• Hi Guest!

    The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress

Lists of Heads of Government and Heads of State


fatal softener
Published by SLP
Over the rainbow
Has anyone ever had the main dominions being split off to separate but unified thrones? I don't have the knowledge to do it
As @Mumby noted, I had it happen in Decades of Darkness. That was due to a rather special set of circumstances, though.

Calling Canada a kingdom was possible easily enough; that was discussed in OTL before the passage of the British North America Act [1]. It didn't happen essentially because it would needlessly upset the US of A. A Britain which for whatever reason is less concerned about American sensitivities would probably have called Canada a Kingdom in 1867, and that would have been the term from that time forward.

Having Canada and then subsequent dominions with separate monarchs is a lot harder. The main concern (among others) was that with a different head of state, Canada would drift away entirely. I had it happen in DoD because of a combination of Britain being much less concerned about Canada drifting away (because the USA was much more hostile ITTL, so Canada would stick together) and a different royal family at the time which had a surplus of royal brothers where they were glad to find thrones for some of them.

[1] That is, the British North America Act of 1867, not the British North America Acts of 1871, 1886, 1907, 1915, 1916, 1930, 1940, 1943, 1946, 1949, 1949 again, 1951, 1952, 1960, 1964, 1965, 1974, 1975 and 1975 again.

Time Enough

"Enthusiastic Cis Male Partner"
Down the Clynes: Labour Leaders from 1922 to 1952

J.R.Clynes: 1922-1933
1923 (Minority, Liberal Supply and Demand then Coalition) [1]
1927 (Opposition) [2]
1931 (Majority) [3]

A.V.Alexander: 1933-1948 [4]
1936 (Majority)
1938 (War Goverment with Liberals, Radical Liberals and War Conservatives) [5]
1942 (Minority, Coalition with Radical Liberal)
1943 (Opposition) [6]
1947 (Opposition)

Nye Bevan: 1948- [6]

*Colour Codes:
Light Blue-CoOperative Party
Orange-ILP/Socialist League

1). So J.R.Clynes manages to win the 1922 Leadership election and in 1923 manages to improve from the amount he had gotten in 1922 by playing a careful and smart campaign, managing to get about 200 seats as a result. After some backdoor talks the Liberals decide enter into a supply and demand deal with Labour, in the hope that they prove to be incompetent whilst in office. Clynes is a pragmatist and manages to keep the government going even with a minority, expanding welfare in some ways as well as trying to implement schemes to solve unemployment in Britain as well as managing to deal with trade unions (avoiding the General Strike of 1926). Of course this occasionally hits the brick wall of the Liberals and Free Trade but Clynes is able to convince numerous Liberals to support his efforts, eventually creating an official coalition with the Liberals in 1924. Meanwhile after much backdoor backstabbing, Austen Chamberlain is made Leader of the Conservatives, ready for another go in 1927.

2). So the Liberals collapse, the Conservatives get enough gains to make a slim majority of 10 but Labour is the real winner as it becomes the definite leader of the opposition with a secured position and proof they can work in Government and Clynes is allowed to stay around as MacDonald's second leadership bid is shot down yet again. MacDonald retires and his son Malcolm carries on, progressively becoming more Left Wing as time goes on without his father guiding him. Whilst the Tories try to keep things going they are hit with the right hook of the Depression and then in 1930 as they awkwardly fumble around trying to deal with unemployment hit with a General Strike due to attempts to shut down Coal Pits. After much worry (particularly with fears that Soldiers would be sent out to crush the strikers), the strike is successful and in the aftermath in 1931 the broken Conservative government calls an election.

3). Labour wins it's first majority, a majority of 60 to be exact based upon there manifesto of radical change against the Depression, Unemployment and Poverty inspired by the work of Maynard Keynes (though re-orientated for a more Labour inspired focus). The Liberals divide themselves between the Liberals lead by Herbert Samuel who support Free Trade and disapprove of expansion of the Welfare State and the Radical Liberals lead by Lloyd George who support the Keynesian ideas. Meanwhile the Tories dump Austen Chamberalin and go with Samuel Hoare instead (with support from Lord Beverbrook). In 1933, Clynes steps down, ten years of stress of being a Labour leader steps down and a Labour leadership contest comes under way.

4). The Labour Leadership contest ends up being between Herbert Morrison on the Right, A.V.Alexander occupying the 'Centre' and Stafford Cripps shoring up the Left/ILP. At first it looks like Morrison would win, but Alexander is able to call upon the support of Deputy Leader Clement Attlee and his Mason connections, the support of the CoOperative Party and after seeing the writing on the wall (and assured a position in the cabinet) Cripps and the Socialist League/ILP throw in the towel and support Alexander. Morrison loses and Alexander becomes Labour Leader and Prime Minister.

5). After winning the Labour Leadership election Alexander continues with the path of his predecessor and it allows him to win another election as the economy starts to bounce back and unemployment goes down. He does try and expand the opportunities of CoOperatives but that gets some backlash in his cabinet from the Trade Union members like Ernest Bevin. But whilst this has been happening Nazi Germany and Fascism has been on the rise. Britain supports the Republicans in Spain with firearms (Alexander seeing it as a good opportunity to help unemployment, with rearmament) and when Germany tries to wrangle the Sudetenland, Britain and France declares war on Germany. As Britain and France prepare, Alexander forms a War Government made up of mainly Labour, Liberal (both strands) and Conservatives that break the ranks to support the War effort (like Winston Churchill and Anthony Eden).

6). After a slightly messy European War, in which Germany manages to limp into 1940 before a General's Coup ousts Hitler and the Nazi's and a even messier Pacific War in which Japan manages to battle on into early 1942 before they are crushed by the British, French and Dutch and Soviet forces. An election is called in Autumn of 1942 in the hope to recapture the good mood after the War's end but a combination of 11 years of Labour domination combined with a spirited Conservative campaign lead by Anthony Eden and Lord Woolaton leads to Labour just scraping into a minority coalition with the Radical Liberals lead by Richard Acland. The coalition collapses after Acland pulls out in early 1943 annoyed that the Government wouldn't consider his ideas. Labour heads into another election and loses to a spirited campaign by Eden.

7). Labour loses another election in 1947 due to the combination of another great campaign by Eden and Woolaton and Alexander being rather low energy. In 1948 he steps down after 15 years as leader and another leadership contest occurs, Morrison tries his luck again but this time he has a real contender against him. Nye Bevan comes from the Left of the Party but experience being in Labour's War time Cabinet and post War Cabinet means he's more pragmatic than Cripps was in his attempt, making platitudes to the CoOperative party who are upset that they didn't get there hour in the sun fully under Alexander and also consulting Attlee for help from the Centre as well as calling on the support of the Tribune and ILP/Socialist League. The fact that Morrison has bullied many of his possible allies means that in the end Bevan wins. Now it's 1952, Eden is still Prime Minister as he calls yet another election but the nation would like change. Bevan is offering Radical Socialist healthcare, More Houses, Industrial Democracy, Co-Ops and full Nationalisation (Alexander was only able to do so much, mainly coal, gas, water and telecommunications), Honour Balfour is offering the new improved Beveridge Report which seems to be an expanded version of the Welfare State and the Liberals under Gwilym Lloyd George is offering Free Trade, Monetarism and Liberal Reform. Who knows what will happen...

