• 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

Honestly, even putting the Confederacy's economy and specific raison d'être outside, there are quite a lot of red flags, even in its very Constitution, suggesting that it would have become very centralized and very authoritarian had it become independent.
I think I remembering mentioning to someone once that the Confederacy has strong ‘Let’s LARP Medieval Europe’ energy which is famously a big red flag.

Like a system of wealthy aristocracy pretending to be feudal lords with a divinely appointed King Emperor in the centre is famously known as being a system that survived incredibly in the 20th century...

I like how it captures that outright dysfunction at the heart of it all.
 
died of heart attack during argument with Speaker Dick Cheney, who also died of heart attack during same argument

Woops... medical version of certain duels

new, integrated, South African government including Chris Hani as Deputy President and Joe Slovo as Minister of Defence

Yum

SA getting a VP in his 40s is much better than OTL
 
Okay, so this is an idea I had where instead of doing a standard chronological timeline, or an essay about what the future might be like, you kind of merge the two and do a list of prime ministers and competitors. I've added notes about who does what and where I got the characters from for flavour

1997-2007: Tony Blair (Labour)

1997&2001
Check your history books ;)

To throw in some flavour for this scenario - on September 11th 2001 terrorists attack the Work Trade Centre and George Dubya invades Afghanistan with British support. In 2003 Dubya decides to finish his dad's job and invades Iraq. Britain takes part in both conflicts though by the second people are more worried that America isn't really going after terrorists but is using it as an excuse to gain geopolitical power in the middle east. Blair, being quite interventionist by nature, is a strong supporter of America

2005

  • Conservative: Michael Howard He's run for leader before, in 1997. I know he's an odd pick given the leadership election but given two disastrous elections I think the Tories could be quite unstable this time round and the leader may not last a year In an election against a right wing Labour Party allied firmly to America's growing wars, the Conservatives don't really break though though they benefit slightly from Labour losing popularity
  • Liberal Democrats: Charles Kennedy Incumbent. Easy :)The Lib Dems make good progress pitching themselves as a pro-civil liberty, anti-war party
Over this parliament the government keeps pushing on the war, there's threats that Dubya will even invade Iran but two wars at once is enough. In general, after 8 years in government, Labour are tired and mostly concerned with maintaining the status quo and introducing new policing powers to deal with terrorism

2007-2010: Gordon Brown (Labour)

The Chancellor of the Exchecquor's arguments with Blair and political differences have grown more extensive during the wars and Blair's popularity has melted away. Brown faces a major recession, which should be fertile ground for him, but he can't fight against years of poor management and Dubya's mismanagement of the US economy. America turns away from Dubya style republicanism, even going as far as to elect a black president! Brown attempts to change some policies - generally being a bit more left wing and a bit less liberal.But nothing really changes on the war and the economy is in chaos. This sets the scene for the Conservatives.

2010-2015: David Cameron (Conservative, Coalition with Liberal Democrats)

David Cameron was elected this year and is a weird one - he endorsed Iain Duncan Smith as leader but seems to be generally on the liberal side. I think he's a potential pick for Blair-like. Which is one path for the Tories if they want to win - especially if Blair goes to the right like he does ITTL

2010

  • Labour: Gordon Brown
  • Liberal Democrats: Nick Clegg Currently an MEP, I could easily see him getting elected in 2005 if he wanted to be. He seems to have a lot of energy and be making a name for himself in the party. This would mean he'd need to go from not an MP to leader of the party in one parliament, which would be weird but I suspect Kennedy won't retire right after the election, or if he does maybe they'll have an interim leader? I don't know? It's a bit off the wall but I'm leaving it in because I think he's ambitious and stranger things have certainly happened in British politics :p
Cameron and Clegg get on reasonably well at first but it rapidly becomes clear that the Liberal Democrats are being used as a shield by the Tories and even when they achieve their political goals they get no credit. The wars in the Middle East drag on with a series of revolutions and civil wars in Syria and Libya. But the US does not have the forces to invade.

As the Lib Dems fade, the protest vote has to go somewhere. In 2014, with Labour still recovering, the Tories unpopular and the Lib Dems destroyed, UKIP wins an EU election. This causes chaos - MPs defect from the Tories to get away from the centrist coalition in charge and Cameron pledges he'll go to the right to compensate

2015-2016: David Cameron (Conservative)

2015

  • Labour: Ed Miliband A name I found on a list of Gordon Brown's SpAds - so I don't know anything about him really but I thought a list like that would be more interesting than the usual youth wing of the Labour party picks
  • UKIP: Nigel Farage One of UKIP's two current MEPs
  • Liberal Democrat: Nick Clegg
UKIP only got one seat due to FPTP but they got more votes than the Lib Dems, to try and halt their rise the Conservatives pledge a referendum on EU membership. This works but Cameron expects people won't actually vote to leave. However, after a decade of war in the middle east and growing economic problems at home, it goes through. The world gets nastier ad more racist. America's black president comes to the end of his second term and is replaced by a right wing reality TV celebrity. Cameron resigns rather than push through a policy he doesn't agree with anyway.

