What would Atlas be like if it existed in the past?

[darklordoftech]

In 1952-2000, there would be debates over whether or not the Southern Strategy is a thing.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

In 1952-2000, there would be debates over whether or not the Southern Strategy is a thing.

You mean 1972-1980? It wasn't a thing prior to that date range and wasn't in debate at all after that.

[President Johnson]

Atlas in the days after JFK’s assassination. I included Biden and Trump as posters as if they were that age in late 1963 (Biden technically registered as Dem in 1969, but I gave him a red avatar anyway).

Tekken Guy Junior chimp ★★★★★ Posts: 7,479

Rate the 1964 presidential election « Reply #1 on: November 30, 1963, 01:19:21 pm » How would you rate the 1964 election a week after JFK’s death? Is Johnson safe? How would a Goldwater-Rockefeller primary end up? Could Nixon jump in?

Spectator Junior chimp ★★★★★ Posts: 9,479

Rate the 1964 presidential election « Reply #2 on: November 30, 1963, 01:24:01 pm » Titanium Democratic (sane)

Woody SirWoodbury Junior chimp ★★★★★ Posts: 9,201

Rate the 1964 presidential election « Reply #3 on: November 30, 1963, 01:44:36 pm » Tilt D

MR. MATIN LUTHER KING olawakandi Atlas legend ★★★★★ Posts: 89,665

Rate the 1964 presidential election « Reply #4 on: November 30, 1963, 01:49:17 pm » PREZ HOHNSON is secularist like MR SOCIALIST FD ROOSEVELT who won with 523 map and has 80s approvals. Ds and Rockefeller Rs can pass Civil Rights Act and as a result Hohnson will win SUNBELT STACK with 99 per cent of blk vote. GA isnt a R state as Spectator said before Kennedy death was inevitable. Rs have become permanant minority and CA SEN is wave insurace for 1964 . GOV BROWN won over corrupted Nixon in gov race which is why Ds can nominate him VEEP on ticket nxt yr. Its 330 dayz to election but Prez Johnson can pass tax cuts without prez of senate anyways

○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└ jfern Atlas legend ★★★★★ Posts: 55,633

Rate the 1964 presidential election « Reply #5 on: November 30, 1963, 02:00:06 pm » Safe Johnson (R)

Suburbia bronz4141 Atlas icon ★★★★★ Posts: 18,220

Rate the 1964 presidential election « Reply #5 on: November 30, 1963, 02:00:06 pm » Johnson is favored, but if his latest address to congress is any indication how he intends to govern, I see trouble at the horizon. Calling for passage of civil rights could tear the Democrats apart. Johnson may soon be regarded as a traitor to Southern values. I'm even hearing here in New Jersey from Italian Americans that desegration goes too far. You shouldn’t underestimate Goldwater’s minority appeal. Many negro males support segregation and are openly hostile to all white people, especially law enforcement. They also oppose mixed race marriages, so Goldwater could easily reach Nixon level support among these communities. I'm not sure whether Johnson is capable to understand this or has the proper advisers here.

Very stable Genius John Baron Atlas prophet ★★★★★ Posts: 150,257

Rate the 1964 presidential election « Reply #6 on: November 30, 1963, 02:54:14 pm » Who cares? Neither loser candidate is going to do something about the fact we get killed by the Soviets at all fronts. We’re losing to the Russians big league, and our stupid leaders are doing nothing. They’re so incompetent, nobody has seen that much incompetence. A lot of people are saying this, and say it very strongly. Eisenhower, who I nicknamed LOUSY IKE, an EXTREMELY OVERRATED general and NO GEORGE PATTON (who was total killer!), was a complete and total disaster. He was WEAK, LIKE NIXON WHO CONCEDED AFTER KENNEDY AND MAFIA STOLE THE ELECTION. Lousy Ike LOST with Sputnik and got chucked by Khrushchev with the U2 incident. He was so weak, people couldn’t believe he was ever a general. Total embarrassment for our generals. Then Kennedy – or as I call him CHEATIN’ JACK – got in, said he was going to make America proud again, and FAILED WITH BAY OF PIGS (should have resigned in disgrace after that!). Cheatin’ Jack approvals were in FREE FALL before he got himself into trouble. Why did he even ride an open car and failed to get down after the first shot was fired? I like people that don’t get killed. As for Johnson, I thought he had tremendous potential as a killer, but he made a BORING SPEECH before congress that revealed himself as a RADICAL SOCIALIST. Bad!

