|
I recently wound up binging through those whole thread, I'm so glad it's apparently kicking off again! And looking at the thoroughly insane alternate timeline Goons have wrought.
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2016 13:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 20:38 |
|
|
I'm leaning towards the People's Party. I realise that people here desperately want Full Communism Now, but I personally think that the SLP are going a bit too far.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2016 08:04
|
|
|
NumberLast posted:But if they go too far we can just have referendum that reign them back in. It's the perfect plan!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2016 14:10
|
|
|
The Lord of Hats posted:Come on, now, that's not true at all. Yeah, I think the fact that we're judging all of these people from our modern perspective and values means that it's nigh impossible for us to weigh the candidates objectively in their context. I mean Wing's only on the ballot in 5 states and running as a protest candidate and goons are probably going to put him in the White House regardless. Which is of course part of the fun. Although I kind of like the cut of this Bellamy chap's jib. Why can't we vote for him? (Man, goon-selected candiates would make this thread even more gloriously ridiculous. I mean we'd almost certainly have President Hamilton rather than His Also FYI i'm voting for Teddy in every election he's on the ballot, Debs or no Debs. Gotta get those National Parks. Bully!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:Bellamy is a fascinating character in and of himself. His book, Looking Backwards, was the third-largest bestseller of the 19th century behind Uncle Tom's Cabin and Ben-Hur. Its popularity, in turn, inspired a pseudo-socialist poltical movement during the 1880s similar to the Fourier phalanxes of the 1840s. Had it not been for Bellamy's failing health and the unexpected rise of the Populists, the movement might have gained some steam. Bellamy recognized that "socialism" had become politically toxic and needed rebranding if it was to survive as a major force in the United States. That said, I'm going to assume this is how people dress in this timeline.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2016 07:48
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:It's not even steampunk! According to the author, everything is running on electric motors to the point where coal is almost totally out of use and houses no longer have chimneys. Fun fact I learned from the Dollop: apparently Henry Ford was working on an electric car when he was first starting out (with batteries supplied by Edison). Unfortunately the batteries were poo poo, and rather than look for another supplier he gave up on the idea. Also they struck oil in Texas, so gas prices went way down and we got the gas guzzlers we all know and love. Also QuidProQuid: please make sure to post the latest fashion from that handy chart for all future election announcements, please.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
Yeah, Bryan seems like the best pick. An actual mainstream progressive, who'd have thought? Wait, are the votes for Bryan going to be added together, and whichever of the two veeps win gets the nod? Definitely leaning towards Watson as Veep, though. I don't necessarily agree with all of his stances, especially wanting to dissolve the national bank, but at least he's not 100% opposed to his boss. Yvonmukluk has issued a correction as of 18:44 on Jul 31, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 20:38 |
|
|
The Lord of Hats posted:I think part of the fun of this is choosing between (heavily flawed) people, not generic candidates that we can project everything onto. I say mention them being there for curiosity's sake, but don't put them on the poll. Yeah I think it's obviously easy for us to choose candidates that would never be feasible as being elected - i.e. Literally anyone other than George Washington for the first POTUS, because we're both judging these candidates through a 2016 lens and because we're obviously not having to deal with the consequences. It's one thing to joke about being on Civil War VII, but of course most living in the United States of Goonmerica would regard one as too many, hence why people spent so much effort to try and avoid it at all costs. That being said, I think changing horses in midstream is a bad idea, and overall the thread is great (and I love learning about all these fascinating people who most have never heard of), but I think there are problems when a party that only was on the ticket in 5 states somehow takes the White House. Would that even be possible in the electoral landscape of the time (assuming they won all 5 states they ran in?) I mean I guess it could, assuming the other states were divided enough between various other parties, but that would mean a very hostile congress, presumably. So I guess the more radical policies would never make it past Congress. Considering counter factual scenarios is fun! In conclusion, I do agree with Lord of Hats that perhaps there should be more focus on candidates who could have a path to victory in the historical election, but it's ultimately QuoProQuid's thread so I'm willing to abide by however the elections are run. I think the problem lies with those in the electorate pushing for Full Communism Now and drat the consequences.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 12:51
|
|