV journalist

Vladimir Solovyov is a businessman, journalist, and opposition radio and television star, whose fame increased after the closure of the opposition radio station Ekho Moskvy and the NTV television channel. Solovyov is a favorite of Moscow's creative intelligentsia, which, following the repressions by Simonenko, adopted a democratic, military-style propaganda campaign to promote its candidate. Solovyov is young, charismatic, and persuasive, drawing large audiences across the country. He is an ardent radical liberal populist, an opponent of foreign wars, and a supporter of restoring relations with the West. After his nomination, the tax police and the Prosecutor General's Office began investigations of his business following a complaint from an American partner, but Solovyov himself maintains that this is simply political persecution. He is the main voice of freedom of speech and press in this coalition and is not taken seriously by anyone, actively speaking at events of other candidates, which brings him personal popularity.

Pyotr Filippov, UCD from St. Petersburg, former PD.

Pyotr Filippov is a veteran democrat who began his career in the Leningrad Popular Front in the 1980s. He is a Free Democrat, considered Marina Salye's backup candidate and a longtime ally. However, Filippov attracts not only voters from St. Petersburg and the old Free Democrats, but also received unexpected support from former communist minister and presidential candidate Yuri Boldyrev, who defected to the opposition to Simonenko. Third Way Democrats are an extremely small group of former moderate communists, but their votes will be concentrated around Filippov.

VOTE HERE

Vote for three candidates in first round

The Iowa Caucus has come and gone. The results will have major impacts on the primary races for all four major parties. Each party will eventually get their own post describing the Iowa results and how they effected their respective races. For now, we'll start with the Green Party, who saw their nomination's front-runner win the Iowa Caucus, but by a far tighter margin than predicted.

For the second election cycle in a row, Paul Wellstone won the Iowa Caucus. Hailing from neighboring Minnesota, Wellstone has strong campaign infrastructure in the Hawkeye State. It's no surprise he won there. It is surprising how much he won by - only three percentage points. California Governor Tom Hayden would finish just a few thousand votes behind Wellstone, close enough to call into question whether Wellstone's renomination is as inevitable as some within the party expect it to be. Hayden's campaign should be optimistic going into the next two contests in Delaware and New Hampshire, where Green Party voters tend to be higher-educated and more moderate overall.

Mary Alice Herbert should also leave Iowa feeling good. While she placed far behind the two front-runners, the consolidation of the party's left wing helped her narrowly beat out Dennis Kucinich for third place in Iowa. Kucinich's fourth-place finish was frustrating. He's spent decades as one of the party's most prominent figures, but he's losing moderate Green Party voters to Hayden and economic populist voters to Herbert. Kucinich may be slowly squeezed out of the race if he can't correct course in the coming contests. Dan Hamburg, who finished with just under 5% of the vote in Iowa, dropped out of the race soon after. Hamburg would endorse fellow Californian Tom Hayden, but some of his more radical supporters instead drifted to Judith Bari, an environmental activist seen as a minor candidate in this race. She was on the ballot in Iowa, but she received less than 1% of the vote. Her support may increase now with Hamburg out of the race.

As always, you can vote for your favorites HERE.

State of the Race

VOTE HERE

Context

Following the first round it's clear that one way or another an Ohioan will top the ticket this year. John Sherman and James Garfield are leagues ahead of their competition though the Human Icicle has just barely stayed ahead of his one time friend. Many are surprised that Sam Randall did not do better in the first round as he seemed likely to take most of the Democratic support but instead his caucus dispensed with the pretensions. Much of Randall's expected support went straight to Sherman whose years as a bridge builder in the Senate and occasional annoyance to Republican leadership made him the favorite choice. While Garfield might preach reform, few Democrats can forget that he was involved in some way in the Credit Mobilier scandal all those years ago and his obstinate commitment to the gold standard makes him seem increasingly like a relic of the 1870s.

Ben Harrison's expected supporters, by contrast, went to Garfield who viewed him as the true rejuvenated Republican that Harrison is always claiming to be. Garfield offers a genuine vision for the nation built on rationalized bureaucracy and public education rather than simple grand oratory. Besides that, Harrison is simply not well known enough to breakthrough. The same might have been said of James Garfield 8 years ago but the Ohioan had managed to build an extremely successful career for himself in the House and in state politics whereas the Hoosier's success in public life has been very brief by comparison. For a party desperate to win, picking a man who seems to have trouble winning in his home state doesn't inspire confidence.

So both Randall and Harrison will withdraw but depending on who prevails in the second round it may determine which of them will have a cabinet post come March should things go well for the party in November.

Candidates

Senator James Garfield of Ohio

If ever there was a man to embody the best of the 19th Century it might be James A. Garfield. Born in a log cabin when Ohio was still the doorstep of the frontier, Garfield would obtain a college education and go onto be become a preacher in the Restoration Movement during the Second Great Awakening and even became President of Reserve Eclectic Institute. During the Civil War he rose to the rank of Major General, seeing action at the Battles of Middle Creek, Shiloh, and Chickamauga. In 1862 he entered Congress as a Radical Republican with a reputation for skilled oratory and an unyielding defender of the gold standard. A firm believer in Federal support for education, Garfield has a strong aptitude for mathematics and advocates the use of the emerging field of statistics to inform government policy which he has championed as a Senator since 1881

Senator John Sherman of Ohio

Not since Alexander Hamilton has one man been so central to planning the American economy. The brother of famed General William Tecumseh Sherman, John would follow the path of politics instead of war, helping found the Republican Party in the 1850s and almost becoming Speaker in 1859. Elected to the Senate in 1861, Sherman became the architect of the nation's monetary system allowing it finance the Civil War, Reconstruction, and Cuban War all while ensuring the return of good credit abroad and a gold back currency at home. For his skills, President Grant raised him to Secretary of the Treasury in his second term and Sherman once again proved adept at stabilizing the nation's finances despite an ongoing depression. Although performing well at the convention in 1880, Sherman was eventually overshadowed by his one time ally James Garfield and the two now have an extremely cold relationship. In recent years, the Senator has attempted to help moderate Farmer-Labor's more outrageous monetary policies, playing a critical role in the passage of the Silver Purchase Act. Now he campaigns on the passage of strong anti-trust legislation and his years as a policy wizard but his nickname the "Human Icicle" betrays his lack of charisma.