Scranton Joe JRB1942 Atlas icon ★★★★★ Posts: 15,051

Rate the 1964 presidential election « Reply #7 on: December 1, 1963, 01:04:37 pm » Who cares? Neither loser candidate is going to do something about the fact we get killed by the Soviets at all fronts. We’re losing to the Russians big league, and our stupid leaders are doing nothing. They’re so incompetent, nobody has seen that much incompetence. A lot of people are saying this, and say it very strongly. Eisenhower, who I nicknamed LOUSY IKE, an EXTREMELY OVERRATED general and NO GEORGE PATTON (who was total killer!), was a complete and total disaster. He was WEAK, LIKE NIXON WHO CONCEDED AFTER KENNEDY AND MAFIA STOLE THE ELECTION. Lousy Ike LOST with Sputnik and got chucked by Khrushchev with the U2 incident. He was so weak, people couldn’t believe he was ever a general. Total embarrassment for our generals. Then Kennedy – or as I call him CHEATIN’ JACK – got in, said he was going to make America proud again, and FAILED WITH BAY OF PIGS (should have resigned in disgrace after that!). Cheatin’ Jack approvals were in FREE FALL before he got himself into trouble. Why did he even ride an open car and failed to get down after the first shot was fired? I like people that don’t get killed. As for Johnson, I thought he had tremendous potential as a killer, but he made a BORING SPEECH before congress that revealed himself as a RADICAL SOCIALIST. Bad! WHAT drugs are you on, Jack? You’re full sh—t, man. By the way, would one of the mods please explain why this effing troll after more than 150k s-t posts isn’t already banned? Obviously Johnson is going to win in a landslide. Goldwater Republicans are too extreme. That’s not your father’s Republican Party anymore, folks. Who wants this guy run our nation? You gotta be kidding.

ElectionsGuy Atlas Star ★★★★★ Posts: 21,110

Rate the 1964 presidential election « Reply #8 on: December 1, 1963, 02:06:00 am » Lean D, closer to Tilt than Likely. Especially with Goldwater, Rockefeller makes it Likely D. There’s nearly a year to go before any ballot will be cast. The election mafia is living in denial to believe that Johnson’s approval ratings remain at this level for that period of time. You guys are underestimating how much blacklash Johnson will face over his call implement Kennedy's agenda. He and his allies like Humphrey will almost certainly overreach next year.

President Johnson Senator Johnson Atlas star ★★★★★ Posts: 28,375

Rate the 1964 presidential election « Reply #9 on: December 1, 1963, 04:04:12 pm » Super safe D. Anyone who says something to contrary is kidding themselves. BIG LYNDON is going to cruise to victory and pass the biggest reform agenda since FDR, if not ever. He’s much more capable than Kennedy. It was a mistake Democrats didn’t nominate him in 1960 already. But at least he can serve until 1973 now. Despite the tragedy of Dollas, I’m so excited about the new boss in town!

Modern School Republican Computer39 Atlas Legend ★★★★★ Posts: 40,255

Rate the 1964 presidential election « Reply #10 on: December 2, 1963, 01:22:22 am » Super safe D. Anyone who says something to contrary is kidding themselves. BIG LYNDON is going to cruise to victory and pass the biggest reform agenda since FDR, if not ever. He’s much more capable than Kennedy. It was a mistake Democrats didn’t nominate him in 1960 already. But at least he can serve until 1973 now. Despite the tragedy of Dollas, I’m so excited about the new boss in town! You guys are definitely favored in 1964. But if Johnson overreaches with a liberal agenda , he will face an increasingly hostile congress and public. Keep in mind he may plan to go even further than Roosevelt with the New Deal and massively expand power of the federal government. America however is a nation founded on individualism which Democrats to the left of Kennedy want to overcome. There's also the situation in Vietnam which could be a weakspot for Johnson . He may see a 1964 victory as mandate to withdraw US presence from Vietnam which will inevitably lead to communists winning another battle in East Asia. Consequently people will remember how Truman lost China in 1949 . So by 1968 Johnson is more likely to end up as Truman 2.0 at this point .

SnowLabrador Atlas icon ★★★★★ Posts: 11,034

Rate the 1964 presidential election « Reply #11 on: December 2, 1963, 03:19:30 pm » As of today, it may be Likely D, but make no mistake, it will be Lean R with Rockefeller and Safe R with Goldwater by the fall of next year. If Johnson really pushes through the CRA, this will end the Democratic Party. We're so pathetic as a country that we've been unable to repeal segregation for nearly 100 years and white people will revolt en masse over it. As bad as it sounds, at this point I hope Johnson fails passing the CRA and subsequently does not stand for reelection. Maybe we have a small chance by nominating Robert Kennedy instead, even though he will get blown out in the South. But that's our only chance not to end up with President Goldwater, who will get us into WWIII over 'Nam. Make no mistake about that.

Goldwater Atlas Star ★★★★★ Posts: 20,456

Rate the 1964 presidential election « Reply #12 on: December 2, 1963, 04:06:02 am » RIP to the dream of President Goldwater. Dallas moves the race from Likely to Safe D. Maybe we have a shot in '68 again. Let's see. I'm not that optimistic. Barry should consider not running and stay in the senate as a forceful voice against Johnson's inevitable power expansion of the federal government.

[wnwnwn]

1988 USA Elections - Missouri Thread

OldTimeDem (D): Bentsen may be a good fit, but with Dukakis I see this state as a tossup. The party has to win Little Dixie farmers, win the Lean Belt and maximize urban turnout at the same time. It's true that Bush isn't the best fit for the state and Quayle is Quayle, but one shouldn't expect much of a state like this.

