The National Guild, Its Origins, Motives and Story
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 18, 2025, 10:05:11 PM
News: Election Calculator 3.0 with county/house maps is now live. For more info, click here

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs? (Moderator: Dereich)
  The National Guild, Its Origins, Motives and Story
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: The National Guild, Its Origins, Motives and Story  (Read 378 times)
blueandred
Rookie
**
Posts: 99


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: April 03, 2020, 07:46:13 PM »

The date was January xx 2021. The election of a moderate Democratic candidate the previous November was a disappointment for conservatives. Republican Control Council met up in January to coordinate their response to this threat. The leader of the Senate suggested that a policy much the same as that of the term of 2009-2013 would be most likely to succeed: blocking all policy proposal in the Senate to ensure a one-term presidency for the Democratic administration.
 
Also present at that meeting were some members of the House, who were reeling from a second straight dire loss for their caucus. They were now in a significant minority, and due to the rules of their House did not have much influence on the government. This was not a great situation for the Republican Control Council. They had no influence on two institutions, that of the House and the Presidency, and could potentially be outmaneuvered in the Senate if a couple of maverick Senators decided to join forces with the minority. The President seemed likely to overturn the executive orders of the period from 2017-2021. This was not looking good at all.
 
The Republican Control Council decided that they needed a way to leverage their limited power in the government, by moving to consolidate their power. The problem was, this would require going around the normal operations of political government, to include the third branch, the Judiciary, in their scheme. The Control Council decided that the best way to block the Democratic administration was to take full control of the Judiciary.
 
In January 2021, two supreme court justices resigned, and were replaced with two new Birthright Movement judges, who now had a solid 5-4 majority on this court. The Birthright Movement was a right wing judicial organization that believed in laissez faire economic policy and traditional social policy.
 
In February 2021, the House and Senate caucus agreed to the Spring Manifesto, which claimed that each law that was introduced into one House, would immediately be reviewed by the Whole Caucus of the Republican Party. No bill would be introduced into the Senate which was not supported by a majority of the Republican Caucus in The House and also by a majority of Republican Senators. This effectively shut down any chance of the Democratic administration passing any bills.
 
In March 2021, a group of Border Patrol Agents sued the Democratic Administration after an executive order relating to the family separation policy was repealed by the President. The case soon was taken up by the supreme court, who created the Doctrine of Extended Standing: any government employee or agent, who would be negatively affected by the repeal of a previous executive order, would have standing to sue the government and to effect a stay on that repeal.
 
This effectively ended any action the Democratic administration could possibly do: They were blocked in the legislative branch, the executive branch, and the courts.
 
A Democratic Senator from the social democratic wing of the Party announced that he was going to be calling for a Rally in the Home State of the Senate leader. This rally was meant to convince the Senate leader to overturn the February Manifesto and to convince him to introduce a National Healthcare Insurance bill. The rally in the Senator leader’s home state attracted 235 individuals, who were promptly arrested by Local Police. This was not enough to convince the Senate leader.
 
The State of California was a Democratic, liberal, progressive, social democratic area, and so it posted its own manifesto, the Sacramento Manifesto. This statement claimed that if the Republicans did not allow debate on a key series of 5 House bills “The Big Five” then California would encourage its citizens to suspend tax payments to the Federal government. The Manifesto asked the Democratic administration not to call out the Tax Collectors to their state.
However, the President gave an address in which he said that, while he too was angered at what the Republicans were doing, suspension of tax payments went against the law, and he would be forced to send the Tax Collectors in to California. He also said that any government official who stopped them would be in violation of Federal law.
 
This infuriated the people of California. By June 2021, California had called a constitutional convention in which they decided to secede from the Union if the President did not endorse their Manifesto. However, at that convention, Federal agents managed to take control of the meeting hall and held the Convention-goers hostage.
 
The President gave another address, in which he stated that the California government was now in clear violation of Federal law and would now be “disestablished” and run directly by Congress. This was unconstitutional, but it did not matter as the supreme court immediately accepted this development, and gave an advisory opinion stating that this was legal.
 
Later on, during his retirement, the Democratic president said he “respected the court… they were willing to be fair and balanced. Sure, they were controlled by the Republicans, but they agreed with me that June…”
 
In Washington, the Republican members of the House and Senate posted another Document stating their goals. They claimed to be participants in a “Unity government,” the National Guild, which was going to argue for state’s rights, small government, and freedom of speech. They also said that they supported indefinite martial law in California until certain “seditious elements” could be removed.
 
 
The Governor of California now had to make his decision. He could dissolve the Constitutional convention, which would diffuse the situation, or he could declare that California was now independent. This was one of the most important decisions of the 21st century. From his office in the Governor’s Mansion, he gave his own address: he stated that…
Logged
Captain Chaos
GZ67
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 735
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: April 03, 2020, 08:14:20 PM »

Who was elected President?
Logged
blueandred
Rookie
**
Posts: 99


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: April 10, 2020, 04:22:32 PM »

He stated that despite all of the provocation of this so called “unity” government, California would be staying in the Union for the time being. He said that he believed secession to be unlawful unless agreed to by a majority of both Houses of Congress. However, the intrusion of Federal agents into what was an internal State concern, he believed, was irresponsible. He asked those agents to leave. The President called the Governor and thanked him for his decision. The next few months would strain the relationship between these two men, and the relationship between California and the Federal government.

The Congress was now in a state of disarray. Many of the Democratic members of the House were planning on a bill that would remove certain “troublemakers” (organizers of the National Guild) from any relevant committees unless the Republicans agreed to at least give a floor vote for some of the passed House bills. Eventually a deal was stamped out where the GOP allowed a floor vote on a minimum wage bill. That vote did not succeed, but it was the start of a period of reconciliation of sorts. It seemed as though everything was returning to normal.

One problem, though, was that while most of the President’s Cabinet had been confirmed, a couple of stragglers were left. The GOP was not going to allow, it seemed, the nominee for Treasury pass through. A sitting Senator, her ideas were considered by the Republicans as too radical and anti-business. The Democrats disagreed and said that she was qualified for the position. The President refused to pull the nomination. Such an important office being vacant was not a good thing, and so the National Guild proposed that the Democrats nominate a liberal Wall Street type instead. This was not agreed to.

Aside from that, another key issue was that of abortion. With the court so united, it seemed like...
Logged
blueandred
Rookie
**
Posts: 99


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: April 12, 2020, 01:46:41 PM »


[Biden, but in this timeline I won’t be using any names until later on]
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
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 9 queries.