The funny thing is that were Schweitzer to run in 2016 he'd probably displace Sanders as the anti-Clinton candidate easily
Schweitzer runs against Clinton in 2016
Clinton loses to Trump
Schweitzer wins the nomination in 2020 against Elizabeth Warren
Brian Schweitzer is elected President
Actually I think @True Grit did something like this at one point during Schweitzermania
Eh, by like 2013/2014 he was far more critical of the Clinton’s than most other Democrats at the time. Got the sense that there was no love lost.True, but also Schweitzer was also weirdly friendly with the Clinton’s for a variety of reasons.
But it could have been a close election to say the least.
I may have, though it doesn’t ring a bell - I know I made a few infoboxes with him winning in 2016 as the Democratic version of Trump though.Schweitzer runs against Clinton in 2016
Clinton loses to Trump
Schweitzer wins the nomination in 2020 against Elizabeth Warren
Brian Schweitzer is elected President
Actually I think @True Grit did something like this at one point during Schweitzermania
I may have, though it doesn’t ring a bell - I know I made a few infoboxes with him winning in 2016 as the Democratic version of Trump though.
The funny thing is that were Schweitzer to run in 2016 he'd probably displace Sanders as the anti-Clinton candidate easily
I don’t think Bernie’s success actually had a lot to do with that, though - certainly not in 2016, when a lot of his support in general and a disproportionately high number of primary successes in specific came from anti-Clinton rural Anglo Democrats who would probably prefer to vote for Schweitzer over Sanders. Which could have a huge number of knock-on effects on the party as a whole.He doesn't strike me as being capable of exciting such a strong and energetic youth base as Bernie did. But then again, neither did Bernie until I actually saw him in action.
Very curious to see where the party goes in a scenario where Bernie sits out and, say, Jim Webb becomes the most credible anti-Clinton candidate.I don’t think Bernie’s success actually had a lot to do with that, though - certainly not in 2016, when a lot of his support in general and a disproportionately high number of primary successes in specific came from anti-Clinton rural Anglo Democrats who would probably prefer to vote for Schweitzer over Sanders. Which could have a huge number of knock-on effects on the party as a whole.
Democrats become a Scots-Irish identitarian partyVery curious to see where the party goes in a scenario where Bernie sits out and, say, Jim Webb becomes the most credible anti-Clinton candidate.
I don’t think Bernie’s success actually had a lot to do with that, though - certainly not in 2016, when a lot of his support in general and a disproportionately high number of primary successes in specific came from anti-Clinton rural Anglo Democrats who would probably prefer to vote for Schweitzer over Sanders. Which could have a huge number of knock-on effects on the party as a whole.
...There'd be far fewer self-declared socialists, in Congress and on the local level, and far more avidly rifle-toting supporters of a single-payer healthcare system - like Rob Quist, I would guess.
...
Wow, this fella is something.
So they come from the same protoplasm as per say, Wayne Cryts/Farm Aid folks?he really was the first modern iteration of what i like to call "Farmer-Lab" Democrats; People who share 99% of opinions with progressive Democrats with the exception of guns and maybe abortion depending on the person, but have a distinct rural cultural affect that hasn't really existed in the Democratic party since like the 60s or 70s at least.
In the same way that modern farmers mostly farm subsidies, modern Farmer-Lab Democrats mostly farm medium-sized donations from college-educated suburban Resistance Liberals, which is not a criticism of either but goes to show how fundamentally different modern politics is from the period they’re trying to imitate.he really was the first modern iteration of what i like to call "Farmer-Lab" Democrats; People who share 99% of opinions with progressive Democrats with the exception of guns and maybe abortion depending on the person, but have a distinct rural cultural affect that hasn't really existed in the Democratic party since like the 60s or 70s at least.
Wayne Cryts
I've always been interested in Rubio 2016, I wonder what he would do legislatively and how he would deal with Kavanaugh, who I think is an understandable pick for any GOP winner in 2016.Presidents of the United States
Senator Barack Obama of Illinois / Senator Joe Biden of Delaware (Democratic) 2009 - 2017
2008: Senator John McCain of Arizona/Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska (Republican)
2012: Former Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts/Representative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin (Republican)
Senator Marco Rubio of Florida / Governor Rick Snyder of Michigan (Republican) 2017 - 2021
2016: Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of New York/Former Secretary of Labor Tom Perez of Maryland (Democratic)
Former Governor Brian Schweitzer of Montana / Representative Val Demings of Florida (Democratic) 2021 - present
2020: President Marco Rubio of Florida/Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina (Republican), Businessman Howard Schultz of Washington/Retired Admiral Michael Mullen of New York (Independent)
Schweitzer launches a bid against Clinton come 2016. Maybe her handling of Benghazi is worse than OTL, who knows. But he runs, and becomes the main alternative to the establishment. But of course no one if going to stop Hillary Clinton from receiving her god given right to be the Democratic nominee. She proceeds to lose the election to Senator Rubio in an upset (In this case Christie doesn't make it to the debate stage to kill Marco's momentum, allowing him to overtake Trump). Schweitzer feeds off the growing populist sentiment growing across the country, and utilizes it to springboard himself to the presidency come 2020.
Since his career in national prominence is so long, I almost wonder if you could have a weird “eternal PM” scenario, where he serves as PC/C leader for decades and either goes in and out of office like a Victorian PM or just sticks it out the whole way through to the point that there are potentially MPs elected who have never not lived under MacKay’s iron fist.Prime Minister Peter MacKay
Since his career in national prominence is so long, I almost wonder if you could have a weird “eternal PM” scenario, where he serves as PC/C leader for decades and either goes in and out of office like a Victorian PM or just sticks it out the whole way through to the point that there are potentially MPs elected who have never not lived under MacKay’s iron fist.
The issue with making Peter MacKay leader is that he's a moderate easterner who originally elected as a Progressive Conservative in a party whose leadership, caucus and membership was and still is dominated by westerners who were veterans of the Reform Party; a party which was not unreasonably always at best suspicious of the federal PCs they were competing with. If MacKay became leader he would from day one face suspicion from large swathes of the party. The mood would be fractious no matter how many concessions and gestures he made. It would be the current OTL whispering campaign against Erin O'Toole on steroids. I suspect you see a Bernier-type right wing splinter earlier than OTL.A somewhat realistic approach to making Peter MacKay PM.