(First proper list, this is how you do it right?)
Last edited:


Well-known member
1921-1923: Warren G. Harding / Hiram Johnson (Republican)
1920: James M. Cox / Franklin D. Roosevelt (Democrat)
1923-1925: Hiram Johnson / vacant (Republican)
1925-1930: Hiram Johnson / Theodore E. Burton (Republican)
1924: James M. Cox / Charles W. Bryan (Democrat)
1928: Franklin D. Roosevelt / Henry T. Allen (Democrat)

1930-1933: Hiram Johnson / vacant (Republican)
1933-1937: Franklin D. Roosevelt / William Gibbs McAdoo (Democrat)

1932: Herbert Hoover / Channing Cox (Republican), Norman Thomas / Upton Sinclair (Socialist)
1937-1949: Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. / Arthur Vandenberg (Republican)
1936: Franklin D. Roosevelt / William Gibbs McAdoo (Democrat), Upton Sinclair / James P. Cannon (Popular Front)

1940: Wendell Willkie / Harry F. Byrd (Democrat), James P. Cannon / A. J. Muste (Popular Front)
1944: W. Lee O'Daniel / Millard Tydings (Democrat)
1949-1955: Albert B. "Happy" Chandler / Frank Lausche (Democrat)
1948: Charles P. Taft / Oscar R. Erwing (Republican), Vito Marcantonio / Glen H. Taylor (Peace)
1952: Charles P. Taft / Terry de la Mesa Allen, Sr. (Republican), Henry A. Wallace / Philip Vera Cruz (Peace)

1955-1957: Frank Lausche / vacant (Democrat)
1957-1961: Frank Lausche / Frank G. Clement (Democrat)

1956: Eliot Ness / Hubert Humphrey (Republican)
1961-1969: Karl Bendetsen / Winifred C. Stanley (Republican)
1960: Howard W. Smith / Robert F. Wagner, Jr. (Democrat)

President Harding's death in 1923 caused Progressive Vice-President Hiram Johnson to ascend to the Presidency. Johnson would go on to become one of the most unpopular presidents being largely blamed for the Great Panic. The numerous public work projects and the trade wars with the European powers were blamed for worsening the crisis. His inability or unwilingness to take action following the Coup in Japan on the 15th of May, which saw young Japanese officers kill over 60 American citizens, was the final nail in the coffin for the Republican party's hopes.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt promises on the campaign trail to 'cut reckless spending' and 'stand up against any foreign power that dared to threathen the United States' helped him enter the White House in the biggest electoral landslide since 1864. The economy, however, only worsened during his presidency and he was defeated in a close election, which saw a record amount of votes for third parties, by his distant cousin.

Under the Younger Roosevelt the country saw it self embroiled in years of war only weeks after his inaguration. The American-Japanese war was the Navy, which had been seriously strengthened under FDR, to show it's muscle. The war ended abruptly in 1939 following another coup in Japan, this time from Army which vowed for peace. Roosevelt, Jr. claimed victory while the Japanese Archipalego entered years of civil war which was only ended after Trotsky's intervention.

The other, and more notable, war was the Anglo-American intervention in Europe which lasted until 1946. Following the fascist's victory in the German civil war the German Empire and her allies with the Soviet Union and it's puppet states. The war ended in a phyrric victory for the Soviet Union, which had to evacuate as far east as Kiev to lick it's wounds. The rest of Europe east of Alsace-Lorraine was pretty much in a gigantic civil war from Amsterdam to Sofia between Fascsist and Communists. Following the siege of Berlin Roosevelt and John Simon could finally claim victory in Europe. Troops were pretty much immediately transfered to China, to fight the Guomintang, and the Dutch East Indies, to fight Sukarno and his communist allies. Also thousands of Asian-Americans were interned, just a minor detail in American history.

The interventions in East-Asia are said to be the main reason for Taft's defeat in 1948. Senator "Happy" Chandler promised to not neglect domestic affaires like the President had done. The President from the Bluegrass state was popular for both handling the 1947 recession and combatting communism abroad, without sending thousands of Americans boys to their early death. His sudden assasination by a Communist Filippino immigrant shook the nation. His succesor Lausche's presidency was mostly the same, except for his backing of the 1959 coup in Australia, which saw relations with the Commonwealth worsen.

Now there is a new president. A man who fought Communism in Indonesia and Iran and who promised to "continu the fight against Asiatic Communism both at home and abroad". He got into office in a landslide and brought almost 100 new Republican congressmen and senators with him. The 1961 Civil Rights Act has already helped millions of disenfranchised African-Americans and could according to some even tilt the South towards the Great Old Party. The Democrats in the meantime are so busy trying to find a way to stop the Republicans that there is almost no one left to oppose the Intervention in Peru and worsening of Asian-American rights.

Well, technically the Peace Party still exists, but Asian-American civil rights activist Fred Korematsu managed to only get 1% in his second run for President and already has multiple accusations standing against him by Secretary of Investigation Hoover.


Гуси 🦢
Published by SLP
Teignmouth, Devon
Happy Ed Balls Day #NeverForget

1990-1995: John Major (Conservative)

1991: John Major (Conservative) [342] Neil Kinnock (Labour) [269] Paddy Ashdown (Social and Liberal Democrat) [16] Jim Molyneaux (UUP) [9] John Hume (SDLP) [4] Dafydd Wigley (Plaid Cymru) [4] Alex Salmond (SNP) [3] Ian Paisley (DUP) [3] Gerry Adams (Sinn Fein) [2] James Kilfedder (UPUP) [1]
John Major calls a snap election, securing his position as Prime Minister and giving his sufficient authority to negotiate the Maastricht Treaty and weather a time of deep economic uncertainty

1996-2001: John Major (Conservative) Coalition with Paddy Ashdown (Social and Liberal Democrat)

1996: John Major (Conservative) [316] Position Vacant (Labour) [291] Paddy Ashdown (Social and Liberal Democrat) [21] Jim Molyneaux (UUP) [11] Dafydd Wigley (Plaid Cymru) [4] Gerry Adams (Sinn Fein) [4] Alex Salmond (SNP) [3] Ian Paisley (DUP) [2] John Hume (SDLP) [2]

1996 was, by all the polls and all reason, expected to be Labour's year. However, an apalling campaign by John Smith was sealed by his death mid-way through and his replacement, on a temporary basis, by the party's deputy leader, Tony Blair.

Major did not win a majority, but was able to choose between a deal with the SLD or UUP. Major privately preferred the SLD - fearing that a deal with the UUP would further slow down the path to a power sharing agreement in Northern Ireland. However the threat that they could be replaced kept the SLD firmly in check.

