Post random maps here

[SilverPhantom2]

Test maps for my Timeline...

1840, Incumbent Whig William H. Harrison is renominated against Democrat Martin Van Buren.

1844, The Republican Coalition nominates Daniel Webster. The Democratic Coalition nominates Lewis Cass.

1848, Webster chooses not to run again. The Republican Coalition nominates Zachary Taylor. The Democratics nominate James Buchanan. The whole election hinges on CT... Buchanan wins by one.

[SilverPhantom2]

And this is just because...

2008, GOP nominees are Romney/Brownback, Dem is Obama/Biden. Economic crisis and Romney has a solid defense...

GOP: 299
Dem: 239

[SilverPhantom2]

The South, though firey and led by the warmongering South Carolina, still casts their vote for the compromise Party: John Bell. In the north, similar leanings towards compromise instead of a complete ban on slavery leads to the election of Stephen Douglas.

The Republican Party takes only New England and the Southern Democrats pull only the Deep South. My guess is that this would spell doom for the Southern Democrats, but the Republican Party might become some very small third party. The Constitutional Party and the Democrats might be the parties lasting into the 20th Century... assuming a compromise on slavery is reached.

Douglas (D) - 156
Bell (C) - 77
Lincoln (R) - 36
Breckenridge (S) - 34

[SilverPhantom2]

Democratic Party compromises in 1860 with a Douglas/Breckenridge ticket (no split over Kansas in 1854). The south obviously goes Democratic. Douglas has an uphill battle, fighting for the northern states... but wins a decisive majority.

Douglas (D) - 159
Lincoln (R) - 144

[SilverPhantom2]

Why? Historically, South Carolina was secessionist.

[SilverPhantom2]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I believe the proper expression is, "Them's fightin' words."

[SilverPhantom2]

Yep, and if more states held that sort of stance our Federal government wouldn't be out of control like it currently is.

I'm an anarcho-capitalist, so you don't have to lecture me about the overbearing power of the federal government. Still, I'm also a realist, and the historical reality of 1860 South Carolina was that Abraham Lincoln wasn't even on the ballot, despite the fact that Stephen Douglas was absolutely right, winning only the northern states, the north politically dominated the government. Could a compromise be reached? I'm an absolute believer that it could've. Unfortunately, South Carolina didn't believe so and they followed the famous words uttered by Calhoun and Hayne. Whether or not you agree with them, it's warmongering. Plain and simple.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

1972 Demo-wank? XP

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Tilden v. Hayes comes out with a Dem victory? Does this involve anything with LA, FL, and SC having Conservative gov'ts and voting their conscience instead of with Rep. troops? Or something just entirely different?

[SilverPhantom2]

1864: The Civil War is dragging on. The Mid-West is ripe with Copperheads (California turns as well) and results in a closer election for Lincoln.

Lincoln - 119
McClellan - 114