U.S with U.K-ish party system

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I'm thinking of doing a fairly big "what if" thing of the U.S with U.K-ish parties...

Working out when the Labour Party is born is fairly easy (although there are multiple possibilities) but I'm not so sure about the Liberal Party or the Tories.

Ideas welcome

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Assuming that you aren't trying to keep the party names the same, using the post-Civil War Republicans as the core of a Gladstonish Liberal party, the Democrats as the nucleus of the Conservative party, and some amalgam of the Populist/Socialist/Progressive parties as the Labour Party.  Don't forget to include something like a Alaskan National Party and a Pu'ulu Ku'oko'a.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I don't intend to keep the names the same

[J. J.]

The rough match-up to the Tories would be a lot like Republicans in the 1850-70 period.  Both are basically "national" parties, not based on class or occupation. 

I would suspect that the bulk of the Republican Party would be "Unionist."

I would also suspect a more "libertarian" party grouping that generally agrees with the Unionist on economic, foreign and foriegn policy, but more local control or individual control.  The "Devolutionists Liberals" would be the old Conservative Democrats that favored secession in the 1860 and were the Dixiecrats of the 1940-70 period.  There would also be another group which disagrees with the "Devolutionists" but favors more individual rights and was never segregationalist, the "Free Liberals."

Lloyd-George probably would have been part of the Devos, with Devonshire more to the Free Liberals.  Today, the Devos would have more like the SNP and BPP (Welsh) parties.  The smaller Free Liberals would still exist, with national support; it might have entered into an alliance with the Tories at times and with Labor at times.  These groups, because of the US Senate, would have greater influence than there numbers.

Labor is interestesting, but I'll let someone else do it.

[WMS]

I might be wrong here, but...

Weren't the American Whigs based in part on the British Whigs? I admit I don't have enough of a grasp of their comparative politics to know for sure, but it seems like they might be proto-Liberals.

And where does the American/Know-Nothing Party fit in? They are the most successful third party* in American History (see the congressional Elections of 1854!), so they should be included, even if they were bigots.

*Before I hear about the Republicans, let me add that by the time the Republicans emerged as a party in the 1856 election (they ran for both Congress and the Presidency in 1856, but NOT in 1854), the Whigs had dissolved as a party by then (they were pretty much non-existent in 1854 - a book detailing all the Congressional elections labeled the three groups in 1854 the Democratic Party, the American Party, and 'The Opposition', since it was too fragmented to count as a party but was clearly not Democratic or American) and the Republicans simply moved into the vacant 2nd Party slot (by absorbing most of the 'Opposition' politicians). It wasn't THAT dramatic an entrance.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Teddy's Roosevelt's 1912 run is the most succesful third party run ever, so I'd say the Progressives are the most succesful third party in history.

[WMS]

Teddy's Roosevelt's 1912 run is the most succesful third party run ever, so I'd say the Progressives are the most succesful third party in history.

Best Presidential result, absolutely.

But they didn't do much in Congress and flamed out quickly (OK, there was that 1924 run, but ya gotta get Congressional seats).

Like them or hate them, the American/Know-Nothing Party did consistently get a decent number of seats in the 1840's-1850's (they seem to have eventually disappeared in the 1860s, although I'm not sure which party they broke to). In 1854, you actually had a Congress without a majority party. It looked like one of those PR legislatures in Europe. I believe the Americans and 'Oppositions' eventually formed a coalition, but I seem to remember that it took over 100 floor votes to select a Speaker of the House.

Ah, American politics sure were complicated for the better part of three decades...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Good stuff so far, thanks
I'll try to get some more people to post here then I can start.

[Serenity Now]

Al, I've just noticed you're "Yes Minister" pic in you're sig - One of the best TV programmes ever

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Al, I've just noticed you're "Yes Minister" pic in you're sig - One of the best TV programmes ever

True

---
Oh yes... *blows dust off this idea*

Some more comments/ideas would be nice but I should be able to start the thing soon-ish

[minionofmidas]

Hm.
Not that big into these whatiffish things, although this might become interesting.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Before I get started I thought I'd work out where the Labour Party would be initially strong. The main thing to look for is areas of support for various socialist or semi socialist third party candidates in real elections in the late 19th/early 20th century (although other things like the location of active coafields, areas dominated by the textiles industry, areas with large docks etc. are also importent).

Weaver 1880:



1892 election (Populist Party in Green)



Debs 1912:



PA counties to give more than 10% to SPUSA candidates in Gubernatiorial or Senate elections: Lawrence, Northumberland, Luzerne, Carbon, Berks (which did so repeatedly), Mifflin

States to elect Greenback-Labor Congressmen: Vermont (1), Missouri (5), Indiana (1), Illinois (1), Iowa (3), North Carolina (1), Pennsylvania (1)

States to elect Populist Party Congressmen or Senators: Nebraska (7), North Carolina (6), Kansas (13), California (3), Colorado (2), Minnesota (2), Montana (1), Idaho (3), Alabama (2), South Dakota (2)

States to elect SPUSA Congressmen: Wisconsin (1), New York (1)

States to elect Union Labor Congressmen: Arkansas (1), Minnesota (1)

More of this soon

[Хahar 🤔]

You know, I'd be interested in seeing this. I think you did something like this in another thread. Is there a link?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

You know, I'd be interested in seeing this. I think you did something like this in another thread. Is there a link?

I think I did, yeah. No idea if it was any good or not. Would be on the What-if boards, I think.

[Hash]

I was considering re-starting my US-with-French-parties thingee if it wasn't too sh**tty and if there was interest.

[big bad fab]

I was considering re-starting my US-with-French-parties thingee if it wasn't too sh**tty and if there was interest.

But there is interest

[Tetro Kornbluth]

For this to happen the South would have win the Civil war but end up back in the United States somehow (with slavery abolished).

Or at least something to that effect.