One exception was the referendums for devolved assemblies in Wales and Scotland, which would effectively serve as forums for local government, but with an executive committee elected by STV. Wales voted against semi-devolution, which Scotland voted, cautiously, in favour.

2001-2006: John Redwood (Conservative) Coalition with John Taylor (UUP)

2001: John Redwood (Conservative) [317] Tony Blair (Labour) [305] John Taylor (UUP) [12] Paddy Ashdown (Social and Liberal Democrat) [5] Gerry Adams (Sinn Fein) [7] Ieuan Wyn Jones (Plaid Cymru) [4] Alex Salmond (SNP) [4] Ian Paisley (DUP) [2]

Major standing down opened the way for a surprise right-ward shift in UK politics, a situation made worse by the WTC attacks in America. Redwood's government spent the first few years implementing the ARTHUR Act, which secured a range of new powers for the government to tackle terrorism and dissent. The EU referendum was delayed until 2003, when its passage was taken as a tacit endorsement of the UK siding with America over Germany and France by joining the War on Iraq.

Between 2004 and 2006 British Independence (known colloquially as Brindy) and responses to terrorism dominated the political discourse. But by 2006, the narrow lead for Brindy had evaporated, and the war on Terror was becoming universally loathed as the world considered the ramifications of an America-Iran War.

2006: Ed Balls (Labour)

2006: Ed Balls (Labour) [392] John Redwood (Conservative) [208] Charles Kennedy (Centre Party) [25] Alex Salmond (SNP) [11] John Taylor (UUP) [8] Gerry Adams (Sinn Fein) [7] Ieuan Wyn Jones (Plaid Cymru) [5] Ian Paisley (DUP) [6]

Ed Balls was prime minister for under a month, and in that time he did not achieve a great deal. His term was cut short on 28 April 2006 when he was shot by an Islamist terrorist while visiting a school in central London.

Despite his short rule, Ed Balls is remembered fondly as the best prime minister Britain nearly never had, and his memorial day has become a central event in the political calendar as a memorial to all those who have lost their lives in Terrorism. The Ed Balls Foundation has become a key tool of political outreach and is credited with the establishment of the Youth Parliament and pushing forward votes at 16.

2006-2017: Tony Blair (Labour)

2011: Tony Blair (Labour) [383] David Davis (Conservative) [216] Kenneth Clarke (Centre Party) [25] John Taylor (UUP) [13] Nicola Sturgeon (SNP) [10] Gerry Adams (Sinn Fein) [7] Ieuan Wyn Jones (Plaid Cymru) [5] Ian Paisley Jnr (DUP) [1]
The party planned a leadership election after Balls died, but over the coming weeks with national uncertainty at an all time high support centred around the Home Secretary, Tony Blair. He introduced full devolution for Scotland, with Wales once again voting against this. Blair even introduced a return to a form of power sharing legislature for Northern Ireland under the Ed Balls Day Agreement of 2008.

Outside of this, Blair renewed the ARTHUR Act, and expanded its remit in terms of Data retention and the introduction of ID Cards, none of which was in Ed Ball's manifesto. He did however also introduce a national Minimum wage in 2006, ban fox hunting in 2007, and repeal Section 28 and introduce a new Equality Act in 2010.

In 2011 Blair won his own majority and was able to push forward the creation of Super Casinos, funding for the NHS through PFI schemes, and in 2015 bought in gay marriage. However, the big job of the term was to deal with the SNP, who had won a majority in 2012 and demanded a referendum on independence, which Blair had little choice but to agree to. In 2015, Scotland voted to leave the UK, and negotiations on Scindy would dominate political discussions.
2016: Tony Blair (Labour) [323] David Davis (Conservative) [236] Ruth Davidson (Unionist) [33] George Osborne (Centre Party) [28] Emma Little-Pengelly (UUP) [10] Nicola Sturgeon (SNP) [12] Gerry Adams (Sinn Fein) [10] Adam Price (Plaid Cymru) [4] Derek Wall (Red-Green Alliance UK) [3] Ian Paisley (DUP) [1]
Blair's victory in 2016 left him with a majority only because Sinn Fein did not take their seats. In Scotland, a strong victory for the newly independent Conservative Party (now called the Unionists) gave a new lease of life to negotiations and to the hope of a confirmatory referendum on Scindy. But the legal case for a second referendum was lost, and the SNP refused to countenance the idea.

Blair had developed a reputation as an elderly, incompetent politician with a tendency of hurting campaigns he was associated with, and never quite shook off the comparison to eternally young, eternally photogenic, left wing and saintly Ed Balls. A deal with Sinn Fein that allowed the "associate membershp" to the UK Parliament cost him his majority in all but name, and when Scottish Independence went ahead despite a perception (in the rest of the UK) that Scotland did not actually want it, Tony Blair would finally be forced out of power in a brutal and effective Palace coup.

2017 post-Scindy: Tony Blair (Labour) [279] Boris Johnson (Conservative) [251] George Osborne (Centre Party) [28] Michelle O'Neill (Sinn Fein) [11] Emma Little-Pengelly (UUP) [9] Leanne Wood (Plaid Cymru) [4] Derek Wall (Red-Green Alliance UK) [5] Ian Paisley Jnr (DUP) [1]
2017-20XX: Claudia Webbe (Labour) coalition with Derek Wall (Red-Green Alliance UK) and Gerry Adams (Sinn Fein)

Claudia Webbe became Prime Minister by coup, and could only maintain control maintain her authority by working with leftist parties. In 2019, Northern Ireland voted to leave the UK in a decision that many commentators believe had much to do with the region wanting to avoid having to introduce gay marriage and abortion. Plans to re-unify, lead by Scotland's Prime Minister Ruth Davidson have stalled, and attempts to massively increase public spending and social welfare were tricky until the Avian Flu outbreak made them necessary and also expensive.

As Britain heads towards an election where Labour are expecting to be wiped out, the right of Labour have found a totemic figure in Ed Balls, who somehow every faction in Labour believes would have been on their side, and would have sorted all this mess out.