PennyRep (R): The suburbs may decide this election. Dukakis too soft on crime, he will lose them by a lot. Also, rural southerns are less yellow everyday. The Bootheel will go to Bush and the republicans will attack Dukakis past in a way that will scare the rest of rural dems.

JesseTeam (D): Missouri is not Pennsylvania. Those farmers know better, they want good farm programs. Democrat farm programs. Also, racism is reducing, epsecially outside those upper middle class suburbs. Reagan won for Cold War, but imagine Quayle with the nuclear buttom. That's why Dukakis and Bensten will win moderates in both rural and urban areas. Columbia and the northern farmers are key, but also those french areas just south of Saint Louis.

ValleyBoy (I): Democrats will get gains in the suburbs this cycle. The suburban youth leans more soclib as democrats also do. Even if GOP still wins Saint Louis County, its margin will reduce by a lot. Combine this with the effects of the farm crisis in rural areas. Maybe a tossup, but leaning more dem than GOP.

[Sir Mohamed]

Atlas in the days after JFK’s assassination. I included Biden and Trump as posters as if they were that age in late 1963 (Biden technically registered as Dem in 1969, but I gave him a red avatar anyway).



snip

Great job, especially the feud between Trump and Biden. I had their voices in my head actually saying this. Trump's post reads extremely realistic.

[wnwnwn]

1932 New Jersey Presidential Elections Thread

KingofKings (D-NY): Accoding to this recent polls, Hoover's lead in the state would be a lot smaller than the normal. Newspapers are saying that NJ will become a swing state again. Imagine that, like in the 1880s!

1920sDestiny (R-DE): New Jersey voting for Franklin? Hahahaha. New Jersey is a conservative industrial state. He will win Hudson County and maybe Essex or Paterson, I don't know, but only that. Look at the 1928 elections, there are not enought urban viters for him.

GodnRights (D-MT): New Jersey is a tariff loving establishment state. FDR should focus on the plains. The Dakotas. Minnesota. Even Wisconsin seems more plausible. NJ democrat? At this point, Michigan going dem seems more plausible, at least with the growing unions there. What's important is to win a trifeca and cut those tariffs and regulate those banks.

DebussyFan (I-France): About this state, don't forget some things. 1 - There are unions there too. 2 - The inmigrants have son, their vote share grow every day. 3 - With Hoover's horrible work as president, those 'cooperhead' areas are añienated and will vote as their grandpas as protests.

FlagLover (C-IN): I have some friends in New Jersey and they are worried about our president's posibilities there. Maybe he should cut Curtis and put a northeastern as VP. The issue is that Franklin is no Smith, but Smith voters will vote for him, so he will get both dem normales and the Al mob. The GOP should campsing in cooperhead areas, they should know better and vote for the dries.

DePriestVP1936 (R-MO): Here in Saint Louis the race is divided. Some like Franklin, maybe as he is a yankee and a distant cousin of Teddy. The rest plan to stay with the Union Republican Party. Roosevelt's economic plans may be appealing, but I think better progressives like Norris or Johnson would have done it better. Also, I don't trust Garner. #HooverCurtisforHumanRights.

[darklordoftech]

In 1952-2000, there would be debates over whether or not the Southern Strategy is a thing.

You mean 1972-1980? It wasn't a thing prior to that date range and wasn't in debate at all after that.

I've seen arguments that it began in 1952.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

In 1952-2000, there would be debates over whether or not the Southern Strategy is a thing.

You mean 1972-1980? It wasn't a thing prior to that date range and wasn't in debate at all after that.

I've seen arguments that it began in 1952.

I suppose Eisenhower winning Tennessee and Virginia is notable, but those are both states that had notable Republican presences prior in Unionist enclaves. And kind of tough to argue that as a "Southern Strategy" because Eisenhower was pro-desegregation.

[Steve from Lambeth]

Talk Elections
> Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
>> 2016 U.S. Presidential Election

Croissant Thinking Croissants Croissant Atlas Prophet Posts: 118,527

DONALD TRUMP DROPS OUT - ENDORSES STATE SEN. LYDIA BRASCH « on: April 01, 2016, 11:44:16 AM » In a shock overnight announcement, Donald Trump has said that he will be suspending his campaign and endorsing Lydia Brasch as the Republican nominee for President. The businessman's speech was scant on details, but he praised the little-known Nebraska state legislator as "a true patriot who will keep America stronger, safer, and freer than it ever has been." It's not clear how much support she'll be able to gather in the coming months ahead of the Republican National Convention, the only place where an outsider candidate can seriously be considered - but immediate reaction from our experts was sceptical, with one suggesting that Trump might flip yet again and endorse a conservative such as Ted Cruz at the convention. https://www.cnn.com/2016/04/01/politics/trump-exits-republican-race/index.html

Talk Elections
> General Politics
>> International General Discussion

kilometerslunn YaBB God Posts: 4,281

Boris Johnson has taken his own life « on: April 1, 2016, 09:16:45 PM » APRIL FOOLS!