2016-2019: Theresa May (Conservative)

Current Shadow Minister for Education and Employment

Theresa May was elected prime minister to get Britain out of the EU but this was difficult with her reduced majority and opposition from a hostile parliament. The Lib Dems double down on being pro-EU in an attempt to win back votes after being destroyed in 2015. Labour has fallen into chaos similar to the Tories OTL with the backbenchers and socialist members finally rebelling from Blairism. To try and get a better majority Theresa May calls an election

2017

  • Labour: Jeremy Corbyn current backbench socialist MP
  • Liberal Democrat: Tim Farron candidate in Westmorland and Lonsdale this year and did pretty well. ITTL he finds a safe seat. I'm really trying to avoid names from youth parties - which means sometimes really old MPs and sometimes people who didn't quite get elected and are young.
Labour does surprisingly well as the Tories are unpopular. UKIP vanishes after the referendum because they have nothing to fight for and the Lib Dems do better. Theresa May still doesn't have the majority she needs to leave the EU on her terms and she gets replaced by a new Prime Minister who calls a general election

2019-????: Boris Johnson (Conservative)

Yes, the right wing journalist from Have I Got News For You. He stood for parliament in 1997 so this isn't totally out of nowhere

  • Labour: Jeremy Corbyn
  • Liberal Democrat: Jo Swinson Another northern young candidate from 2001 who didn't get elected but did okay. I'd like to throw in some southerners but I haven't really followed those constituency elections so closely because I have fewer connections to there. I know that's lazy but it's not like these people have detailed websites.
Following the 2019 election Boris Johnson gets the majority he needed to push through leaving the EU. The wars in the Middle East are collapsing and western troops are being pushed back, meanwhile Russia is taking the opportunity created by western weakness to advance in areas with Russian populations like the Ukraine. After ten years in power, Boris Johnson is facing a major crisis in the NHS with new super viruses running rampant, along with a difficult international situation. The Liberal Democrats stung by losing the EU issue have elected a safe pair of hands, Ed Davey current MP. With the left and right wings of the party decimated by infighting Labour go with a relatively young MP Keir Starmer one of the lawyers involved in the McLibel case. He seems cool but mostly, you have to pay attention to a name like that!

Twenty years in the future, the world is a dangerous place - it is impossible for me to predict what will happen next.

------

Okay. I don't know if this format works? I feel like I've not really been able to talk about the international situation and I've not touched on technology at all. Is this good? What do people think? Should I make edits? Is it too much to follow the UK and have this big war going on it the background? Should I continue the story? If I go further it would be hard to find real names.
 
Twenty years in the future, the world is a dangerous place - it is impossible for me to predict what will happen next.

You and me both, list. You and me both.

The defensive tone on the notes (no, you could have an MEP randomly get into Parliament and become leader in one election, shut up), combined with the fact that we know there's no reason to be defensive because all of that actually happened, really makes this.
 
You and me both, list. You and me both.

The defensive tone on the notes (no, you could have an MEP randomly get into Parliament and become leader in one election, shut up), combined with the fact that we know there's no reason to be defensive because all of that actually happened, really makes this.

Thanks! I really wanted to write something to make people think about how we select people for lists - it feels to me like the picks we usually use young recently elected politicians and youth/LGBT wing leaders. I'd never think to look up SpAds, candidates who did well in unwinnable seats, etc.

My headcanon for the writer is they live in the north and have met/followed the elections of some of the Lib Dems there. I think you'd have to really find Nick Clegg interesting to imagine "okay, so he didn't run for election this year, but he gets elected to Westminster in 2005 and leads the party into the next election"
 
List of Vice Presidents of the United States:

2001 - 2009: Dick Cheney (Republican)
2000 [with George W. Bush] def: Joe Lieberman [Al Gore] (Democrat)
2004 [with George W. Bush] def: John Edwards [John Kerry] (Democrat)

2009 - 2017: Hillary Clinton (Democrat)
2008 [with Barack Obama] def: Joe Lieberman [John McCain] (Republican / Connecticut for Lieberman)
2012 [with Barack Obama] def: Mike Huckabee [Jeb Bush] (Republican), Jesse Ventura [Ron Paul] (Libertarian)

2017 - 2021: Condoleezza Rice (Republican)
2016 [with Michael Bloomberg] def: Jay Inslee [Hillary Clinton] (Democrat), Gary Johnson, Nina Turner [Jesse Ventura] (Libertarian - Green)
2021 - 2026: Ben Jealous (Democrat)
2020 [with Bernie Sanders] def: Michael Flynn [Donald Trump] (Team Trump), Condoleezza Rice [Michael Bloomberg] (Republican)
2024 [with Bernie Sanders] def: Michael McCaul [Martha Roby] (Republican), Donald Trump Jr. [Michael Flynn] (Team Flynn and Trump)

2026 - 2026: vacant
2026 - 0000: Michèle Flournoy (Democrat)
2028 [with Ben Jealous] def: David Petraeus [Ben Quayle] (Republican), Brace Belden [Hasan Piker] (Alternative)


The modern vice presidency as we know it is very much a 21st century creation. Though the VP as a policy advisor can trace it’s roots back to Mondale and Carter in the late 1970s, it was Hillary Clinton or Dick Cheney, depending on how many conspiracy theories you believe, who really was the first modern vice president.

I’m not going too deep into the arguments for Cheney. Yes, he played a significant role in picking the cabinet members, and he was probably instrumental in convincing Bush to invade Iraq, but what else did he do? Waterboard suspected terrorists? It was the failures of the Bush-Cheney presidency in 2008 that convinced Obama to pick Clinton.