Tsar of New Zealand

Hell no, I did not leave the South Island for this
the Suede-Denim Secret Police
"As Tennessee Goes, So Goes the Nation" or: "As Knoxville Goes, So Goes the Loser"

Tennessee Electoral College votes
1860 (U.S.): John Bell (Constitutional Union-TN)
1861 (C.S.): Jefferson Davis (Nonpartisan-MS)
1867: P.G.T. Beauregard (Democratic-LA)
1873: Fitzhugh Lee (D-VA)
1879: James Longstreet (D-VA)
1885: John S. Marmaduke (D-KY)
1886: Succeeded by John Tyler Morgan (D-AL)
1891: States Rights Gist (D-SC)
1897: Robert Love Taylor (D-TN)
1903: John Sharp Williams (D-MS)
1909: Woodrow Wilson (D-VA)
1915: Gabriel Semmes (D-AL)
1921: Wade Hampton V (D-SC)
1927: William B. Bankhead (D-AL)
1933: disputed; either Cordell Hull (Radical Liberal-TN, 39.71%) or Jacob Featherston (Freedom-VA, 39.73(?)%) [1]

Knox County, TN election results

1860 (U.S): President: John Bell (CU-TN, 77.3%)
1861: Ordinance of Secession: Opposed (71.7%)
1861 (C.S.): No popular vote - state delegates voted directly
1867: John Pool (Opposition-NC, 67.2%)
1873: Patrick Cleburne (O-AR, 62.5%)
1879: William Mahone (O-VA, 59.4%)
1885: Absolom West (Corn-Coal-Cotton League-MS, 58.1%)
1891: Leonidas Polk (Radical-NC, 53.0%)
1897: Thomas Watson (Liberal-GA, 47.5%)
1903: Thomas Watson (Radical-Liberal fusion, 56.8%)
1909: Marion Butler (RL-NC, 48.3%)
1915: Jose "Joe" Arango (RL-CH, 52.3%)
1921: Ainsworth Layne (RL-VA, 40.6%) [2]
1927: Joseph Robinson (RL-AR, 48.9%)
1933: Cordell Hull (RL-TN, 71.6%) [3]

[1] Massive and widespread voting irregularities made it difficult to determine who was the legitimate winner of the Presidential election in Tennessee - it is likely Featherston won a plurality, but the disappearance of ballots from Freedom-leaning districts in Davidson County meant the Radical Liberals were able to claim victory in the official count. Just enough Democratic electors from Virginia and Alabama held their noses and voted for Hull to prevent the election being thrown to the House (where a Freedom victory was near-certain), and all hell broke loose.
[2] NB - Layne was assassinated four days before Election Day, and there was not time to have the ballots changed. The Radical Liberals' electoral votes for President from Cuba, Chihuahua, and Louisiana were scattered among different candidates, including the Democratic (Wade Hampton V, SC), Independent (Robert Lee Slaughter, TX), Prohibitionist (Sidney Johnston Catts, AL), and even a Socialist (Reddin Andrews, TX).
[3] For the first time since 1856, when Tennessee was still in the Union, Knox County voted for a winning Presidential candidate. Given the murky circumstances of the vote, though (ballots from several precincts went missing or were only partially returned), and the suspicious goings-on in the House, it is unclear whether this counts. As the Freedom Party flag is raised over state houses across the nation and towns, Army units, and states begin peeling away in support of Featherston, the question has become moot, but for the superstitious, Cordell Hull's victory in the electoral battle leaves them wondering who will win the war.


The Brood Queen could enter heaven
Banned from the forum
"Unfortunately, the bad fairy made him a shit."

Prime Ministers of Great Britain:

1976-1979: James Callaghan (Labour)
1979-1988: David Owen, Field Marshal Roland Gibbs, and Joe Gormley (Government of National Preservation)
1988-2004: David Owen (Social Democratic)
def 1988:(Majority) Derek Holland (National Front), Mike Hicks (CPGB), Edward Goldsmith (PEOPLE), Geoffrey Dickens (Moral Legion), various scattered independents
def 1992:(Majority) Nick Crane (National Front), Edward Goldsmith (PEOPLE), Nina Temple (CPGB), Geoffrey Dickens (Moral League), Bill Bland (CPGB-Anti-Revisionist), Derek Holland (Political Soldiers)

def 1996:
(Majority) Tony Whittaker ("Green" PEOPLE), Nina Temple (CPGB), Nick Griffin (Moral Soldiers), John Papworth ("Red" PEOPLE), Bill Bland (CPGB-Anti-Revisionist), "KING MOB" (Abolish The State)
def 2000:(Majority) Sara Parkin (Green), Nick Griffin (Moral Soldiers), Dave Cook & Penny Kemp (C&PPGB-Coalition of Leftist Forces), Nina Temple (Independent CPGB), Harpal Brar (CPGB-Anti-Revisionist), David Myatt (Third Position), David Icke (Divinity International)
2004-2010: Zac Goldsmith (Green)
def 2004: (Majority) David Owen (Social Democratic), Nick Griffin (Moral Soldiers), Penny Kemp & Terry Fields (Coalition of Leftist Forces), Michael Reid (Christian Soldiers), Nina Temple (CPGB), David Icke (Divinity International), Harpal Brar (CPGB-Anti-Revisionist), David Myatt (Third Position), Peter Mandelson (Unite4Change)
def 2008:
(Minority) David Owen (Social Democratic), Hilary Wainwright & Dave Nellist (Coalition of Leftist Forces), Michael Reid (Christian Soldiers), David Icke (Divinity International), David Copeland (Moral Soldiers), Harpal Brar (CPGB-Anti-Revisionist)
2010-2018: David Owen (Social Democratic)
def 2010:(Majority) Zac Goldsmith (Green), Hilary Wainwright & Benjamin Zephaniah (British Section of the 5th Internationale), David Icke (Divinity International), Bruno Quintavalle (Christian Soldiers), Harpal Brar (CPGB-Anti-Revisionist), Alan Woods (Communist Worker's Party), Robert Cottage (Moral Soldiers), Minette Batters (Agrarian Justice)
def 2014:(Coalition with Christian Soldiers) Simon Hughes (Green), Benjamin Zephaniah & Linda Smith (British Section of the 5th Internationale), David Icke (Divinity International), Alan Craig (Christian Soldiers), Charlie Kimber (Communist Worker's Party), Minette Batters (Agrarian Justice), Roger Nettleship (CPGB-Anti-Revisionist)
2018-XXXX: Adam Afryie (Green)
def 2018: (Majority) David Owen (Social Democratic), David Icke (Divinity International), Mark Serwotka & Faiza Shaheen (British Section of the 5th Internationale), Alan Craig (Christian Soldiers), Spencer Pitfield (Agrarian Justice), Aaron Bastani (21st Century Socialism), Josh Jackson (CPGB-Anti-Revisionist), Chris Lythgoe (British Defence Political Army), Steve Hedley (Communist Worker's Party)


Welcome to the Central Australian University Board Thesis Application System, helping you quickly achieve academic excellence and preventing loss of work.
Please submit appropriate details into terminal.

Student Name:George Xenophon
University:Flinders University
Major Subject:Political Science
Thesis Title:Fertile In Tyrants: Explaining post-nuclear British politics with comparison to post-colonial states.
Thesis Synopsis:

A sluggish, low-tech economy focused around resource extraction and primary industries. A vaguely socially conservative society that at the same time is ready to embrace countless different revolutionary or ideological movements. Politics is dominated by an economically populist/workerist party heavily associated with a great national struggle and a single leader, which is closely knit with many other national institutions and unwilling to move forward socially. The leading opposition is a party of economic and social liberalisers funded by the major capitalist world power, along with charismatic religious-based groups, splintered leftists, and nationalist sectarians. Am I talking about the formative years of post-colonial nations, or the Kingdom of Great Britain circa 2020?

