• 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

1944-1953: James F. Byrnes (Democratic)

I briefly did discuss a Byrnes Presidency in the 1940s many a moons ago with @Roberto El Rey on account of what we both perceived to be the list of Presidents in Daughters of Elysium about the United States growing into a one-party-state under Dixiecrat-dominated Democrats. In fairness to the author of that work, it is my understanding that they have themselves admitted that they were fairly young when they wrote it, since the United States were not going to be the focus of the story, they didn't devote too much time to that particular part of the world-building, and that were they to rewrite it today, they would probably do a lot of things differently.

And I get it, and I have no problems with the author and don't intend this as some sort of trashtalking of that work.

That said, the decision to have Jim Eastland succeed FDR as President did not seem like a particularly plausible trajectory. In 1944, Jim Eastland had less than two years of continuous service in the Senate, he was in his late 30s, and had no accomplishments to really show. The notion that FDR would put him on the ticket would have been absurd.

However, Byrnes was seriously considered for the VP slot. In the end, of course, the decision was between Harry Truman and William Douglas, as the Democratic national leadership was worried about alienating labour unions by picking a Southerner. Nevertheless, Byrnes had for many years been a close friend and confidante of Franklin Roosevelt, and had had his hands on both the administration's economic policy as well as it's foreign policy. He was a respected man, in the eyes of many, even in the North, a statesman.

I would say that if there is any Southerner who conceivably can become President in the 1940s with a PoD not too early, then it's Byrnes, and he is likely to get there by way of the VP slot.

My idea was that the Dixicratification of the Democrats is not straightforward from thereon, but rather, what happens is that Byrnes is not the Democratic presidential nominee in 1948, rather they pick someone else. Since whoever else this is try to make inroads on civil rights, there is a Dixiecrat campaign regardless, led by, say Strom Thurmond. Byrnes refuses to publicly endorse either, but like Grover Cleveland in 1896, it is clear to everyone where Byrnes' true feelings lie.

Because of a more split electorate, Thomas Dewey ends up winning a decisive victory (though not an Eisenhower landslide), and of course, becomes the one to get the United States involved in Korea. Soon, Dewey finds himself very unpopular, while Byrnes is quietly cultivating his image home in South Carolina as a statesman who was unjustly robbed of his nomination by vindictive northerners. He has no interest in actually trying to run again, but he is interested in making sure that the Democrats become more and more a party attuned to Southern interests. And what with Sam Rayburn and Richard Russell being the two most powerful Democrats on the national stage, that turns out not to be as difficult as one might have thought.

The Democrats get back again in in 1952 with Estes Kefauver, and from thereon, things start going more and more southern.
 
I briefly did discuss a Byrnes Presidency in the 1940s many a moons ago with @Roberto El Rey on account of what we both perceived to be the list of Presidents in Daughters of Elysium about the United States growing into a one-party-state under Dixiecrat-dominated Democrats. In fairness to the author of that work, it is my understanding that they have themselves admitted that they were fairly young when they wrote it, since the United States were not going to be the focus of the story, they didn't devote too much time to that particular part of the world-building, and that were they to rewrite it today, they would probably do a lot of things differently.

And I get it, and I have no problems with the author and don't intend this as some sort of trashtalking of that work.

That said, the decision to have Jim Eastland succeed FDR as President did not seem like a particularly plausible trajectory. In 1944, Jim Eastland had less than two years of continuous service in the Senate, he was in his late 30s, and had no accomplishments to really show. The notion that FDR would put him on the ticket would have been absurd.

However, Byrnes was seriously considered for the VP slot. In the end, of course, the decision was between Harry Truman and William Douglas, as the Democratic national leadership was worried about alienating labour unions by picking a Southerner. Nevertheless, Byrnes had for many years been a close friend and confidante of Franklin Roosevelt, and had had his hands on both the administration's economic policy as well as it's foreign policy. He was a respected man, in the eyes of many, even in the North, a statesman.

I would say that if there is any Southerner who conceivably can become President in the 1940s with a PoD not too early, then it's Byrnes, and he is likely to get there by way of the VP slot.

My idea was that the Dixicratification of the Democrats is not straightforward from thereon, but rather, what happens is that Byrnes is not the Democratic presidential nominee in 1948, rather they pick someone else. Since whoever else this is try to make inroads on civil rights, there is a Dixiecrat campaign regardless, led by, say Strom Thurmond. Byrnes refuses to publicly endorse either, but like Grover Cleveland in 1896, it is clear to everyone where Byrnes' true feelings lie.

Because of a more split electorate, Thomas Dewey ends up winning a decisive victory (though not an Eisenhower landslide), and of course, becomes the one to get the United States involved in Korea. Soon, Dewey finds himself very unpopular, while Byrnes is quietly cultivating his image home in South Carolina as a statesman who was unjustly robbed of his nomination by vindictive northerners. He has no interest in actually trying to run again, but he is interested in making sure that the Democrats become more and more a party attuned to Southern interests. And what with Sam Rayburn and Richard Russell being the two most powerful Democrats on the national stage, that turns out not to be as difficult as one might have thought.

The Democrats get back again in in 1952 with Estes Kefauver, and from thereon, things start going more and more southern.
I loved that TL, it wasn’t very realistic as far as the US was concerned, but it still had great world building.

As far as Dixiefying the Democrats and the rest of the US is concerned, I think you need a POD in at least the 1910s for it to be even remotely successful. Hughes winning in 1916, taking the country into war, and afterwards losing in 1920 to William Gibbs McAdoo who governs for more than two terms and beats a communist revolution following the great depression is the one I came up with it for a successful Dixie America.
 
I loved that TL, it wasn’t very realistic as far as the US was concerned, but it still had great world building.

As far as Dixiefying the Democrats and the rest of the US is concerned, I think you need a POD in at least the 1910s for it to be even remotely successful. Hughes winning in 1916, taking the country into war, and afterwards losing in 1920 to William Gibbs McAdoo who governs for more than two terms and beats a communist revolution following the great depression is the one I came up with it for a successful Dixie America.

I kind of prefer to have the PoD be after FDR already being in the White House and having won three landslides, simply because, well, I kind of like a challenge.
 
I briefly did discuss a Byrnes Presidency in the 1940s many a moons ago with @Roberto El Rey on account of what we both perceived to be the list of Presidents in Daughters of Elysium about the United States growing into a one-party-state under Dixiecrat-dominated Democrats. In fairness to the author of that work, it is my understanding that they have themselves admitted that they were fairly young when they wrote it, since the United States were not going to be the focus of the story, they didn't devote too much time to that particular part of the world-building, and that were they to rewrite it today, they would probably do a lot of things differently.

And I get it, and I have no problems with the author and don't intend this as some sort of trashtalking of that work.

That said, the decision to have Jim Eastland succeed FDR as President did not seem like a particularly plausible trajectory. In 1944, Jim Eastland had less than two years of continuous service in the Senate, he was in his late 30s, and had no accomplishments to really show. The notion that FDR would put him on the ticket would have been absurd.

However, Byrnes was seriously considered for the VP slot. In the end, of course, the decision was between Harry Truman and William Douglas, as the Democratic national leadership was worried about alienating labour unions by picking a Southerner. Nevertheless, Byrnes had for many years been a close friend and confidante of Franklin Roosevelt, and had had his hands on both the administration's economic policy as well as it's foreign policy. He was a respected man, in the eyes of many, even in the North, a statesman.

I would say that if there is any Southerner who conceivably can become President in the 1940s with a PoD not too early, then it's Byrnes, and he is likely to get there by way of the VP slot.

My idea was that the Dixicratification of the Democrats is not straightforward from thereon, but rather, what happens is that Byrnes is not the Democratic presidential nominee in 1948, rather they pick someone else. Since whoever else this is try to make inroads on civil rights, there is a Dixiecrat campaign regardless, led by, say Strom Thurmond. Byrnes refuses to publicly endorse either, but like Grover Cleveland in 1896, it is clear to everyone where Byrnes' true feelings lie.

Because of a more split electorate, Thomas Dewey ends up winning a decisive victory (though not an Eisenhower landslide), and of course, becomes the one to get the United States involved in Korea. Soon, Dewey finds himself very unpopular, while Byrnes is quietly cultivating his image home in South Carolina as a statesman who was unjustly robbed of his nomination by vindictive northerners. He has no interest in actually trying to run again, but he is interested in making sure that the Democrats become more and more a party attuned to Southern interests. And what with Sam Rayburn and Richard Russell being the two most powerful Democrats on the national stage, that turns out not to be as difficult as one might have thought.

The Democrats get back again in in 1952 with Estes Kefauver, and from thereon, things start going more and more southern.
While the exact circumstances were questionable, I thought it was a brilliant idea by the writer of that story to justify a federalised Europe by portraying it as being trapped between the USSR and a Dixiecrat US, a good case of actually making 'both sides are evil' vaguely plausible.

I was actually taking a bit of inspiration from that with this list - if you want the US to be the losing side in the Cold War and set it up to be something analogous to the Communist one-party state that slowly decays, you could probably do worse than imply that the Democrats never lose their New Deal dominance but are slowly taken over more by southerners whose general elections are scarcely more small-d democratic than Soviet ones. Of course, the best way to do that is to have the Republicans dominated by unelectable extremists - at first by chance, and then increasingly on purpose thanks to Watergate on steroids.
 
I was actually taking a bit of inspiration from that with this list - if you want the US to be the losing side in the Cold War and set it up to be something analogous to the Communist one-party state that slowly decays, you could probably do worse than imply that the Democrats never lose their New Deal dominance but are slowly taken over more by southerners whose general elections are scarcely more small-d democratic than Soviet ones. Of course, the best way to do that is to have the Republicans dominated by unelectable extremists - at first by chance, and then increasingly on purpose thanks to Watergate on steroids.

I was looking over the kind of dominance the Democrats used to have in the South, and I learned today (I am amazed I didn't learn this back the other year when both of that state's senate seat were up for grabs in the same election), as late as in 1990, the Republicans did not bother to field a candidate in the Georgia senatorial election. Neither did the Libertarians, nor the Greens, nor the Constitution Party, nor anyone.

Sam Nunn was in fact the only candidate on the ballot.
 
I was looking over the kind of dominance the Democrats used to have in the South, and I learned today (I am amazed I didn't learn this back the other year when both of that state's senate seat were up for grabs in the same election), as late as in 1990, the Republicans did not bother to field a candidate in the Georgia senatorial election. Neither did the Libertarians, nor the Greens, nor the Constitution Party, nor anyone.

Sam Nunn was in fact the only candidate on the ballot.
Unopposed senatorial elections are certainly less common than congressional or state legislative ones, but they're still around; I believe the most recent one was South Dakota in 2010.
 
I was looking over the kind of dominance the Democrats used to have in the South, and I learned today (I am amazed I didn't learn this back the other year when both of that state's senate seat were up for grabs in the same election), as late as in 1990, the Republicans did not bother to field a candidate in the Georgia senatorial election. Neither did the Libertarians, nor the Greens, nor the Constitution Party, nor anyone.

Sam Nunn was in fact the only candidate on the ballot.

That might be just due to Nunn's own popularity, notoriety as an incredibly moderate figure in the Democratic Party, and how congressional seniority used to be a somewhat bigger deal in elections decades ago. He very nearly lost his 1972 election to the Senate and the Republican Party had been competitive in Georgia statewide since Goldwater.
 
INVISIBLE THRONE: AN ALTERNATE YANKEE-COWBOY WAR

"The Yankees are defined as the traditional Eastern Establishment, accumulating socio-economic capital through their control of banking cartels and round-table think tanks. Their global Atlanticist policy is an outgrowth of the White Man's Burden to civilize the world, cooperating with the old European imperial powers to ensure the multinational usurpation of post-colonial power structures."

"The Cowboys hail from the American West and Southern Rim, and have grown rich off the legacy of domestic colonialism, dominating mining, aerospace, energy production, and most importantly defense contracting. Inspired by the drum of Manifest Destiny which drove white settlers west, they believe American imperialism must become a rival to Atlanticist interests, prioritizing a unilateral American hegemony."

"When conflict forms within the national security apparatus, what results is a clandestine war of shadows. This is not the usage of a handful of rogues, it is a formalized practice of an entire class in which a thousand hands spontaneously join. Conspiracy is the normal continuation of normal politics by normal means."


1953-1957: Dwight Eisenhower/ Richard Nixon (Republican)
[1]
def. Adlai Stevenson II/ John Sparkman (Democratic)
1957-1959: Dwight Eisenhower/ Robert B. Anderson (Republican & Independent) [2]
def. Adlai Stevenson II/ Stuart Symington (Democratic)
1959-1961: Robert B. Anderson/ vacant (Independent with Republican support)
1961-1969: Franklin D. Roosevelt Jr. [replacing Stuart Symington]/ Frank P. Graham (Democratic)
[3]
def. Robert B. Anderson/ Gerald Ford (Republican), Storm Thurmond/ various (Unpledged Democratic)
def. Prescott S. Bush/ Jim Rhodes (Republican), Allan Shivers/ Burnet Maybank Jr. (Pioneer)
1969-1973: Barry Goldwater/ William W. Momyer (Republican) [4]
def. Will Rogers Jr./ John Pastore (Democratic)
1973-1977: Robert F. Kennedy/ Hale Boggs (Democratic) [5]
def. Barry Goldwater/ William W. Momyer (Republican), William L. Scott/ Samuel P. Huntington (Populist)
def. Barry Goldwater/ William C. Cramer (Republican)
1977-1978: Hale Boggs/ vacant (Democratic) [6]
1978-1981: Dan Rostenkowski/ vacant (Democratic)
1981-pres: George H.W. Bush/ Charles Stenvig (Republican) [7]
def. Frank Carlucci/ George Rawlings (Democratic), Peter Diamondstone/ LaDonna Harris (New Alliance)

[1] Personally disliked Nixon during his time as President, as did the growing western industrialists/eastern financiers. Would replace Nixon with long-time friend Robert B. Anderson, the Texan Secretary of Defense. IOTL, Nixon would become President and was by far-right contingents within the national security apparatus who began to view him as a liability. Here, he would leave politics and later become head of the Motion Picture Association.

[2] Showing reluctance to intervene against communist Cuba in favor of a more internationalist policy represented the first major split between himself and Anderson. Later died of a stroke due to covert tampering with heart medications, Castro himself would be killed via airstrike a year later.

[3] Initially the running mate of Stuart Symington, an opponent of CIA influence who was assassinated on the campaign trail. Would oversee the end of the Cuban Conflict, expand Social Security, pass some watered-down civil rights, intervene in the Congolese War, lose the Space Race, and ensure the shaky dominance of Atlanticist internationalism. Also a close friend of the Bush family.

[4] Represented the Republican break away from civil rights, economic corporatism, and Anglo-American internationalism which began under Anderson, pursuing a more independent course regarding Japan, Rhodesia, and French Algeria. A firm ally of western industrial interests yet his failure to secure negotiations during the Oil Crisis of 1972 due to covert sabotage by the CIA, Mossad, and Kennedy campaign made him deeply unpopular.

[5] Known for his ruthless management of political affairs in the Capitol and sought to cement Atlanticist interests. Initially successful, crippling the oil cartels and establishing American detente with China, yet suffered from the revelation of his involvement in COINTELPRO by the CIA-connected U.S. Labor Party. Though doubtlessly guilty, he was now a scapegoat for the police state's worst excesses and resigned, instead of being killed by the national security apparatus as his brother was IOTL.

[6] Initially chosen as a folksy southern figure to balance Kennedy's lack of charisma, but would prove to be persistent in investigating the truth behind the extent of the shadow war between the "bankers" and "generals". Later killed by the People's Mojahedin Organization during a state visit to Iran.

[7] Would oversee the establishment of committees to investigate CIA actions as Senator, while directing the national security apparatus to reduce its official control over the state by privatizing vital assets. With ties to the money men of the eastern coast and the private militaries of the west, his presence in the Oval Office has appeased both sides of the shadow war, as they become united in their singular goal to build a new American hegemony, no matter the cost.
 
inspired in part by @Luke_Starkiller, here's Take Me To Church

1961-1963: John F. Kennedy Democratic)
(With Lyndon B. Johnson)
1960 def. Richard Nixon/Henry Cabot Lodge (Republican), Others

1963-1973: Lyndon B. Johnson (Democratic)
(With Hubert Humphrey, later Billy Graham)

1964 def. Barry Goldwater Sr./William E. Miller (Republican), Others
1968 def. Richard Nixon/Bourke Hickenlooper (Republican), Others

1973-1981: Sam Yorty (Republican)
(With Claude R. Kirk Jr.)

1972 def. George Wallace/Louise Day Hicks (Democratic), Tom McCall/Walter Fauntroy (Civic), Others
1976 def. Abraham Ribicoff/Walter Mondale (Democratic), John Stennis/John Cromelin (States Rights), Ralph Nader/Oscar Acosta (Civic)

1981-1984: Frank Church (Democratic)
(With Terry Francios)

1980 def. Donald Rumsfeld/James Emery (Republican), Others

1984-1985: Terry Francios (Democratic)
(With Reubin Askew)

Replaced Frank Church

1985-1993: Pierre Du Pont (Republican)
(With Jeremiah Denton)
1984 def. Terry Francios/Reubin Askew (Democratic), Others
1988 def. Reubin Askew/Chuck Robb (Democratic), John Tanton/Willis Carto (National Front), Others

1993-2001: Mickey Leland (Democratic)
(With Tom Turnipseed)

1992 def. Jeremiah Denton/Elsie Hillman (Republican), David Duke/Matthias Koehl (National Front), Others
1996 def. Jeb Bush/Bob C. Smith (Republican), Others

2001-2005: Carolyn Tomei (Democratic)
(With Bill Bradley)

2000 def. Ron Lauder/John McCain (Republican), Others

2005-201x: Betsy DeVos (Republican)
(With Gary Johnson)

2004 def. Carolyn Tomei/Bill Bradley (Democratic), Mike Huckabee/John Lindauer (New Nationalist), Others
2008 def. Paul Wellstone/William Barber II (Democratic), Others
 
I briefly did discuss a Byrnes Presidency in the 1940s many a moons ago with @Roberto El Rey on account of what we both perceived to be the list of Presidents in Daughters of Elysium about the United States growing into a one-party-state under Dixiecrat-dominated Democrats. In fairness to the author of that work, it is my understanding that they have themselves admitted that they were fairly young when they wrote it, since the United States were not going to be the focus of the story, they didn't devote too much time to that particular part of the world-building, and that were they to rewrite it today, they would probably do a lot of things differently.

And I get it, and I have no problems with the author and don't intend this as some sort of trashtalking of that work.

That said, the decision to have Jim Eastland succeed FDR as President did not seem like a particularly plausible trajectory. In 1944, Jim Eastland had less than two years of continuous service in the Senate, he was in his late 30s, and had no accomplishments to really show. The notion that FDR would put him on the ticket would have been absurd.

However, Byrnes was seriously considered for the VP slot. In the end, of course, the decision was between Harry Truman and William Douglas, as the Democratic national leadership was worried about alienating labour unions by picking a Southerner. Nevertheless, Byrnes had for many years been a close friend and confidante of Franklin Roosevelt, and had had his hands on both the administration's economic policy as well as it's foreign policy. He was a respected man, in the eyes of many, even in the North, a statesman.

I would say that if there is any Southerner who conceivably can become President in the 1940s with a PoD not too early, then it's Byrnes, and he is likely to get there by way of the VP slot.

My idea was that the Dixicratification of the Democrats is not straightforward from thereon, but rather, what happens is that Byrnes is not the Democratic presidential nominee in 1948, rather they pick someone else. Since whoever else this is try to make inroads on civil rights, there is a Dixiecrat campaign regardless, led by, say Strom Thurmond. Byrnes refuses to publicly endorse either, but like Grover Cleveland in 1896, it is clear to everyone where Byrnes' true feelings lie.

Because of a more split electorate, Thomas Dewey ends up winning a decisive victory (though not an Eisenhower landslide), and of course, becomes the one to get the United States involved in Korea. Soon, Dewey finds himself very unpopular, while Byrnes is quietly cultivating his image home in South Carolina as a statesman who was unjustly robbed of his nomination by vindictive northerners. He has no interest in actually trying to run again, but he is interested in making sure that the Democrats become more and more a party attuned to Southern interests. And what with Sam Rayburn and Richard Russell being the two most powerful Democrats on the national stage, that turns out not to be as difficult as one might have thought.

The Democrats get back again in in 1952 with Estes Kefauver, and from thereon, things start going more and more southern.
I remember that conversation (funnily enough, I actually don’t remember participating in it to the extent that anyone would remember my involvement). Still, I remember thinking Byrnes was an inspired choice compared to Eastland.
 
inspired in part by @Luke_Starkiller, here's Take Me To Church

1961-1963: John F. Kennedy Democratic)
(With Lyndon B. Johnson)
1960 def. Richard Nixon/Henry Cabot Lodge (Republican), Others

1963-1973: Lyndon B. Johnson (Democratic)
(With Hubert Humphrey, later Billy Graham)

1964 def. Barry Goldwater Sr./William E. Miller (Republican), Others
1968 def. Richard Nixon/Bourke Hickenlooper (Republican), Others

1973-1981: Sam Yorty (Republican)
(With Claude R. Kirk Jr.)

1972 def. George Wallace/Louise Day Hicks (Democratic), Tom McCall/Walter Fauntroy (Civic), Others
1976 def. Abraham Ribicoff/Walter Mondale (Democratic), John Stennis/John Cromelin (States Rights), Ralph Nader/Oscar Acosta (Civic)

1981-1984: Frank Church (Democratic)
(With Terry Francios)

1980 def. Donald Rumsfeld/James Emery (Republican), Others

1984-1985: Terry Francios (Democratic)
(With Reubin Askew)

Replaced Frank Church

1985-1993: Pierre Du Pont (Republican)
(With Jeremiah Denton)
1984 def. Terry Francios/Reubin Askew (Democratic), Others
1988 def. Reubin Askew/Chuck Robb (Democratic), John Tanton/Willis Carto (National Front), Others

1993-2001: Mickey Leland (Democratic)
(With Tom Turnipseed)

1992 def. Jeremiah Denton/Elsie Hillman (Republican), David Duke/Matthias Koehl (National Front), Others
1996 def. Jeb Bush/Bob C. Smith (Republican), Others

2001-2005: Carolyn Tomei (Democratic)
(With Bill Bradley)

2000 def. Ron Lauder/John McCain (Republican), Others

2005-201x: Betsy DeVos (Republican)
(With Gary Johnson)

2004 def. Carolyn Tomei/Bill Bradley (Democratic), Mike Huckabee/John Lindauer (New Nationalist), Others
2008 def. Paul Wellstone/William Barber II (Democratic), Others

There are some deep cuts here, and there are other things that are the stuff of abject horror. Well done.
 
“Upon Saint Crispin’s Day!”: The Dual Monarchy of England and France (1422-1727)

Kings of England and of France and Lord of Ireland

9 April 1413/22 October 1422 – 4 March 1461: Henry V and II “The Lion” or “The Old Lion of England” (House of Lancaster)
Major Events: Final Phase of the Hundred Years’ War; Battle of Agincourt; Treaty of Troyes; First and Second Treaty of Canterbury; Fall of Orleans; First Valois Rebellion; The Henrican Crusade; Second Valois Rebellion.
Important Ministers: Richard Plantagenet, 3rd Duke of York; John, Duke of Bedford; Thomas Beaufort, Duke of Exeter; John de Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk; Thomas Fitzalan, 5th Earl of Arundel; Thomas Langley, Dean of York.

4 March 1461 – 21 May 1471: Henry VI and III “The Saint” or “The Learned” or “The Weak-Willed” (House of Lancaster)
Major Events: Third Valois Rebellion; The Mortimer Rebellion; The Burgundian Wars; Foundation of Eton College, King’s College (Cambridge), All Souls College (Oxford), Saint Thomas à Becket College (Angers)
Important Ministers: Richard Plantagenet, 3rd Duke of York; Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick; Queen Margaret of Anjou; George Neville, Archbishop of Canterbury

21 May 1471 – 30 August 1483: Edward IV and II* “The Ill-Born” or “The Bastard of Westminster” (House of Lancaster)
Major Events: The Burgundian Wars; The Great Slump of 1470s; Fourth Valois Rebellion; De Mowbray's Uprising; Razing of Armagnac
Important Ministers: Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick; Philippe de Commines; Henry Stafford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham; Sir John Woodville
* Edward had himself crowned II of France to acknowledge the claim of Edward III of England, who started the Hundred Year’s War

30 August 1483 – 21 April 1509: Richard III and I “The Iron-Wrought” (House of Lancaster)
Major Events: Last Valois Rebellion; The Mad War; Foundation of the Holy League; Creation of the Councils of the North, Wales and Normandy; First Italian War; Creation of the Court of the Star Chamber; Cabot's discovry of North America
Important Ministers: Philippe de Commines; Robert Stillington, Bishop of Bath and Wells; Thomas Rotherham, Archbishop of York; John Morton, Archbishop of Canterbury; Sir William Daubeney

21 April 1509 – 1 January 1515: Henry VII and IV “Coin-Counter” (House of Lancaster)
Major Events: Cabot's Mapping of Chesapeake and Hudson; English Wool Boom; Institution of the Pragmatic Sanction in France
Important Ministers: Sir Richard Empson; Edmund Dudley; Thomas Wolsey, Bishop of Lincoln; William Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury

1 January 1515 – 6 July 1553: Francis I “The Great” or “Rex Supernorum Regum” (House of Lancaster)
Major Events: "The Spanish Match"; War of the Holy League; Battle of Asti; Cardinal Wolsey's Papacy; Arrival of the Renaissance in France and England; da Vinci's Parisian Phase; Third Italian War; Sack of Rome and death of Pope Benedict XIII (Wolsey); Annulment of the Spanish Match; English Reformation; French Reformation; Pilgramage of Grace; Occupation of Scotland; Start of the Rough Wooing; Edict of Romorantin; Fourth Italian War
Important Ministers: Thomas Wolsey, Archbishop of York; Sir Thomas More; Thomas Cromwell, 1st Earl of Essex; Thomas Howard, Duke of Norfolk; Antoine, Duke of Lorraine; Anne, Duke of Montmorency

6 July 1553 – 10 July 1559: Henry VIII and III (House of Lancaster)
Major Events: Fifth Italian War; Anglo-French Counter Reformation
Important Ministers: Antoine, 1st comte de Noailles; Stephen Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester; Anne, Duke of Montmorency

10 July 1559 – 30 May 1574: Francis II (House of Lancaster)
Major Events: Sixth Italian War; Hugenot Uprising; Wyatt's Rebellion; First Anglo-French Settlements in the Americas; Start of the Dutch Wars of Independence; Seventh Italian War
Important Ministers: Anne, Duke of Montmorency; Stephen Gardiner, Cardinal of Winchester; Thomas Wriothesley, 1st Earl of Southampton; Richard Rich, 1st Baron Rich

30 May 1574 – 24 March 1603: Henry IX and IV (House of Lancaster)
Major Events: Eighth Italian War; Raiding of the Spanish Treasure Fleets; Drake's Circumnavigation of the Globe; Ninth Italian War; Annus Horribilis 1595; Spanish Invasion of England; 2nd Battle of Hastings; Battle of The Solent; Spanish Occupation of London; Deliverance of Paris; End of Anglo-French Counter-Reformation
Important Ministers: Louis de Bourbon, Prince of Condé; Gaspard de Coligny; William Cecil, 1st Baron Burghley; Sir Francis Walsingham

Kings of England, France and Scotland and Lords of Ireland

24 March 1603 – 9 April 1616: Margaret I and II “The Flower of Scotland” (House of Douglas)
Major Events: End of the Rough Wooing; Last Italian War; Cessation of Navarre; The Blackpowder Plot; Edict of Nantes; Publication of Queen Margaret's Bible (First official Bible in English and French, begining of the Emergence of Anglois Identity); Works of Guillam Shakespeare; Refurbishing of Portsmouth, Brest and Plymouth Dockyards; Franco-Scottish Admittance to the House of Lords
Important Ministers: George Beaufort, 1st Duke of Buckingham; Henry Wriothesley, 3rd Earl of Southampton; Sir Francis Bacon; Robert Cecil, 1st Earl of Salisbury; Maximilien de Béthune, Duke of Sully; Charles de Lorraine

9 April 1616 – 14 May 1643: Henry X, V and I (House of Beaufort)
Major Events: Founding of the Roanoke Colony; Founding of New London on the Saint Lawrence River; The Ordinance of 1620; Declaration of the Rights of Crown and Parliament; Establishment of East India Company; "Pax Christi Regnante Henri"; Foundation of New Anjou on the Chesapeake Estury
Important Ministers: Donald Leslie, 3rd Earl of Leven; Robert Devereux, 3rd Comte de Montpellier; David Fairfax, 1st Earl of Harrogate; Oliver Cromwell, 5th Earl of Essex; Francois Calvet, Marquis de Harfleur

14 May 1643 – 6 February 1685: Charles I, VII and I (House of Beaufort)
Major Events: Anglois Phase of the Thirty Years' War; Peace of Westphalia; Act of Uniformity; Great Plague of 1660; First Anglois-Dutch War; Scourging of the Thames; Start of the Dutch Occupation of Picardie
Important Ministers: Francois Calvet, Marquis de Harfleur; Oliver Cromwell, 5th Earl of Essex; Jean-Luc, Comte de La Barre; George Lambert, 1st Duke of Clarendon; Sir Thomas Hobbes

6 February 1685 – 1 September 1715: Henry XI, VI and II (House of Beaufort)
Major Events: Expulsion of Prince Georges; "Queen Maria's War"/ War of the French Succession (Civil War between Loyalists and Georgeists); Fall of Paris; Defection of the O'Neils; Battle of Dundalk; Razing of Cork; 2nd Battle of Agincourt; Choking of the Siene; Battle of Fontainebleau; Peace of Saint-Denis; Darien Plan/Establishment of New Caledonia; Convocation of the Etats-Généraux; Building of the Palace of Versailles; Articles des Droits des Etats-Généraux et Souverain
Important Ministers: Archibald Campbell, Duke of Argyll; Henry FitzHenry, Duke of Cleveland; Charles, Duke of Orléans (future Charles III and IX); Phillip Calvet-Cromwell, Comte of Anjou; Sir John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough

Kings of Great Britain, France and Ireland
1 September 1715 – 11 June 1727: Charles II and VIII "the Younger" or "the Dragon of the Somme" (House of Beaufort)
Major Events: Union of the Crowns 1717; ; Second Anglois-Dutch War; Battle of The Somme; Relief of Calais; Battle of Zeeland; Siege of Antwerp; End of the Dutch Occupation of Picardie; War of the Florentine Succession; Occupation of Corsica; Battle of Chambery; Po River Campaign; Medici-Sforza dynasty merge Duchy of Milan and Florentine Republic and divide Savoy; First Georgeists Uprising; Four Year's War; Battle of Nivelle; Battles of the Pyrenees
Prime Ministers: Phillip Calvet-Cromwell, Comte of Anjou; Germain Chauvelin, Marquis de Grosbois; Philibert Orry, Count of Vignory; Henry Paget, 1st Earl of Uxbridge; Henry St John, 1st Viscount Bolingbroke; Robert Walpole
 
Silent Running: World Leaders Circa 1987​

The G7
  • United States of America: President Richard Nixon | Vice President Daniel Patrick Moynihan (Unity)
  • United Kingdom: Queen Elizabeth II (Windsor) | Prime Minister Peter Walker (Conservative)
  • The Fifth French Republic: President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing (Union for French Democracy) | Prime Minister Jacques Chaban-Delmas (Rally For The Republic)
  • Empire of Japan: Emperor Akihito (Yamato) | Prime Minister Toshiki Kaifu (Kaishintō)
  • The Nation of Canada: Governor General Martial Asselin (Progressive Conservative) | Prime Minister Bill Davis (Progressive Conservative)
  • Republic of Italy: President Aldo Moro (Christian Democrats) | Prime Minister Enrico Manca (Italian Socialist)
  • Federal Republic of Germany: President Richard von Weizsäcker (Christian Democratic Union) | Chancellor Holger Börner (Social Democratic)
  • The European Economic Community: President of the European Commission Max van der Stoel (Socialist) | President of the European Council Desmond O'Malley (European Democratic Alliance)
The G7 formerly emerged in 1976 (originally called the Liberty Group), just in time for Taft Jr. to be replaced by Fred Harris who’s concept of New Populism seemed out of step with the proposed reasoning for the Forum. Cue a series of postponed conferences and political instability. With the election of Nixon in 80’ followed by a series of less Radical World leaders emerging the stage was finally set for a new series of conferences to occur. The 1986 Conference will be the first to be held in America, specifically in Hearst Castle as Nixon flaunts the grandeur of a garish American Castle in his home state.

In terms of politics, the closest political leaders will be of America, Canada and Britain. Nixon, Walker and Davis are represent the Statist Centre Right reaction to the excesses of the Left, whilst seemingly allied around Keynesianism and Moderate Conservatism the answer is that the more business orientated ideals of Walker in particular his support for Free Trade clashes with the ‘Gaullist’ policies of Nixon and Davis which has lead to conflict and Walker the former Kennedy supporter to focus on becoming closer with Europe (though being mute on the EEC and further incorporation).

Valéry Giscard d'Estaing and France meanwhile has managed to retain his support from both party members and likeminded colleagues from across the aisles to pursue his liberalisation efforts on the French Economy and Society but Gaullists and Leftists oppose his changes to Wages and National Sovereignty with his slow approach to incorporating France further into the EEC. Still d’Estaing has been able to limp through it though predictions see the Socialists making gains and the Presidency under Jacques Delors next time around.

Germany, Italy and Japan spent much of the 70s and Early 80s under stress from combinations of stagflation economy’s, widespread Leftist terrorism, student radicalism and Right Wing Establishment entities stirring up trouble within the nation. By the Mid 80s things have begun to get back on track due to the election of Centre Left Governments, particularly in Japan where the LDP came crashing down after 27 years of rule after a series of economic problems and a split within the party. Whilst things have died down in there’s nations things aren’t perfect; Germany is dealing with the stresses of raising immigration and the continued existence of Leftist Terrorist groups, Japan’s leadership whilst competent have whispered tones about corruption scandals and Italy’s Government is being kept tightly controlled from behind the scenes by the nations President. Where these nations go yet is to be seen.

The European Economic Community has risen in strength in recent years, attempting to incorporate more European nations into the midst, with Greece, Spain and Portugal on the cards for officially joining in the coming months. But the Scandinavian nations refuse to budge and Britain is constantly stymieing measures to increase further cooperation and possibly even a future European currency at every turn. Additionally Max van der Stoel attempts to include elements like a Charter of Human Rights and Industrial Democracy aspects to the EEC’s constitution seems like it will likely cause enemies to emerge across Western Europe.


The Warsaw Pact
  • Union of Soviet Socialist Republics: General Secretary Fyodor Kulakov | Premier Vladimir Semichastny (Communist Party of the Soviet Union)
  • Polish People’s Republic: First Secretary Stanisław Kania | Prime Minister Czesław Kiszczak (Polish United Workers' Party)
  • German Democratic Republic: General Secretary Willi Stoph | Chairman Günter Mittag (Socialist Unity Party of Germany)
  • Hungarian People’s Republic: General Secretary János Kádár | Chairman György Lázár (Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party)
  • Czechoslovak Socialist Republic: First Secretary Jozef Lenárt | Prime Minister Lubomír Štrougal (National Front of Czechs and Slovaks)
  • People's Republic of Bulgaria: General Secretary Todor Zhivkov | Chairman Georgi Filipov (Fatherland Front)
  • Socialist Republic of Romania: General Secretary Ion Gheorghe Maurer | Prime Minister Manea Manescu (Front of Socialist Unity)
The Warsaw Pact hasn’t had a stellar couple of decades, whilst reforms in the 60s shifted the nations away from Stalinist style economic values to a something closer to Tito, it hasn’t gone according to plan entirely. Indeed the brief Shelepin regime would try and increase centralisation, have a more aggressive foreign policy and further KGB control of the state. This wouldn’t please the military and within time, Shelepin would join Khrushchev in a guarded Dacha far away from anyone else. The second coup and it’s masterminds Kosygin,Podgorny and Suslov would find themselves running the country with a heavy debt to Semichastny and the KGB.

Now several decades later and the coup masterminds for the most part dead, things aren’t great. Whilst the Warsaw Pact is still together and still a formidable opponent to NATO, it’s economy’s are for the most part sluggish or in the case of Romania still very much stuck in the Stalinist mindset. But the selling of oil and gas during the Iranian Fuel Shock provided a brief injection of cash to the Soviets and discussions about using the Pact’s resources to keep the system functioning is being pondered.

The domination of Semichastny over the sickly Kulakov keeps the system running, a true Soviet patriot in many senses of the word, whilst Semichastny is happy for mild reforms to keep the Soviet system running any attempt to liberalise freedom of speech, Trade Unions or even drastic economic reforms like the ones proposed in Czechoslovakia in the late 60s, see it’s architects sent off to prison or meeting an accident whilst in police custody.


But despite it all, Resistance is brewing, more reformist politicians are beginning to raise up through the ranks and as the eighties tick on further a pressure is beginning to occur within the Iron curtain.

The Others:
  • People’s Republic of China: Chairman Yu Qiuli | Premier Li Peng (Chinese Communist Party)
  • Republic of India: President Zail Singh | Prime Minister Indira Gandhi (Indian National Congress)
  • Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia: President Džemal Bijedić | Premier Milka Planinc (League of Communists)
  • Islamic Republic of Pakistan: Prime Minister Hayat Sherpao (Pakistan Peoples Party)
  • Republic of Iran: President Abolhassan Banisadr (Independent) | Prime Minister Massoud Rajavi (People’s Mujahedin Organization of Iran)
The other world powers exist in a constant state of flux and turmoil. Indeed there’s a possibility that within a decade they may collapse or become even greater depending on the way the cards are played.

China has had a turbulent few decades, when the Great Helmsman drowned in his swimming pool in 1965, the ensuing leadership battle would see Zhou Enlai and Liu Shaoqi dominate Chinese politics for just over a decade. Followed by the emergence of Deng Xiaoping in the late 70s it seemed China would embrace a more liberalised economy and Western friendly attitude compared to the Soviet Union and it’s puppets. But a series of corruption scandals and disasters caused by the economic policies of the reformers would allow the ‘Petroleum Faction’ with Military support to take over. Whilst not completely ripping up the economic reforms that occurred (indeed Yu Qiuli belief in modern technology guiding the revolution means that China has a surprisingly okay relationship with Japan and America) the emergence of Paramount Leader Yu Qiuli has seen a drastic shift back towards a more Stalinist, Planned Economy than what had been occurring in the 70s, combined with Qiuli reintroducing Cult of Personality ideas has seen China had back towards the ideas of Mao in a manner of speaking.

Technically if you squint hard enough, India and Pakistan are lead by Centre Left Democratic Governments, though this often isn’t particularly the case. India continues to be dominated by Indira Gandhi and any sign that she’ll be retiring any point soon is unlikely (given that her retirement means that Sanjay would become INC leader this is probably wise). The campaign against the Khalistan movement is still ongoing and the possibility of another Emergence is discussed though unlikely whilst Indira is still alive. Pakistan has weathered a turbulent Seventies particularly after the assassination of Prime Minister Bhutto in 78’ and the failed military coup a year later. Hayat Sherpao runs Pakistan as a Left Wing Demagogue who uses India & Afghanistan and the saber rattling it can produce to stay in power alongside using his supporters in the Police and Army to keep him in power, the Soviets are happy that they have a friend in the subcontinent even if the possibility of war between India and Pakistan looks like it would be a devastating thing for all involved.

Yugoslavia has been a chaotic place for some time, the death of Tito followed by the Iranians Fuel Crisis in the late 70s nearly caused the country to collapse but the firm hand of Džemal Bijedić and his liberal use of the military lead to nationalist protests to be quashed. In the late 80s, the Federal Republic is in a strange place, whilst economically it’s managed to climb back and it’s certainly more liberal than the Warsaw Pact nations in terms of personal freedom there’s a strange feeling in the air, not helped by Bijedić having built a strange quasi-cult of personality in the intervening period and it seems yet again the fate of Yugoslavia is dependent on the health of one man.

The Islamic Iranian Republic is a strange world power, having built up it’s power with it’s supply of oil and relatively stable country compared to chaos ensuing in Saudi Arabia and Iraq, but it’s a power dependent on a single resource. Additionally the Islamic Socialist Government leading the country is beginning to see discontent against it, Liberals disgruntled by lacks of reform in social areas and Agricultural groups disgruntled by the lack of reforms in the countryside. In the process of this reaction, the People’s Mujahedin has began to progressively dip into building a cult of personality around it’s leader Massoud Rajavi, all the while President Abolhassan Banisadr tries to battle the slowly rising tide of autocracy and reaction through trying to reform and increase democratic participation and even drawing a possible plan for direct democracy from the ground up to ensure that no one can claim absolute authority within Iran again...
 
2. The Adams Family

November 23 .1963 35th president of the United States John Fitzgerald Kennedy is assassinated. Stephen T. Adam's descendant of John and Quincy Adam s takes kennedy s place as 36th president of the United states. Prior to being Kennedy s v.pm he was senator of Texas. Stephen Adam s served as president from 1963 - 1973 defeating Arizona senator Barry Goldwater in 1964 and Michigan Governor George Romney in 1968.

2004 Simon Adam s nephew of 36th president former senator from New York narrowly defeated another relative of a former president George W.Bush. in 2008 he lost reelection to senator of Arizona John Mcain who in turn lost reelection in 2012 to Ilionoise senator Barrack Obama.
 
2. The Adams Family

November 23 .1963 35th president of the United States John Fitzgerald Kennedy is assassinated. Stephen T. Adam's descendant of John and Quincy Adam s takes kennedy s place as 36th president of the United states. Prior to being Kennedy s v.pm he was senator of Texas. Stephen Adam s served as president from 1963 - 1973 defeating Arizona senator Barry Goldwater in 1964 and Michigan Governor George Romney in 1968.

2004 Simon Adam s nephew of 36th president former senator from New York narrowly defeated another relative of a former president George W.Bush. in 2008 he lost reelection to senator of Arizona John Mcain who in turn lost reelection in 2012 to Ilionoise senator Barrack Obama.
This is the best list I have ever seen
 
3528845-09.jpg

Presidents of the United States (Union government)
1961-1962: John F. Kennedy (Democratic)
(with Lyndon B. Johnson
)
defeated Richard Nixon/Henry Lodge Jr. (Republican), Harry Byrd/various (faithless elector)
1962-1963: Stewart Udall(Democratic) [as Secretary of the Interior]
(vacant
, then with William Westmoreland)
1963-1964: William Westmoreland (Democratic, then Independent) [as Vice President]
(vacant)
vacated office after passage of the Emergency Congressional Powers Act
1965-197?: Henry Kissinger (Union)

(with Hubert Humphrey) elections suspended, nominated by acclamation

Presidents/"Protectors" of the United States (Southern Confederacy government)
1963-1963: Theophilus Eugene "Bull" Connor (States' Rights Democratic) [as Acting Governor of Alabama]
1963-1966: George Wallace (Independent) [as Governor of Alabama, then as President de-facto]
1966-1967: Charlton Heston (Independent)

'66: defeated Lurleen Wallace (Independent), Robert Shelton (Independent), Joe Lightburn (Independent)
1967-1968: [vacant]
1968-1968: Tom Turpinseed [caretaker]

'68: Southern Confederacy government dissolves

Presidents of the United States (Western government)
1963-1970: Richard Nixon (Republican) [as Governor of California]
'62: (with Jack Tenney)
defeated Pat Brown/Glenn M. Anderson (Democratic)
'67: (with Sam Yorty)
defeated Belva Davis/Stanley Mosk (Democratic)

1970: disputed between Huey P. Newton (Alliance of Libertarian Activists) and Sam Yorty (Independent)
1970: Huey P. Newton(Alliance of Libertarian Activists)
(vacant
, then with Edward Michael Keating) nominated by acclamation
1970-1971: Richard Nixon(Independent)
(vacant)
appointed by the California House of Representatives
1971: Prof. Angela Davis (Independent) [caretaker, then as Governor of California]
(vacant
, then with Duncan West) appointed by the Union government
'71: Western government dissolves
 
Last edited:
Boris Does It Again

2019-2031: Boris Johnson (Conservative)
2024: Keir Starmer (Labour), Ed Davey (Liberal Democrat), Carla Denyer and Adrian Ramsey (Green Party England and Wales), Nicola Sturgeon (SNP), Mary Lou Macdonald (Sinn Fein)
2028: Keir Starmer (Labour), Ed Davey (Liberal Democrat), Amelia Womack and Benali Hamdache (Green Party of England and Wales), Kate Forbes (SNP), Laura Pidcock (TUSC)


Boris' first major challenge came in 2022 with Partygate. Following a disappointing local election result there were calls for his resignation, but by the time the vote of no confidence came in July 2022, the moment had passed and the main result was that Boris was safe from a second vote during the awkward first half of 2023 when Keir Starmer had his much anticipated 20 point Labour poll leads.

In July 2023, the Queen died. Boris ensured that the funeral would be a spectacular event and that the monarchy would be front and centre until the Coronation. Rishi Sunak rejoined the cabinet as Minister for the Coronation and put on an amazing show. At the time the media was kicking up a moral panic about republicanism and the government gleefully joined in. A document showed the Keir Starmer had advocated for a republic in sixth form, and Republicgate would drag on through the next few months. The government's Online Harrassment and Freedom of Speech Act technically gave the police the power to prosecute people for advocating for a republic online, though these powers were not practically useable.

In the 2024 general election Labour won 254 seats, the biggest increase in seats by any party since 2010 but not quite as good as Corbyn in 2017. Starmer stayed on as leader but the 2024-8 term would see his party struggle with internal divisions between left and right while the Tories sought out populist policies that only served to emphasise the divisions in Labour.

2026/7 was the season of mass murders, with Britain's first school shooting in decades; a car getting driven into the parade at Brighton Trans Pride and the high profile still unsolved of the Nottingham Face Eater. All this would mean that the 2028 general election was fought over the Death Penalty. Boris' "Get Criminals Punished" strategy was more successful than Starmer's approach, which Boris characterised as "dithering on crime, dithering on the causes of crime" Labour was reduced to 231 seats and while the Tory majority was cut they remained in power.

2030, of course, was the year of The Scandal. It is not necessary here to go over the way The Scandal fundamentally shook faith in the UK political system but for the whole year no British institution seemed safe; The Scandal cut across the government, the royal family, the BBC, the Scouts, the Women's Institute, Sport and the press. Although Boris was never charged in The Scandal over a hundred Conservative MPs were and his government was thrown into chaos.

2030-2036: Wes Streeting (Labour, Anti-Corruption Nationals, Liberal Democrats)
2031: Layla Moran (Liberal Democrat), Boris Johnson (Conservative), Rosi Sexton (Green Party of England and Wales), Kate Forbes (SNP), Bethan Sayed (Plaid Cymru)


Over the course of The Scandal, some 46 Conservative MPs left the party over Boris' handling of the situation and in 67 seats former Conservatives would stand in the Progressive Alliance as Anti-Corruption Nationals. The Alliance won 514 seats, reducing the Conservatives to third place behind the SNP - a defeat that saved Boris as the party was too chaotic for a leadership election.

Many people believe that at this stage the Conservative Party was run by people who essentially believed that any further fight was hopeless and the best thing was to hold onto power while they drained the party bank accounts. Then, in 2032 Scotland declared Independence, in 2033 Ireland was reunified and in 2035 the narrowly defeated but highly acrimonious Welsh Independence Referendum wiped out progressive Unionist politics in the country for a generation.

In 2032, following Charles' abdication over The Scandal, the nineteen year old George VII leapfrogged his father William to become King and made it clear he was closer to his mother's side of the family in his parents' divorce. A muted coronation and "The Fall of the House of Windsor" mixed with economic and foreign policy failings left Britain nostalgic for better days.

2036-2040: Boris Johnson (Conservative)
2036: Wes Streeting (Labour), Rosi Sexton (Green Party of England and Wales), Layla Moran (Liberal Democrat), Rishi Sunak (Honesty), Bethan Sayed (Plaid Cymru)


The Conservatives returned to government with 343 seats to the utter surprise of a chattering class that had just gotten used to the idea that they may get over a hundred seats.

The new government re-normalised relations with Russia, introduced the death penalty, scrapped the Church Disestablishment Roadmap and House of Commons Reform. A large number of new Conservative MPs were caught up in scandals of one kind or another - as very few of them were vetted with an eye to them potentially getting elected. However, new Parliamentary Immunity rules and the 2037 Online Harassment and Freedom of Speech Act have made it difficult to say for sure whether we're heading to a new Scandal.

In 2040, having reached his fourth decade at the centre of British political life, Boris Johnson stood down on his 75th birthday. He claims it's just the best time to retire. But permanent protest camps against "the British exceptionalist approach to equality law", 55% of the population increasingly angry about living in private rental housing, the US trying to force Britain to take a side in the NATO-European Commonwealth and wildcat strikes impacting businesses that don't offer help insurance, the 2040s are likely to be a bad time to be Prime Minister.

Next General Election (anticipated): TBC (Conservative), Emily Benn (Labour), Ash Routh (Green Party England), Elena Bunbury (Liberal Democrat), Bethan Sayed (Plaid Cymru)
 
34. Wendell Wilkie 1941-1946 (Republican) ✞
(With Charles McNary) Def: James Byrnes/Paul McNutt
(With Earl Warren) Def: Albert Barkley/Sam Rayburn
35. Earl Warren 1946-1949 (Republican)
36. Richard Russell 1949-1957 (Democratic)
(Elected in contingent election) Def: Earl Warren/Thomas J. Curran Harry Byrd/James Eastland (States Rights)
(With Paul Dever) Def: Robert Taft/Harold Stassen Hubert Humphrey/Wilson Wyatt

37. William Knowland 1957-1961 (Republican)
(With Walter Judd) Def: Richard Russell/Paul Dever Claude Pepper/Paul O'Dwyer
38. George Smathers 1961-1965 (Democratic)
(With Al Gore) Def: William Knowland/Walter Judd Paul O'Dwyer/Adlai Stevenson
39. James Roosevelt 1965-1971 (Labor) ✞
(With Philip Wilkie) Def: George Smathers/Al Gore Barry Goldwater/Prescott Bush
40. Philip Wilkie 1971-1973 (Labor) ✞
(With Lauris Norstad) Def: John Lindsay/Paul Laxalt George Mahoney/John Gilligan
41. Lauris Norstad 1973-1977 (Labor)
42. William Westmoreland 1977-1985 (American)
(With Mario Biaggi) Def: Lauris Norstad/James Abourezk
(With Mario Biaggi) Def: Birch Bayh/Cliff Finch

43. Mario Biaggi 1985-1989 (American)
(With Jim Folsom Jr) Def: John Lewis/Mark Dayton
44. Fred Harris 1989- (Labor)
(With Franklin Roosevelt III) Def: Mario Biaggi/Jim Folsom Jr
(With Franklin Roosevelt III) Def: Zell Miller/Thomas Sowell
 
Back
Top