The Myanmar crisis, the India-Pakistan crisis, Russian shenanigans in Ossetia, and most importantly the bursting of the US Housing bubble made it clear to presumptive nominee Barack Obama that his years in the white house were going to be rocky to say the least. At first this only strengthened the idea of picking Biden as VP, but Obama and his team quickly realized that he did not have the gravitas to act as president, while being VP, on the international stage. It was at this point that Hillary Clinton changed from a semi-serious suggestion to a serious consideration.

While McCain tried something somewhat similar by picking former Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, this instead failed spectacularly, as the right turned on the two, and Obama-Clinton came into office with a landslide and supermajorities in both houses of congress.

Obama focussed his early days exclusively on internal matters. Healthcare reform, a $2 trillion stimulus, banking reform, voting reform, etc. were all done in his first year. At the same time, VP Hillary Clinton and SoS Holbrooke focussed on foreign affairs. Countries like Pakistand and Egypt started their path towards democratization under the watch of VP Clinton, and for a while it looked like the Obama-Clinton duumvirate looked genuinely unstoppable, despite rising right-wing opposition at home.

The first cracks started to show following the 2010 mid-terms. The Democrats made minor losses in the Senate, but kept their filibuster-proof majority, while also keeping a comfortable majority in the House. With both domestic and foreign affairs seeming less like a burning dumpster, Obama increasingly grew into his role, and tried to influence foreign policy decisions more, while HRC tried pushing away some of the more left-wing members of Obama’s economic team, leading to the dismissal of Robert Reich.

The first real clash between Obama and Clinton came on the issue of Syria. Hillary and new SoS Susan Rice favored direct intervention and aid to the pro-Democratic force based on the relatively succesful ‘North African model’, while Obama and Transportation Secretary Biden, one of Obama’s closest advisors at this point, preferred a less gung-ho manner of support for the opposition. Eventually Clinton’s faction won out, but the power struggle was leaked to the public, drawing considerable controversy among progressives, who thought she was compromising his presidency, and conservatives, who just hated the Clintons.

Some leftists attempted to convince firebrand congressman Alan Grayson to primary the VP, though they were unsure how that was even possible. Despite the controversies, Obama and HRC continued to share the ticket in the 2012 election, while the right fell into division as primary runner-up Jeb! and third-placed Huckabee’s bargain evaded the possibilities of a brokered convention, but did cause plurality holder Ron Paul to run as a libertarian, and winning a surprising amount of progressive non-interventionist voters along the way. Nevertheless, Obama and Hillary entered 2013 with slightly increased majorities in congress.

Obama’s second term was somewhat of a continuation of his first. Gun reform and civil rights reform narrowly managed to pass congress, as did an ambitious infrastructure plan, and he continued to fight with his Vice President. This time the division came on the subject of Syria, and the Russian involvement in the conflict. Obama argued for a restart of relations with Putin, at the urging of his European allies, while Hillary and her team wished to continue containment efforts against the Russian bear. Even when Republicans, with the aid of Bloomberg’s millions, won back the Senate and House, the infighting did not stop.

Hillary Clinton’s announcement of her presidential campaign in February 2015 was followed 3 weeks later by close Obama-ally Deval Patrick’s primary challenge. However, his campaign gained little traction, as it was another New England politician who nearly clawed the nomination out of Clinton’s hands. Criticizing not just HRC, but also Obama for failing to get more done with his unprecedented supermajorities, Sanders won the first three contests, it was only in Florida where the Clinton campaign managed to block his momentum, starting a long, dirty, and drawn out campaign that only ended days before the DNC as President Obama rallied superdelegates to his number two. The Bernie campaign was disgruntled, and many resisted the Senator’s efforts to bridge the gap with the Democratic establishment. For many Hillary Clinton running the most left-wing campaign since FDR simply did not matter.

At the same time, the Republicans were infected with Trump-mania, as the celebrity, businessman, and conspiracy theorist led the polls up to early 2016, and won the New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida contests. It was only when former NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg crashed the party on Super Tuesday that his momentum could be stopped. The Republicans narrowly managed to avoid a Trump candidacy nightmare, and seemed oddly united for the first time in a while, as Trump gave up on his independent candidacy only days after announcing it.

Lastly, 2012 Libertarian VP nominee Jesse Ventura was also running on a largely non-interventionist, anti-corporatist, populist campaign. His decision to seek both the Libertarian and Green nomination caused significant headaches, as did the question who of the two would appear at the vice-presidential (the eventual answer would be neither, as the rules were skewed against third parties, unlike in 2012). Nevertheless, Ventura’s oddly left-wing populist campaign caused significant disruption gaining votes from both disgruntled Trump and Sanders voters, though the data suggests more from the latter.

At this point you may be wondering why I’m not discussing the VP candidates. Frankly, they were both really boring. Condoleezza Rice held some goodwill among Republicans due to her image as the only close Bush ally not running around like a headless chicken, and her surprisingly successful challenge for the California Senate seat in 2010, and Interior Secretary Inslee’s vice-presidential campaign focus on climate change gained a lot of positive attention at first, but his moderate record in his days in congress only further pissed off Bernie voters.

Condi Rice came into office in 2017 with largely the same responsibilities as her predecessor, though a more subordinate role, due to Bloomberg’s control freak nature. Instead, the next four years saw her function as either a translator whenever Bloomberg and Putin where angry at each other again, and a bridge between Bloomberg and pissed congressional Republicans. The new president refused to listen to his party’s calls for using their narrow majorities for court packing, slashing the filibuster, and other technicalities that made it easier for the GOP to make the lives of minorities and workers a living hell.

Bloomberg’s attempts at bipartisanship bore little fruits, and instead saw him fall down to French president levels of popularity among Republicans. This only worsened when Democrats won back the senate and house in 2018, and Trump announced a third party challenge the same night. A week later Cornyn and McMorris Rodgers tried to convince him to resign, or at least not run again, but to no avail.

The President eventually found his calling in early 2019 when Turkey fell into a civil war following a failed coup, by outgoing President Erdogan. Bloomberg tried to support both the new secular government in the West, and the Kurdish intervention in the Southeast, though this mainly pissed off the latter. Largely ignoring the increasing polarization at home, the president instead somewhat succesfully aided the EU in dealing with its second refugee crisis of the decade, while simultaneously keeping the Russians out of Turkey. However, unexpected events caused Bloomberg to focus back on affairs home.

The police killing of an unarmed black Muslim man in New York caused widespread protesting and rioting across the US. President Bloomberg, who had just successfully resisted an uninspiring primary campaign by former Senator DeMint, came under incredible scrutiny by the left, as the police implemented many of the policies during his days as Mayor. As autonomous zones popped up across American and some West-European cities, the electorate of the US became increasingly divided between the pro-2020 Sanders and anti-2020 Trump. However, it would be the former who won a comfortable victory.

Maryland Governor Jealous was not considered a likely pick for the vice presidency at first. Sanders was initially considering a pick with strong foreign policy credentials, with former National Security Advisor Tony Blinken a favorite. However, the event of 2020 forced the nominee to reconsider. Jealous was largely taken due to his successful handling of protests in Baltimore, it being one of the biggest cities without large scale rioting. Ultimately, he was picked as the Sanders presidencies social affairs czar, while the self-described socialist would focus on economic and foreign affairs.

Only days into his vice presidency, Ben Jealous would travel to Seattle and San Francisco to successfully negotiate the gradual end of the autonomous zones. Images of the VP shaking hands with Brace Belden were plastered across right-wing media, nevertheless the vice president succeeded while very few expected him to.

At the same time, President Sanders occupied himself with the Russian invasion of Crimea, increasingly surrounding himself with Clinton’s former foreign policy team. It wasn’t long before the VP had overtaken him in popularity among the left, as he played a crucial role in passing police reform through congress after nixing the filibuster.

While there were some quite murmurings of a left-wing challenge in 2024, Sanders and Jealous largely cruises to an easy re-election, as reforms at home, and the end of the Turkish civil war and establishment of a new progressive Turkish-Kurdish Republic. However, the winter of 2025 saw the alliance between the Sanders-Jealous regime and the American left finally collapse. One of the main reasons for this was the president’s faltering health.

With the president spending more and more time in hospital, his foreign policy team largely ran the show on their own. Their initial opposition to left-wing revolutionaries in the Gulf and Greece nearly sparked another 2020-style wave of revolts across the states. It was only VP Jealous’ intervention, which stopped the powder keg from exploding. The compromise on not sending aid to ‘authoritarian socialist’ groups was wildly unpopular on both sides.

On the 26th of February President Bernie Sanders passed away aged 84. Less than 4 weeks later the Kremlin was stormed by Marxist protesters, and the Putin regime largely fell. Instead of supporting the revolutionaries, the Jealous government opted to support a smaller democratic socialist faction. This not only put the US and PRC on opposing side on the conflict, but also saw the president lose the support of the American left. His appointment of Acting Secretary of Defense to the vice presidency only worsened the problem, as many leftists considered her to fit more in a Cheney or Bloomberg cabinet.

Losses during the 2026 midterms seemed to spill the end of the Jealous presidency, but a lackluster campaign by popular left-wing podcaster Hasan Piker, and the Republican party’s increased radicalization caused the centre to narrowly give Jealous a full term.

Vice President Flournoy’s primary focus these days lie with foreign affairs, at least that’s the original story. In actuality, her office mostly keeps an eye on former far-left volunteers. Years of fighting in Syria, Kurdistan, Turkey, Arabia, Greece, and in some cases even Russia has left the United States filled with far-left armed volunteer veterans. Though at the moment these groups largely work together with the state against increasing domestic far-right terrorists. The Vice President is convinced that they will grab their chance once they’re strong enough, and commit a more radical repeat of 2020. Unfortunately for the VP, President Jealous prefers to continue the alliance against the domestic fascist movement, even after Flynn was caught recently.

2009 - 2017: Barack Obama / Hillary Clinton (Democrat)
2008 def: John McCain / Joe Lieberman (Republican / Connecticut for Lieberman)
2012 def: Jeb Bush / Mike Huckabee (Republican), Ron Paul / Jesse Ventura (Libertarian)

2017 - 2021: Michael Bloomberg / Condoleezza Rice (Republican)
2016 def: Hillary Clinton / Jay Inslee (Democrat), Jesse Ventura / Gary Johnson (Libertarian), Nina Turner (Green)
2021 - 2026: Bernie Sanders / Ben Jealous (Democrat)
2020 def: Donald Trump / Michael Flynn (Team Trump), Michael Bloomberg / Condoleezza Rice (Republican)
2024 def: Martha Roby / Michael McCaul (Republican), Michael Flynn / Donald Trump Jr. (Team Trump/Flynn)

2026 - 2026: Ben Jealous / vacant (Democrat)
2026 - 0000: Ben Jealous / Michèle Flournoy (Democrat)
2028 def: Ben Quayle / David Petraeus (Republican), Hasan Piker / Brace Belden (Alternative)
 
Last edited:
Our Man; Lamm!