In terms of nuclear impact, Britain was simultaneously lucky and unlucky. On the one hand, the number of missiles aimed at it in the Exchange was low, and mostly they were targeted at American bases rather than urban areas. On the other hand, the country was thoroughly unstable beforehand, and the Exchange wiped out nearly the entire leadership of both parties thanks to the Liberals choosing the 9th of November to try and remove their confidence from the government. Owen, who was on a diplomatic visit at the time, was able to take charge for the ensuring period, and managed to unite Britain around him while ending the Second Anarchy. This allowed him to create a charisma cult as the preserver and recreation of the nation, not unlike that created by leaders such as Sukarno or Kwame Nkrumah--a cult which has dominated British politics to this day. Perpetuated first by the extended "state of emergency" following the Edinburgh Declaration in 1983, and then by the fractured nature of the opposition, Owen has overall been in charge of the nation longer than any other non-royal leader. His party, meanwhile, exerts its position as the national party of government with its strong links to both the 'patriotic' legal trade unions and the Army, and advancement in the Civil Service without SDP membership is all but impossible.

The relatively low impact from the Exchange on the British population (as opposed to its vast impact on the body politic) created several unique circumstances, not the least of which was a relatively stable economic foundation leading to a quicker regrowth of the middle class. Said middle class, slowly increasing in prosperity as global trade began again, was unreceptive to Owen's workerist populism, and as such has formed the basis of political opposition to the current regime. The party which became the vehicle for this opposition, PEOPLE, began life as an environmentalist movement, but the monied background of its founder allowed it to undergo an ideological transformation--at least, once the left split from the party and caused a change of name. The present-day party, while not exactly environmentalist, is strong enough to actually win elections, albeit with plenty of help from the Brazilian government's coffers to 'stabilise the region'. The party is rather similar to the opposition groups found in capitalist African nations policy-wise, with a strong focus on anti-corruption measures, preventing minority exclusion by a dominant culture, and breaking up the state-owned industries in an attempt to stimulate the economy. The environment is a lesser concern for the party now--indeed, PM Afriye's go-ahead for Electrobras to develop a nuclear plant in Wylfa would have Goldsmith spinning in his grave.

Despite the wishes of many at both extremes of the political spectrum, the other opposition parties will not rise to prominence any time soon. The far left, as per usual, is divided into feuding groups who despise each other far more than they despise the other parties. The CGPB has remained, in various new guises, the beating heart of the British left, even if it now takes orders from Ouagadougou over Moscow. However, while it may have gained environmentalists and wildcat trade unionists by this move, the party has shed those who prefer to take orders from Xi'an, Glasgow, or the interior of Aaron Bastani's head. The far right, meanwhile, never recovered from the catastrophic collapse of the National Front. While the Evolaites managed to prolong their fall from grace by hijacking another party, British fascism was ultimately doomed the moment it entered the political sphere--the movement was simply too reliant on its street militias to professionalise. Instead, the main vehicle for those too right-wing to enter the main two parties has been religion. Much like in Tanzania, the evangelical-backed political party has been growing in strength, even if it is inherently limitedly the size of the congregations that are their voter base. However, the most successful religious party in Britain even more constricted. While Icke-approved candidates may be the third largest party and most common protest vote recipient, the bizarre and cultish behaviour of the group (insisting all candidates wear turquoise is the tip of the iceberg--rumours abound of the activities of Icke in Fort Messiah) has prevented them from being considered as anything but a joke.

It should be clear from my thesis above that attempting to use the outdated framework of "densitarian vs posturbian"--merely an attempt to force the Australian political model on a very different nation--is incorrect. British politics can be more easily modelled on post-colonial lines, largely due to the immense figure of David Owen completely bending British politics out of shape.


Always mysterious!
Published by SLP
Municipal Commune of Bourne
this is a draft of something im working on - this is definitely not what the final thing will look like which is why im showing it to you and giving no further explanation

1961-1967: John F. Kennedy (Democratic)
1960 (with Lyndon B. Johnson) def. Richard Nixon (Republican)
1964 (with George Smathers) def. Lyndon B. Johnson (Texan Democratic faithless electors), Barry Goldwater (Republican)

1967-1969: George Smathers (Democratic)
1969-1972: George W. Romney (Republican)
1968 (with William F. Buckley) def. George Smathers (Democratic), Eugene McCarthy (Peace and Freedom)
1972-1973: William F. Buckley (Republican)
1973-1977: Ezra Taft Benson (Republican)
1972 disputed between Nelson Rockefeller & William F. Buckley (Republican) def. Scoop Jackson (Democratic), Eugene McCarthy (Independent)
1977-1981: William Westmoreland (Republican)
1976 (with Ezra Taft Benson) def. Tom McCall (Third Force), Hubert Humphrey (Democratic)
1981-1989: John Lindsay (Democratic)
1980 (with Jerry Brown) def. William Westmoreland (Republican)
1984 (with Walter Mondale) def. Alexander Haig (Republican)

1989-1993: Walter Mondale (Democratic)
1988 (with Dianne Feinstein) def. Pat Robertson (Republican)
1993-1997: Reed Benson (Republican)
1992 (with Bob Dole) def. Walter Mondale (Democratic), Harold Stassen (Independent)
1997-2001: Walter Mondale (Democratic)
1996 (with Dick Lamm) def. Reed Benson (Republican), Steve Benson (Independent)
2001-2009: John McCain (Democratic)
2000 (with Ben Campbell) def. George Bush Jr. (Republican), Pat Buchanan (Populist)
2004 (with Ben Campbell) def. Bill Romney (Republican)

2009-2017: Bill Romney (Republican)
2008 (with Tom Tancredo) def. Hillary Rodham (Democratic), Ron Paul (Peace and Freedom)
2012 (with Jon Huntsman) def. Mike Huckabee (Democratic), B.H. Obama (Peace and Freedom)

2017-2021: Rudy Giuliani (Democratic)
2016 (with Jim Webb) def. Jon Huntsman (Republican), B.H. Obama (Peace and Freedom)


So I've been canceled by the Chilmark Library
1933-1941: Franklin D. Roosevelt/John Nance Garner (Democratic)
1932 def. Herbert Hoover/Charles Curtis (Republican)
1936 def. Alf Landon/Frank Knox (Republican)

1941-1945: Franklin D. Roosevelt/Rexford Tugwell (Democratic)
1940 def. Thomas Dewey/Arthur Vandenberg (Republican)
1944 def. Thomas Dewey/John Bricker (Republican)

1945-1949: Rexford Tugwell/vacant (Democratic)
1949-1955: Rexford Tugwell/William O. Douglas (Democratic)
1948 def. Robert A. Taft/Charles Halleck (Republican), Fielding L. Wright/Leven H. Ellis (States' Rights)
1952 def. Robert A. Taft/William F. Knowland (Republican), various unpledged southern electors

1955-1955: Rexford Tugwell (Democratic)
1955-1964: Rexford Tugwell/Adlai Stevenson/Harry Truman (Democratic)
1955 def. William F. Knowland/Douglas MacArthur/Everett Dirksen (Republican), Harry F. Byrd Sr./John C. Stennis/Strom Thurmond (Southern Democratic)
1958 Referendum: Yes (64%)

1964-1967: Orville Freeman/G. Mennen Williams/Lyndon B. Johnson (Democratic)
1964 def. Strom Thurmond/Edwin Walker/George Wallace (Southern Democratic), Nelson Rockefeller/Harold Stassen/William Scranton (Republican), Barry Goldwater/Walter Judd/Roman Hruska (Republican), various independents
1967-1971: Orville Freeman/G. Mennen Williams/Lyndon B. Johnson (Labor)
1967 Referendum: Yes (45%)
1971-1973: Orville Freeman/G. Mennen Williams/Bayard Rustin (Labor)
1973-1976: Milton Friedman/George Bush/Gerald Ford (Liberal Republican)
1973 def. Bayard Rustin/Sargent Shriver/Walter Reuther (Labor), Sam Yorty/Scoop Jackson/George Wallace (Democratic), various independent & regional candidates
1976 Referendum: No (33%)

1976-1985: Edmund Muskie/Andrew Young/Fred Harris (Labor)
1976 def. Richard Nixon/John Tower/Gerald Ford (Liberal Republican), George Wallace/John Glenn/Lloyd Bentsen (Democratic), various independent & regional candidates
1979 Referendum: Yes (41%)

1985-1988: Ronald Reagan/Alexander Haig/Trent Lott (National Unionist)
1985 def. George McGovern/Robert F. Kennedy/Walter Mondale (Labor)
1988 Referendum: No (37%)

1988-1991: Ron Dellums/Gary Hart/Lane Kirkland (Rainbow 88)
1988 def. Ronald Reagan/Alexander Haig/Trent Lott (National Unionist), Lyndon LaRouche/Anton Chaitkin/Janice Hart (Independent Labor)
1991-1993: Ron Dellums/Gary Hart/Lane Kirkland (DSA)
1991 Referendum: Yes (76%)
1993-1997: Ron Dellums/Kim Stanley Robinson/Lane Kirkland (DSA)
1997-2000: Joyce Brabner/Kim Stanley Robinson/David Bonior (DSA)
1997 def. William J. Clinton/Dick Cheney/Jack Kemp (Liberal Republican), Pat Buchanan/Bob Dornan/Newt Gingrich (National Unionist), George J. Mitchell/Madeleine Albright/James P. Hoffa (Labor), Bill Bradley/John Kerry/Howard Dean (Progressive)
2000 Referendum: No (38%)

2000-2009: Tom Ridge/John McCain/Rudy Giuliani (Liberal Republican)
2000 def. Joyce Brabner/Kim Stanley Robinson/David Bonior (DSA), James P. Hoffa/Harris Wofford/Bob Graham (Labor), Warren Beatty/John Kerry/Tom Daschle (Progressive), Pat Buchanan/Oliver North/Alan Keyes (National Unionist)
2003 Referendum: Yes (53%)

2009-2018: Ted Turner/Alan Grayson/Al Gore (Labor-Progressive)
2009 def. John McCain/Condoleezza Rice/Phil Gramm (Liberal Republican), Ralph Nader/LaDonna Harris/Paul Wellstone (DSA)
2012 Referendum: Yes (48%)

2018-0000: Joe Biden/David Petraeus/Larry Summers (Liberal Republican)
2018 def. David Zuckerman/Russ Feingold/Robert Reich (DSA), Oprah Winfrey/Pete Buttigieg/Rahm Emanuel (Labor-Progressive)

Presidents of the NewStates of America:

1955-1964: Rexford Tugwell (Democratic) [1]
1964-1973: Orville Freeman (Democratic, Labor after 1967) [2]
1973-1976: Milton Friedman (Liberal Republican) [3]
1976-1985: Edmund Muskie (Labor) [4]
1985-1988: Ronald Reagan (National Unionist) [5]
1988-1997: Ron Dellums (Rainbow 88, DSA after 91)
1997-2000: Joyce Brabner (DSA)
2000-2009: Tom Ridge (Liberal Republican) [8]
2009-2018: Ted Turner (Labor-Progressive) [9]
2018-0000: Joe Biden (Liberal Republican) [10]

(Just to clarify the electoral system: an election happens every 9 years, but the president's government faces a referendum after 3 and if they receive <40% then an immediate election gets called. Also there's two VPs)

[1] FDR's deputy, the architect of the Second New Deal and the man behind the Allies' victory in the Second World War, was perhaps the only man capable of so radically altering America's postwar political landscape. After the NewStates Convention was finally ratified by the requisite two-thirds of American states, there was only really one obvious candidate to be the NSA's first president. President Tugwell would triumph over scattered opposition from renegade Democrats and a GOP that was still very much stuck in the wilderness.

Tugwell's presidency mainly dealt with the difficulties in trying to establish his new government's legitimacy. Tugwell's push for racial equality under the NSA's new constitution received violent and sustained blowback from conservative southern whites. Racial tensions between blacks and whites in the American South would remain tense throughout Tugwell's term and after it. In western states, many not in favor of Tugwell's economic central planning, there was heightened resistance to the actions of Tugwell's executive branch and those of the planning branch of government. Although Tugwell would be able to assert the NSA's authority out west, hard political fault-lines would be drawn in regional politics.

Besides 1959's 'Little Crash' and its subsequent brief recession, the economy was largely able to stabilize around the government's new Planning Branch and its National Planning Board. The latter part of Tugwell's term would revolve around foreign affairs, however. The fall of Cuba in 1961 to the communist forces of Fidel Castro would make the Cold War a pressing issue to the American public and something that Tugwell would have to deal with immediately. In 1962, the NewStates would join the Western Union Defense Organization (WUDO) then made up of capitalist western Europe and Canada. Standoff between the two superpowers in East Asia would bring the world to the brink of nuclear war in 1963 but Adlai Stevenson, Tugwell's VP for Foreign Affairs, would be able to bring the Americans and the Soviets to the negotiating table.

As Tugwell declined interest in a second term in 1964, a flurry of government supporters and opponents raced to succeed him. However, only one would come out on top...

[2] Coming from the Left of Tugwell's new political order, Freeman came to the Presidency offering to work with the regional governments much as he had done in his native Minnesota which gave the Midwest and California the push that got him into office. Despite this, Freeman immediately went to war with the Southern states over racial equality - mainly that African-Americans were entitled to the same share of new welfare programs as white Americans. From there the rest is history, as the economic struggle became political, Freeman came down hard on the South determined to use Federal power to break the back of Jim Crow legislation.

All of this did nothing for the political unity of the Democratic Party. Many of the Southern Democrats began to leave the Party to establish their own, while moderates in the West began crossing over to the Republicans. Figuring to go his own way, Freeman took the Left of the Democrats to establish his own party - the American Labor Party from the offset mirrored its European counterparts, with its roots in Trade unionism, social democracy and support for minorities. Nevertheless, Freeman's success in the 1967 referendum usually credited only to his advantage as the sitting President.

Being able to stay on by the skin of his teeth, Freeman took a much more moderate approach: the Universal Healthcare Act was scaled back, increases in welfare had to be reduced and the plans to give Unions a bigger voice in the National Planning Board. Like his predecessor, Freeman's latter term became engulfed in foreign affairs, a freedom only granted as the economy ticked up and up. After another Latin American Republic fell to Communism, Freeman took the idea that the Monroe Doctrine applied to Soviet Imperialism as much as European. As Argentina looked to turn a quarrel over Tierra del Fuego to all out war with Chile, the NSA swooped in to the rescue. The sudden arrival of a carrier group off River Plate and an 82nd Airborne detachment sent to troop the colours in Santiago changed the drum beat coming out of Buenos Aries. This became the NSA's first offensive action in the hitherto defensive Cold War.

For a time, Freeman actively considered running for a second term in office, however initials polls saw his name drag that of his new party down. Hoping to save his new Party from an electoral wipe out, Freeman refused to accept nomination - sponsoring instead one of his VPs, Bayard Rustin.

[3] Friedman's victory was due less to him being a charismatic speaker or his ideas being liked by many, it was mainly due to the ALP and Democratic Party taking chunks out of each from the Left allowing the new Liberal Republicans to win by a small margin. The Liberal Republicans were a project created and run by Friedman to help spread the idea of monetrism, privatisation and deregulation. Which is what Friedman tried to do.

Instantly there were problems, the Labour Unions buoyed by many years of support and help weren't particularly fond of the idea of privatisation or them being left out just yet. Cue numerous strikes and worker actions which Friedman's responses of trying to have the police crush them often failing or turning the press against him. His military actions in South America ended up leading to a quagmire occurring in Peru against the Communists guerrillas and his lack of caring when it came to things like the rise in drug use (Friedman would allow for the legalisation of Marijuana in 1974) or Gay Rights (which he would support) caused more Conservative voices to cry out for blood. In the end though it would be his monetary policies that would lead to his downfall. The deregulation of the financial industry combined with a crash in oil prices due to the 1973 Gulf War lead to a recession in 1974, with Friedman's lack of action against it causing much resentment. When the Referendum came in with Friedman only gaining 33% an election would be called and Friedman hoping to keep his party afloat stepped down to pursue being an economics adviser for the Singapore Government.

[4] One of Freeman's powerhouses in the Senate and a bitter opponent of Friedman, the 'Man from Maine' came to office promising a return to regulations, the protection of the environment, adapting welfare to fit the challenges of the 70s, and detente in the Cold War. The American public liked most of this. Muskie's problem was they weren't as sure about his actual party, and Muskie found he had a minority in Congress and could only get his aims through by compromises with other parties. Instead of a formal alliance, he would carry out the Muskie Doctrine (as it was called) of personally wooing Democratic, Liberal Republican, and independent & 'local' congressmen (the latter a result of Tugman's changes and the political discourse making it easier for a state-specific candidate or party to get at least one man in) who might come round to his way of thinking.

It was successful, but it was slow. Changes came in domestically and he achieved much of what he wanted, but the pace meant this went unnoticed by many and his welfare improvements were two years behind the times when they were completed. It was not until years later he would get his due, instead seen as not meeting his promise. He almost lost his second referendum.

In terms of foreign policy, however, he was able to pull off a global reduction in nuclear weapons. He also used the US's soft talk and big stick to reduce tensions in South America, allowing "homegrown" socialist states and discouraging the brutalisation of activists by right-wing forces. He would be renowned globally for this peaceful use of power. (After his death, it would come out he'd also used the CIA and NSA to sabotage a few political careers 'down south' if those politicians were considered a threat to keeping everything on an even keel)

[5] The National Unionists were a bastard mockery of Abraham Lincoln's electoral vehicle - being a fusion of white supremacist Democrats and moralist Republicans. And like the National Union of old, they were essentially a personality vehicle. Reagan had begun his political career as a Democrat, even an enthusiast for the Newstates Constitution. But by the 1980s he was the very incarnation of all the frustrations that had been building for nearly forty years.

Reagan was a force of nature, achieving victory essentially thanks to his celebrity status. His actual agenda was virtually unknown.

That his agenda essentially looked to abolish an entire branch of constitutional government, take Friedmanite economics to a new height while rolling back decades of social and racial progress, not to mention taking the Cold War to a grand new height in South America. It should therefore come as no surprise that in 1986 the National Unionists were essentially purged from office, amidst a Planning Branch crippled by cuts and the worst unemployment crisis since the Great Depression. Anti-war protestors linked hands with the unemployed and with sexual and racial minorities. Reagan had essentially created the movement that would remove from office by referendum.

[6] America wanted a brighter future, it wanted Progressive ideals, Environmental efforts, Social Justice and to get out of the worst unemployment crisis in history. The Rainbow 88 coalition offered that. With Ron Dellums, the Charismatic Democratic Socialist from California being there leader this coalition of Labor, Progressive Democrats, Socialists, Marxists, Communists, Trots, Liberals etc. Would sweep into office on a popular mandate.

Dellums offered America a lot and his coalition would try and bring it,The Planning Branch was revived, New Deal style projects were implemented to help unemployment and expand environmental friendly power, Welfare increased, Housing increased, the state expanded to greater lengths than ever before.

Of course unlike much of the previous efforts by the Planning Branch, Worker owned Factories and CoOps would be supported to and attempts to establish a Market Socialist system implemented. Civil Rights would be expanded as well with greater emphasis on helping all races, genders and sexualities due to the horrors of Regan administration, though projects like Same Sex Marriage would only start to gain light towards the end of his presidency.

Dellums would also be an Internationalist, putting pressure on South Africa to end Apartheid by 1990 and would help ease the Liberalising Warsaw Pact into the so called ‘Market Socialist Sphere’ and would also begin to climb down from the interfering in South America and help a number of democratic elections occur there. When the Referendum came Dellums would pass with a strong 74% showing that this Democratic Socialist had done much positive change with many considering him to be one of the best Presidents. When he finally left office America whilst not in that bright future as promised was still much bright than before and could head into the 21st Century with optimism.

[7] A political activist and independent comic creator, Brabner had joined the Cleveland wing of the 'rainbow' protests against Reagan and by sheer force of will was able to to take a commanding position. She would become nationally famous for the series of journalistic comics about Reagan-era Pittsburgh with her husband, Harvey Pekar, and this propelled her into the House as a Rainbow '88 and later DSA congresswoman. Under Dellums, she would work on prison reforms.

Thanks to her combatitive nature, strong will, fame, and impeccable ideological credentials, she won the vicious fight to succeed Dellums and so the first female president followed the first black one. Once in office, she worked to further the DSA's transformation of the state and continue the eviseration of the intelligence community. She expected a pushback from that. Unfortunately, the bigger problem was Brabner's abrasive personality - fine as a planner and administrator, and something that was fine in TV debates with rival politicians, but it made her one of the least media friendly presidents. Her struggle with depression would also flare up and became public knowledge. This, along with the DSA being in power long enough to now become the establishment norm (it had became a point of concern for years that the youngest voters saw other parties as the cool rebel ones), would lead to her losing the first referendum on her presidency.

[8] It was not lost on American Conservatism that each time a figure from the Right had entered office that he had never made it past his first referendum. While unpalatable it had to be accepted that Socialist Economics and Progressive Social reform had the broad support of most of America and attempting to rollback on these would simply lead to another eventual defeat. Instead they battled the election on two fronts they felt most confidant on; Law and Order and Foreign Affairs.

Tom Ridge was elected as the first Liberal Republican in 24 years promising a crackdown on perceived inner city lawlessness (a subtle dog-whistle to the more unreconstructed National Unionists) and an increased push for international Democracy, led by the NSA. There would be some tinkering at the edges of the Market Socialist system, some privatization of non-essential services and some minor tax restructuring but nothing like the previous Monetarist reforms. Ridge kept the Unions onside by keeping a portion of the Board of the new privatized companies open for workers representation and a promise to not renege on labour protections. Ridge also promised to respect standing LGTB laws and equality provisions as settled law albeit with the unspoken caveat that the LR's would not be championing any further large scale changes.

Internationally Ridge would seek to work with the Soviets and Chinese to combat the rising tide of Islamism within Central Asia, brought into stark focus by the Victory Day Moscow bombings which left 350 dead during the parades. America would share intelligence and provide some special forces assets to hunt down militant leaders on the Tajik/Afghan border, however there would be points of contention with their erstwhile allies when the Soviets made some moves to encroach on the Northern borders of Imperial Iran ensuring that relations remained somewhat frosty.

Riding high on foreign successes and a strong economy (albeit one instigated by the previous administration) Ridge easily won his referendum, the first Conservative to do so. His following 6 years would remain calm and relatively uncontroversial barring an outcry when his law and order policies were adjudged to be focused overbearingly on urban ethnic minority groups. However with his support base being primarily rural and White he was able to ride out that particular storm.

Come the end of his 9 year term he declined to seek another term, citing precedent and his success in finally being the first 9 year President from the Right. With America prosperous and the world situation fairly stable it seemed the perfect time to pass the fruits of his labour to his successor.

[9] It says a lot about Ted Turner that despite being a Millionaire in partial control of a multimedia empire he lead a political party full of Progressives, Social Democrats, Eco-Socialists, Trade Unionists and Market Socialists with a name taken from a Canadian Far Left party. Turner had originally been a Republican but after there collapse during the 60s and the rise of Freidman's Liberal Republicans he turned away from them and started to become friendly with Freeman and especially the Muskie administration. When Reagan had been elected, Turner shifted his aim at the administration and his constant attacks on Reagan as well as funding of the Rainbow 88' Coalition. Turner would support the Dellums and Bradber administrations and would allow partial public ownership of his media networks and would support the actions of the Turner New Union. As Ridge and the Liberal Republicans ruled America, Turner would start attacking Ridge for his lack of support for environmental concerns, avoiding creating a Green economy, not supporting full scale progressive changes and for targeting minorities.

When the 2009 election reared, Turner turned to the old Labor party (still limbing in the background as the DSA took most of the Left votes) as well as the remnants of the Progressive Democrats/New Dealers/Tugwellites and Rainbow 88' coalition and create the Labor-Progressive Party as his election vehicle. Whilst the Liberal Republicans entered into a slugging match with the DSA, Turner's populist appeal and progressive values would win out and he would manage to enter into office. His aims for his administration were improving the inner cities, environmental reform, a Green Economy and social change. With the aim to make America Carbon Neutral by 2020, Turner would manage to get the Unions related to Fossil Fuels on board through his grand 'Green New Deal' using the Planning Branch to help sort out jobs in coding, computers and media leading to the creation to the Silicon Belt in America. He would also expand natural parks, reintroduce animals like Bison and Wetslope Cutthroat Trout to America, ban Gas and Oil excavation (the Liberal Republicans and Fossil Fuel Companies would cry foul but Turner would shovel money in there direction to shut them up). Social Change would be increased with many LGTB laws being expanded to include more protections for Bisexual,Trans and Non-Binary individuals.

Turner would manage to pass his referendum with popular support but after that he started pushing some odder ideas, attempts to implement a two child policy would end up being rather controversial, his bizarre antagonistic relationship with America's Christian community, Turner would complete the complete destruction of the N.S.A's Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Weapons (leading to many folks crying he was leaving America naked at the negotiation table), his support of Palestine over Israel on certain issues would cause controversy amongst elements of Americas Jewish population and his pal like relation with the leaders of the Soviet Union, China and North Korea would lead to the Chairman of the DSA Tim Ashe calling him out for 'Being Friends with Dictators' in an infamous speech. Still Turner would be seen as a fairly popular president amongst the Left and Centre and when he stepped down in 2018 few could say he had changed America.

[10] While the Labor-Progressives sank like a stone without Turner, it wasn't fast enough for the DSA who despite performing well downballot, failed to shrug off Ted Turner's body blow to their presidential aspirations. The path was opened up for the Liberal Republicans, now firmly ensconced as America's Party of the Right.

Biden had once been a National Unionist, on the softer edge of the Democrats who formed up behind Reagan. And it showed. On any given subject, if you dug into Biden's past there was a typically Reaganesque soundbite, whether that was about drug laws, gay rights, racial integration, taxation or social security. But during the decade of DSA rule, Biden moved away from the National Unionists and after a period sitting as an Independent, joined up with the post-Friedmanite Liberal Republicans.

The narrowness of Biden's victory in 2018 is a cause of some controversy - not least because the elderly leader resembles Reagan in more than just his politics. His speeches have become increasingly inflammatory and incoherent in recent months as the date of the Presidential Referendum approaches. And not only that, he appears to have done things even Reagan was never accused of. Allegations of sexual misconduct have flown thick and fast since his inauguration and has led to the international sensation of the ThatCounts movement, dredging up decades of sexual impropriety and assault from across the political and business worlds. The downfall of the USSR's stodgy conservative elite to be displaced by an ambitious group of anarcho-syndicalist feminists dubbed by the typically misogynist Morning In America News 'Pussy Riot' (no matter how often they say thats a literal translation of the group's name, they've not really recovered from that).

Despite this, the prospect of him losing his referendum next year is not a certainty. The President's erratic charisma, his right-wing record and association with the National Unionists of old, and his recent tendency to not so much dogwhistle as play a brass band all on his own, had endeared him to an aggressive new generation of right-wingers. With the left more divided than it has been since before Reagan, there is every possibility that Biden may yet clinch victory.