Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

The Presidents: 1836-1936 - An Interactive US AAR

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Show only dev responses
Point to me where I asked for War with the Soviet Union! I have done nothing of the sort, and your petty attacks are nothing more than a political gamble to try and frame me as someone who would attack our allies, I see through this sham of an accusation, and for someone who is attempting to take the pedestal of the High Ground, it seems to me that all you are doing is attacking me and my credentials by standing on the Graves of those who have fought in the First Great War, and accusing me of being some kind of Bellicose Monster! I had expected better from both a General and a Secretary in the Administration. It saddens me to think that all you must do is attack me, and make up false accusations about how my actions as President would shape relations with other world powers.

My plan to prevent war is simple, to never again sit on the sidelines. I will support the United Nations, but I will not support us to just sit idly by and watch Europe fall into yet another war if that is the case. It saddens me to think that, as a man who has been stuffed up in Washington for far too long, cannot come to grips with the reality of this World. Accusing me of arrogance, while at the same time demeaning my own position and standing, as if you set yourself on your own pedestal while sending down strikes upon the people below. That position of power up there in Washington seems to have clouded your judgement. As a General, I have fought on the front lines, made sure that this world is a better place, all the while you sit in your office and fume about the days of past wars, and move around the little figures on the map with your glass of Scotch.

Now I am no man to be throwing around insults, as I feel it gets us nowhere, but I shall continue to defend myself from the blatant attacks coming from the Honorable Secretary of Defense. No, what I plan is a better America. While the World must be made Safe for Democracy, it is true that we have a home front, one that has suffered long and hard from this War. As President, I will work towards finding a place for the newly-released GIs, by introducing Common-sense policies, as well as ensuing they have a future for themselves in this world. Furthermore, I believe my experience in leading these men, also make me uniquely qualified to be able to deal with, and to work with, the needs of these men. This being said, I will propose new departments and Government Agencies to work with America's Veterans, past and Present.
 
((Hey, I wanted to let everybody know I'm retiring from the AAR; I just don't have enough time with all the projects I've got going on now, and to be honest, I've kind of lost track of this anyways. Good luck to you guys!))
 
I never said anything about you wanting war with the Soviets; however, your personality may come across poorly in Moscow, and I fear that under your presidency, Soviet-American relations could decline. I fail to see how you consider me some Washington elite; I'm no politician. My first, and only, public position has been Secretary of Defence.

To claim that I am using my fallen comrades in the Great War as tools for my presidential bid is utterly despicable! I saw men under my command, men who I had lead for months, even years, die! To even think that I would even consider using their sacrifice to this nation is contemptible! I've made no such claims about your war record, which is exemplary; I would hope you would have the same sense of decency.

I advocate a cautious use of foreign power; I don't believe should exert excessive power over Europe, as that would completely undermine the principles of self-determination that our nation was founded on. If we begin to dictate the policies of the world, then we have taken a worrying step towards the vile practice of imperialism. We must work alongside the nations of the world to bring about peace, but we must do so with utmost pragmatism, not with heavy handed action that will only lead to more suffering and conflict down the line.

Again, you taut your record, whilst besmirching me; I fought, as a junior officer, in Siberia and in France; to say that that does not qualify me in the same way as it does you is arrogant; true, I was no general, but I lead my troops through no-man's land, and I saw them fight, and I saw them die... If you consider that "fuming in my office, drinking brandy," then sir, I cannot express my dismay at this lack of respect for a fellow soldier; I've made no attempt to accost your war record in such a way, and I would appreciate the gesture be returned.

I can however, see merit in aid for America's GIs, though I feel that it should be handled within the Department of Defence, rather than in a new bureaucracy, which leads to the next portion of my platform; we need to reduce spending, regulation, and taxation. I do no argue for Sherman-level lack of regulation, but I feel a move towards the economic structure of 1920 would be conducive to growth in the market; we should keep some of the regulations passed over the course of the Depression, but now that this crisis is coming to an end, we need to allow the market more room to grow. Under my administration, I will cut taxes, reduce spending, and promote growth.

((Avindian NO!!!1!!!111!!!!1!))
 
General Bradley claims that "position of power up there in Washington" has "clouded the judgment" of Secretary Jarvis, but I fear more that the position of power in the battlefront has clouded his own. The United States - and even more, the world - is no army. The people are not (all) soldiers. The politicians and officials are not officers. The issues of peace are not battlefields.

The millions of civilians who faced the devastation of war - the death and destruction in the front lines, or in Washington, and the loss and lack far away - are not cowards or bunglers. While our brave soldiers fought, our brave populace worked together - not with military "common sense", simplistic solutions, or bravado, but with the things General Bradley would so quickly dismiss as political trash - and gave them strength. As much as we won a war of human muscle, we won the vital wars of material, food, and industry. As much as we won on the maps of battlefields, we won on the maps of diplomacy. The war was not fought on strength - surely the Fascists would have won then, for they had leaders whose whole identity was in their strength! - but on judgement and careful, experienced decision.

((And of course Vice President Gallatin supports sending President McCahill as the first American representative and ambassador to the United Nations when his term is over. He so long championed the formation of that body, and has shown his administrative and diplomatic good judgement throughout his years in the Presidency.))
 
The Primary of 1944​

Liberal Candidate(s)

Calvin Emerson (b. 1901), President Pro Tempore of the Senate ((BigBadBob)). One of the founding members of the Liberal Party, Emerson essentially advocates continuing McCahill’s policies. He is not as optimistic about the UN as many others, but still considers it to be the primary avenue through which the USA should exert influence on the world.

Republican Candidate(s)

Richard A. Jarvis (b. 1890), Secretary of Defense ((Riccardo93)). A veteran of the war-time government, Jarvis is confident that he can, through the UN and the considerate use of American might, best ensure peace in the world. Domestically, he supports a slight relaxation of the McCahill era tax rates and swath of new regulations brought by the Depression.

William Gallatin (b. 1894), Vice-President of the Republic ((Gloa)). Gallatin, who has become somewhat a symbol of peaceful political discourse, the very image of a calm and collected politician, is a firm believer in the ability of negotiation and expanded democracy to ensure peace and stability in the post-war world.

Henry G. Bradley (b. 1890), General-in-Chief NATO Europe ((Frymonmon)). One of the most influential and highest-ranking generals of the entire war, Bradley is without a doubt the most bellicose of the candidates. In his opinion, only a general who has seen modern war can ensure it never happens.

Progressive Candidate(s)

Robert Horshington (b. ????), Doctor and political activist ((Kaisersohaib)). The latest of the oft-battered, never-beaten Horshingtons to enter politics, Robert has taken up the standard of the Progressive Party, hoping that some of his family’s perseverance and determination will rub off on the party and allow it to survive into the post-war era despite its debacle four years ago.

------------------------

Exceptional Situation(s):

None that I can think of.

Republicans, vote. Robert, send me your platform and make a VP pick.
 
Last edited:
((General Bradley was born in 1890.))
 
The American people need stability and a chance to begin recovering from both the Depression and the War; under my administration, as I've said before, I will reduce restrictions on the market, lower taxes, and work with the British and Soviet governments, and the countries around the world, to better ensure that a war of this magnitude never happens again. I have the military experience that General Bradley demands of any candidate running (though my experience comes from serving in the trenches, rather than commanding), and, whilst I cannot compare with the vast amount of experience in the political field that Vice President Gallatin possesses, I have attained a degree of political know-how and insight over the past eight years; furthermore, I have worked with the British and Soviet governments closely, and in these coming days, we need that vital experience.
 
I'm of the opinion the split between Liberal and Progressive is a negative one for our country, I think it's a shame that we can not solve these differences through a simple primary between Emerson and Horshington and would like a coalition of the two. However if that can't be done I stand with the Liberals.
 
I support Emerson, for the Liberal Party. This party has gotten us through so much, we must continue with the Liberal party to ensure four more years of fortune to our great country.

~ Christina J. Blancharde-Fredrick, Speaker of the House of Representatives
 
Mikeboy said:
I'm of the opinion the split between Liberal and Progressive is a negative one for our country, I think it's a shame that we can not solve these differences through a simple primary between Emerson and Horshington and would like a coalition of the two. However if that can't be done I stand with the Liberals.
Click to expand...

I am of the same opinion as Secretary Shaw. The artificial divide between the parties of the left should not be continued. I support a reconciliation after the chaos Sullivan's childishness brought.
 
To Secretary Shaw and Dr. McCahill :
It is my wish too to re-unite our two parties if Mr. Emerson is opened to this subject, both of your comments will not be left in shadow easily
-Dr. Horshington, Progressive Candidate.
(( It looks that i wont get voted again, but i am still proud of my candidacy in which i almost represented the republicans against Sullivan i think, 3 to 2.))
 
I too am on board with the idea of reuniting the Liberal and Progressive Parties.

Of course, this is only possible if the Progressive Party is willing to concede primacy to the victorious side in our split.

((Primaries are closed.

The Liberal Candidate will be Calvin Emerson.
The Republican Candidate will be Henry G. Bradley.
The Progressive Candidate will be Robert Horshington.

Frymonmon, send a platform.

The Liberal-Progressive merger will be discussed by me and de facto Progressive leader Kaisersohaib.))

EDIT: Holy balls, I just realized that the US TTL has had a Native American president... in 1925.
 
Last edited:
It's official: The Liberal-Progressive Party ticket will have Calvin Emerson for President, and Robert Horshington for Vice-President.

Just need the Republican Manifesto and Vice-Presidential pick to get this party started.
 
The Presidential Election of 1945​

The National Conventions of 1944 began, and largely ended, quietly. The Liberal Party had a candidate essentially from the get-go, Senator Calvin Emerson, and most of the debate over who to nominate was for the Vice-Presidency. This would likely have been Christina Fredrick-Blancharde, had the Progressive Party not approached the Liberals with an offer of rapprochement.
The reunion of the Liberal and Progressive Parties was largely thanks to the pragmatism of Progressive nominee Robert Horshington. The son of former Secretary of State’s son, Robert had joined the Progressive Party in 1942, seeing opportunity in the battered and shell-shocked party. Easily asserting himself as de facto leader of the party, Robert quickly became the Party’s presumptive nominee for the election of 1945. However, aware of the fact that he was trailing Emerson in the polls, Robert decided to trade the slim chance at the Presidency and Progressive resurgence for a safer bet.

rhorshington.jpg

1. Dr. Robert Horshington, c. 1943.
​
After his and Emerson’s official nominations, Robert approached the latter with and offer of merging the two parties in return for the Vice-Presidency and representation in the administration. Emerson accepted somewhat grudgingly, realizing that it was in his best interest to accept the deal, despite the fact that Progressive component of the new Liberal-Progressive Party would undoubtedly be weakened by the defections of the staunchly anti-war and anti-military congressmen. What was in question was whether this coalition, standing in December 1944 at a prospective 272 out of 535 House Seats and 48 out of 100 Senate Seats, could keep its slim majority and plurality against the Republicans and their nominee; General Henry Bradley.
Bradley had tapped into the Republican Party’s fear of becoming seen as the “soft” party, and wrested the nomination from Vice-President Gallatin and Secretary of Defense Jarvis in a long, and sometimes ugly, National Convention. