1892 Conventions (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 03, 2024, 09:55:17 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  1892 Conventions (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: ?
#1
Union Convention: Former Vice President Henry Adams of Massachusetts		  
#2
Union Convention: Senator Eugene Hale of Maine		  
#3
Union Convention: Representative Calvin Brice of Ohio		  
#4
Union Convention: Governor Hazen Pingree of Michigan		  
#5
People's Alliance Convention: Vice President Joseph Smith of Illinois		  
#6
People's Alliance Convention: Senator William Allen of Nebraska		  
#7
People's Alliance Convention: Alderman Henry George of New York		  
#8
People's Alliance Convention: President Zebulon Vance of North Carolina		  
#9
Whig Convention: President Zebulon Vance of North Carolina		  
#10
Whig Convention: Fmr. Representative James Weaver of Iowa		  
#11
Whig Convention: Representative Roger Mills of Texas		  
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results
Total Voters: 26

Author Topic: 1892 Conventions  (Read 2364 times)
MurrayBannerman
murraybannerman
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 756


Political Matrix
E: 5.55, S: -2.09
« on: April 28, 2014, 10:02:34 PM »
Zeb/Smith
Logged
MurrayBannerman
murraybannerman
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 756


Political Matrix
E: 5.55, S: -2.09
« Reply #1 on: April 29, 2014, 07:29:02 PM »
Quote from: Dallasfan65 on April 29, 2014, 06:16:52 PM
Quote from: Supersonic on April 29, 2014, 07:27:18 AM
Pingree I guess. Not really enthusiastic about anyone.

I'm not sure why he isn't getting more support, given that he's basically TR.
I prefer him as a candidate, but I feel like he'll, or TR, will be better suited for election in 1896 against a unified People's Alliance and Whig party.
Logged
MurrayBannerman
murraybannerman
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 756


Political Matrix
E: 5.55, S: -2.09
« Reply #2 on: April 29, 2014, 09:58:29 PM »
Quote from: Senator Alfred F. Jones on April 29, 2014, 09:53:52 PM
Quote from: murraybannerman on April 29, 2014, 07:29:02 PM
Quote from: Dallasfan65 on April 29, 2014, 06:16:52 PM
Quote from: Supersonic on April 29, 2014, 07:27:18 AM
Pingree I guess. Not really enthusiastic about anyone.

I'm not sure why he isn't getting more support, given that he's basically TR.
I prefer him as a candidate, but I feel like he'll, or TR, will be better suited for election in 1896 against a unified People's Alliance and Whig party.

Has Dallas even said what party TR is? He's a New Yorker, so that makes me think Unionist, but I'm not entirely sure...
I'm not really sure as well. Maybe, after they unify, the Bull-Moose Party will emerge.

Cue the awesomeness.
Logged
MurrayBannerman
murraybannerman
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 756


Political Matrix
E: 5.55, S: -2.09
« Reply #3 on: April 29, 2014, 10:58:06 PM »
We want Bull-Moose!
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 14 queries.