For Dick Lamm, the Governorship had laid in reach, the people were hungry for change, they wanted someone from the Left of the American political spectrum to come in and change Colorado for the better. Indeed whilst the rescinding Governor Love pointed out his moderation, Lamm pointed out his Radicalism, on abortion, environment and economics (it was the 70s, limiting growth was fairly radical).

And in the end, Lamm would lose. Not by much, indeed a few percentage points here and there, a couple more people voting Prohibition here and there would have swung it to Lamm. But the blow was hard for a man who had put his blood and sweat into trying to become Governor. Lamm would skulk off and ponder what now. He was popular and well liked and sometime in the State Legislative would continue to do him good.

But the itch to do more, kept on bugging him, especially as Nixon started slowly beginning to wind up his Presidency to be replaced by a another dull Moderate Conservative. And he’d been noticed, the Colorado Democratic Party impressed with dynamic man. Talks would be held and Lamm would be informed that a Colorado Representative Pat Schroeder would be resigning for the upcoming 1976 election to gain a job with the Education Department and Lamm would have a clear shot for the nomination and the seat.

Whilst 1976 would in the grand scheme of things be a disappointment for the Democrats with Fred Harris winning the popular vote but losing by a couple of electoral votes to Bob Dole. But for Lamm it gave him a seat in the House of Representatives easily trouncing his Republican rival with his low growth, environmentalist message. Whilst initially just a fairly hum drum Congressman, his support for the Environment would see him gravitating towards Environmental Committees in the late 70s and additionally catching the eye of Dan Rostenkowski.

Whilst finding Lamm strange, he realised that Lamm was a hard working enough individual who could be useful in the coming years, particularly if 1980 brought about a Democratic Presidential Victory. In 1980 would find himself becoming a Democratic Whip in the House of Representatives, coinciding neatly with the election of Birch Bayh as President. Suddenly more eyes began to turn to Lamm as the first couple of years of the Presidency began.

Indeed Lamm’s belief in reform, environmentalism and equal rights for women gelled well with President’s Bayh’s aspirations for the Presidency. Whilst Lamm’s legislation for A Zero Growth Economic Trial would die in Committee, his support for ERA would get the controversial legislation passed by a whisker, permanently enshrined within the Constitution. Lamm would be one of those gleefully smiling as Bayh signed it into law in the halcyon days of 1983.

But the itch to go back home to Colorado and battle for his people there remained. Particularly after Sam Brown Jr., a charismatic and talented operator from the Left of the party would lose reelection after his Workplace Democracy program would anger the type of people you would expect.

Lamm saw an opportunity, to go back and claim the Governorship for himself. In the chaotic days of 1986, Lamm would find himself back in Colorado campaigning for Governor. But this wasn’t the same Lamm that left, whilst he was only in his Fifties and was still incredibly energetic, there was something different about him, an older more respected appeal than before. Indeed, Lamm despite the establishment candidate in some respects ran a Populist campaign, he was the valiant outsider who fought for what he stood for and was a great Colorado figure.

Lamm won handily and took on the task of continuing to modernise and reshape Colorado for business, the people and the environment. But as Bayh’s Presidency continued the slow march Leftward, Lamm started but firm dividing lines between himself and the Bayh administration. His support for health care was, schizophrenic, in many respects. Telling old people they had a duty to die at some point to ensure that social security and healthcare could withstand the age shift that was occurring shocked many, and made many call him ‘Doctor Gloom’ as a result.

Anti-Workplace Democracy, Anti-Economic Growth, Anti-Highway development, Anti-Radical Right, Lamm managed to thread the hole of pissing off the Left and Right of America. Indeed the Left of the Colorado Democrats were out for his blood when he refused to endorse Ed Markey’s Campaign for Democratic Nominee and from the Colorado Democrats themselves when he refused to endorse Harris Wofford.

Indeed Lamm was beginning to find himself in trouble waters, the Democrats dominated by the UCLA and Lawyers and the Republicans just outright fascists on the other side was what he thought in his mind. America needed a third option, Lamm said, though unlike Tom McCall, he actually put the money where his mouth was. 1990 was probably the year of ‘Folks Establishing Third Parties to battle the chaotic forces of Left and Right’ with Lamm, Weicker, Ventura, McCloskey and Silber all creating Third Parties to compete in differing elections all with different results.

Lamm’s, The United Party would win, with Libertarian Rancher Activist Michael L.Strang by his side, Lamm would win the Governorship. In power again, his tenure was pretty much the same as he been doing before but every motion or legislation that he supported that was passed was a political manifesto for him. Supporting Small businesses, stopping large corporations taking hold and polluting the land, anti-immigration points, anti-free Trade, balanced budgets and much more, Lamm’s combination of varying ideas into a philosophy he called ‘Progressive Conservatism’ would be the reasoning for the United Party.

As McDermott was voted in, and the Republicans shifted increasingly Rightward, Lamm saw it as his mission to bring moderation back to America. Meetings with Weicker, Perot and Zschau would provide base upon which he could build his United Party into a nationwide party. Leaving Michael L. Strang to fight for the Governorship (and lose against charismatic Democrat Ruben Valdez), Lamm would pursue his ideas on a national scale, going on talk shows, writing several books (fiction and non-fiction) on his talking points and supporting independent and third party candidates across America against the ‘Dark Insidious Machines that dominate our lives’.

The pundits took little notice of this odd man, nor did the establishment politicians as they prepared for a battle between McDermott and Gramm. But America was listening, indeed the Americans on the Political Centre as it were, those who had happily voted for Nixon, Bayh and then Vander Jagt saw themselves in this strange man, the man of the Suburbs who was liberal but not too liberal. The force of moderation.

It surprised many when Gramm did awfully, his free trade message washing against the shores of Lamm, all fire and brimstone about the coming apocalyptic chaos that free trade would bring. McDermott too found himself being harangued for his support from Labor Unions and the ‘Liberal Lawyers’, a conspiratorial cabal in Lamm’s mind. It was a shock on a election night when Lamm over shot expectations, winning several key states and beating the Republican Candidate. Whilst unable to throw things to the house, Lamm didn’t mind, America had heard his message.

Maybe in 2000 as the Millennium began anew, they would be ready for a New Century of Progressive Conservatism...

Governors of Colorado:

1963-1979: John A.Love (Republican)
1962 def. Stephen McNichols (Democratic)
1966 def. Robert Lee Knous (Democratic)
1970 (With John Vanderhoof) def. Mark Anthony Hogan (Democratic)
1974 (With John Vanderhoof) def. Dick Lamm (Democratic)

1979-1983: Sam Brown Jr. (Democratic)
1978 (With Ruben A.Valdez) def. John Vanderhoof (Republican)
1983-1987: Ted L. Strickland (Republican)
1982 (With Bill Daniels) def. Sam Brown Jr. (Democratic)
1987-1990: Dick Lamm (Democratic)
1986 (With Nancy E.Dick) def. Ted L.Strickland (Republican)
1990-1995: Dick Lamm (United)
1990 (With Michael L. Strang) def. Nancy E. Dick (Democratic), Bill Daniels (Republican)
1995-: Ruben A. Valdez (Democratic)
1994 (With Josie Heath) def. Michael L. Strang (United), Tom Norton (Republican)


Presidents of the United States of America:

1969-1977: Richard M. Nixon (Republican)
1968 (With Spiro Agnew) def. Hubert Humphrey (Democratic), George Wallace (American Independent)
1972 (With Spiro Agnew) def. Ed Muskie (Democratic), George Wallace (American Independent)

1977-1981: Bob Dole (Republican)
1976 (With John Tower) def. Fred Harris (Democratic) won the popular vote, John Lindsay (Independent)
1981-1989: Birch Bayh (Democratic)
1980 (With Reubin Askew) def. Bob Dole (Republican), Roger MacBride (Libertarian)
1984 (With Reubin Askew) def. Bill Simon (Republican)

1989-1993: Guy Vander Jagt (Republican)
1989 (With William L. Armstong) def. Harris Wofford (Democratic)
1993-: Jim McDermott (Democratic)
1992 (With Harvey Gantt) def. Guy Vander Jagt (Republican), Larry MacDonald (Independent)
1996 (With Harvey Gantt) def. Dick Lamm (United), Phil Gramm (Republican)
 
Last edited:
Peace, Love And Granola - the Career of Tom Hayden

1960-1962: Member of Students for Democratic Society (SDS)

- recruited by Alan Haber
1962-1963: President of the SDS
1964-1968: Private citizen, activist

- organiser for the Newark Community Union Project
1968: Member of the National Mobilisation Committee to End the War in Vietnam ("the Mobe")
1969-1972: Private citizen, activist

- tried and convicted as part of the "Chicago Eight" group, charges later reversed following appeal
1972-1974: Founder and director of the Indochina Peace Campaign (IPC)
- visited Hanoi with his wife, Jane Fonda, in 1972
1974: Democratic Party Primary candidate for California's 34th district
defeated Mark Hannaford
1975-1979: Representative for California's 34th congressional district
defeated Bill Bond (Republican/American Independent), John Donohue (Peace and Freedom)
1978: Nonpartisan Primary candidate for Mayor of San Francisco
lost to Dianne Feinstein, David Scott
1979-1981: Director of the Peace Corps
appointed by ACTION Director Sam Brown, replacing Carolyn Payton
1981-1983: Co-founder and Director of Campaign for Economic Democracy (CED)
1983-1986: Private citizen, author
1986: Democratic Party candidate for Governor of California

lost to George Deukmejian (Republican), Joseph Fuhrig (Libertarian), Maria Elizabeth Muñoz (Peace and Freedom), Gary V. Miller (American Independent)
1989-1992: Private citizen, activist
- protested to institute Chapter 1238 of the California Statutes allowing the establishment of "student representation fees"
1992: Democratic Party candidate for Senate Special Election for California
defeated Dianne Feinstein, Joseph Alioto, David Kearns
1993-2007: Senator for California
'92: defeated John Seymour (Republican)
'94: defeated Michael Huffington (Republican)
'00: defeated Tom Campbell (Republican), Medea Benjamin (Green)

2000: Democratic Party Primary candidate for President of the United States
lost to Al Gore
 
Charles Stross said:
Jeff Bezos is 58; keep an eye on him in January 2024, that's when he's due to turn 60. (He seems to be saner than Musk and Putin, but his classic midlife crisis year falls around the start of a presidential election campaign in the US and he might succumb to the impulse to make a grand gesture, like Mike Bloomberg's abortive run on the presidence.)

Presidential Tickets for the Excelsior Party:

2024: Jeff Bezos/various (85 delegates, 9.7% PV) (ran in Democratic primary)
2028: Jeff Bezos/Rick Caruso (13 EV, 19.5% PV)
2032: Jeff Bezos/Jeremy Kaufmann (0 EV, 10.2% PV) (cross-endorsed by Libertarians)
2036: Jeff Bezos/Patrick Deneen (0 EV, 6.4% PV) (cross-endorsed by "Party/Mises" Libertarians)
2040: endorsed Republican ticket, James Majewski/David Eastman (53 EV, 31.2% PV)

"America needs new leadership. This administration might have had good intentions, but they clearly don't know how to handle making money. Deliberately pitting employers and workers against each other, misguided spending causing inflation to skyrocket, and, up and down the land, supply chains collapsing in on themselves. I can't sit by and watch as the only alternative to a far-right Republican party ends up a battle between the far-left platforms of Harris and Tliab. What America needs is far-sighted policies enacted with a clear head, and I think my record should show that..."

"...it is funny as hell, even if it's scary. I mean, we already saw Bloomberg try this! He should know! He saw what happened last time! I mean, in fairness, he's been trying pretty hard--I open my door, there's a Bezos campaign leaflet, I turn on the TV, Bezos campaign ad, I go to sleep, Bezos shows up in my dream--and, like, it still doesn't work! Third in Iowa, second in New Hampshire, a complete blowout on Super Tuesday, hell, if he was an ordinary candidate he'd have dropped out by now, but he's his own biggest funder, so he's just trying to steamroll it away! You have a rocket, dude! You could go to space instead of hanging around in North Dakota like..."

"...not a sore loser. That's a disingenuous comparison. I'm not a 'chicken' either. The Democratic primary electorate is simply not a representative sample of the American populace. It's--my previous performance has very little to do with my ability to win an election. I know what America needs, and I can provide hif the American people reject the extremists on both sides for a rational, technology-based platform that provides technology-based solutions. Next question? Yes, I'm aware that Mr Caruso's mayoral opponent is also running, yes, it didn't affect his decision--a ticket of sore losers? Come on, please, can't we discuss things like adults and focus on the..."

"...many labour activists who have been claiming intimidation of Amazon workers to vote for their boss's cadidacy is widespread at Amazon, but the FEC has so far declined to investigate. However, with these results--Washington as the only state--only full state, given his victory in NE-02, which, I believe we'll be discussing later--to go Excelsior, considering the relative percentage of Amazon employees, and the districts that flipped Excelsior so quickly, I believe, all studded with Fulfillment Centres, and considering how the incoming administration may feel about Bezos...well, it's looking likely that some of these results could be overturned. Back to you in the studio, Gina, for..."

"...a blatant attack on property-owner's freedoms. The woke mob in power, and the fascist mob, too, have been trying to crucify me, and for what? For my business being too successful? For the prosperity I've brought, that Amazon has brought, to so many communities? It's ridiculous, it's anti-American, it's irrational. Yes, there may have been some...unsavoury rumours floating around what, I'd like to remind you, is still America's largest third party, but frankly, they're doing more to uphold the principles of free speech and free enterprise than anyone else in politics. The Republicans and the Democrats have both gone mad, and so I'd like to announce that I'm now entering into..."

"...an ego project. That's what this party has been shackled to--no I won't get off the stage, Mr Moderator. We're all about free speech here, right? So I'd like a bit of free speech here. I'd like some free speech about how much money, last cycle, was going to the Presidential campaign, and how much was going to the downballot races, to other campaigns, to my campaign--get off me! I had a real shot in NH-2, a real shot, and the Party have just frittered that away so some big bald autocrat can make his shrivelled old-man dick feel bigger, oh, and by the way, I'd like to know what's so 'Libertarian' about banning puberty block--oh, calling for security? Armed guards? Do you see this shit? Because I see..."

"...no clear path forward, as things stand. With the current divided state of the right, and the increasing leftist attacks on private property, it's now important, more than ever, to show unity in the face of socialism. While I may have had my disagreements with this party in the past, it's time for me to put aside my ego--quiet down there, please--and admit that Senator Majewski has a better shot this November. Are there any--please, be mature--no, the Nationals are, yes, I suppose they're less 'terrorist-y', if that is even a word, but they're too willing to capitulate to the mob--no, the support won't just be monetary--yes, I'm very satisfied with how our party, our movement, has reshaped politics--very funny! Everyone, please, a round of applause to this jokester--no, that was sarcasm--please, for the love of--will you--I am the richest man in the United States, and I would appreciate it if I--give me a monent to--I DEMAND TO BE TAKEN SERIOU--"
 
34. Adlai Stevenson II 1953-1957 (D-IL)
(With John Sparkman) Def: Robert Taft/William Knowland
35. William Knowland 1957-1965 (R-CA)
(With Alfred Driscoll) Def: Adlai Stevenson/John Sparkman
(With Alfred Driscoll) Def: John Sparkman/John Kennedy

36. Sid McMath 1965-1973 (D-AR)
(With Vance Hartke) Def: Nelson Rockefeller/John Love
(With
Vance Hartke) Def: Richard Nixon/Claude Kirk
37. Charles Percy 1973-1975 (R-IL)
(With Meldrim Thompson) Def: Vance Hartke/Francis Bellotti
38. Meldrim Thompsom Jr 1975-1981 (R-NH)
(With Robert Finch) Def: Henry Jackson/
39. Birch Bayh 1981-1982 (D-IN)
(With Cliff Finch) Def: Bo Callaway/Elliot Richardson
40. Cliff Finch 1982-1987 (D-MS)
(With Andrew Young) Def: Robert Taft III/Buddy Cianci
41. Andrew Young 1987-1993 (D-GA)
(With Joe Frank Harris) Def: Bill Brock/Clay Sm
42. Mark D. Silijander 1993-1997 (R-MI)
(With John Kasich) Def: Andrew Young/Joe Frank Harris David Duke/Randy Weaver
43. Jerry Brown 1997- (U-MI)
(With David Lamm) Def: Ross Perot/Jerry Litton Mark Silijander/John Kasich
 
Last edited:
1656252205953.png
1656252232442.png
Presidents of the United States of America
2009-2013: Hillary Clinton (Democratic)
2008 (with Tom Vilsack): def. John McCain / Mike Huckabee (Republican)
2013-2017: Mitt Romney (Republican)
2012 (with Paul Ryan) def. Hillary Clinton / Tom Vilsack (Democratic)
2017-2025: Bernie Sanders (Democratic)
2016 (with Cory Booker): def. Mitt Romney / Paul Ryan (Republican)
2020 (with Cory Booker): def. Jeff Flake / Mary Taylor (Republican)

2025-2027: Roy Moore (Republican)
2024 (with Rick Scott) def. Cory Booker / Catherine Cortez Masto (Democratic), Brock Pierce / Andrew Yang (Vision '24)
March 24, 2027: Storming of the Supreme Court incited by Pres. Moore after Oberfegell v. Hodges is upheld in Alliance Defending Freedom v. Dana Nessel
2027 Impeachment of Roy Moore (House): 261 YAY - 168 NAY - 6 ABSTENTION
2027 Impeachment of Roy Moore (Senate): 74 CONVICT - 20 ACQUIT - 6 ABSTENTION
2027 vote to bar Roy Moore from public office (Senate): 58 YAY - 39 NAY - 3 ABSTENTION

2027-2029: Rick Scott (Republican)
2029-0000: Jamaal Bowman (Democratic)
2028 (with Dana Nessel): def. Todd Young / Jeanette Nuñez (Republican), Andrew Yang / Michael Tubbs (Humanity First)
 
Last edited:
CPUSA endorsements for President of the United States of America
_________________________________________


2020:
Senator Bernie Sanders / Representative Karen Bass (Democrat) (321 EV/52,5% PV)

“A Bernie Sanders presidency represents hope for needed change. It is our duty as communists to support his candidacy against the fascistic Trump/Pence regime”.

2024:
Comedian Jimmy Dore / Activist Princess Blanding (People’s) (0 EV/0,6% PV)

“In opposition to the forever wars, and in support of true student debt cancellation, the CPUSA endorses comrade Dore’s candidacy for president. The third party option is the only manner in which we can end American Imperialism”.

2028:
Venture Capitalist Andrew Yang / Reverend Wendy Hamilton (Forward) (0 EV/2,1% PV)

“The ‘Democratic Socialism’ of President Bass is nothing but a farce. The CIA’s overthrowal of the Venezuelan president Maduro is just more proof of that. That’s why we join other movements, from the left and the anti-imperialist right, in endorsing Yang’s road to the White House”.


2032: Commentator Tulsi Gabbard / Fmr. Senator David McCormick (Republican) (289 EV/46,5% PV)

“This ain’t your daddy’s Republican party anymore. They have come a long way since the nomination of Barry Goldwater, and today provide the true anti-imperialist option. Instead of continuing the current pro-big pharma healthcare system like VP Rasking is promoting, comrade Tulsi will break the capitalist lobbies that have dominated the country, and provide a true voice to the American working class

2036: President Tulsi Gabbard / Vice President David McCormick (Republican) (276 EV/47,6% PV)

“Do not be fooled be fooled by the AFL-CIO March, and the so called “Trade Union leader”. Sara Nelson is a continuation of the Bush-Obama-Sanders-Bass years of imperialist wars, workers’ oppression, and continued exploitation of the working class by woke capitalism. For a truly communist option, we must support President Gabbard, and give her four more years.

2040: Vice President David McCormick / Senator Bo Hines (Republican) (241 EV/45,2% PV)

“This election we are offered a choice between the continuation of the Gabbard Revolution or Kropotkinism under that San Francisco champagne socialist who’s name is not even worth mentioning. VP McCormick may not have been our first option, but he’s the only thing standing between a literal anarchist as president, and a blank cheque for Speaker Ocasio-Cortez to destroy our way of life”.


2044: Commentator Jackson Hinkle / Senator Christian Walker (Republican) [election to be held November, 5th 2044]

“If you, even for a single second, believe that the illegitimate president Belden is a Marxist-Leninist, you need to visit a doctor. As our good friend Tucker Carlson said, even a child with basic understanding of dialectics can see right through his lies, and this Saturday the American will people send him and his social nazis packing back to Gay Francisco”.



This scenario was inspired by lists made by Blackentheborg and True Grit.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top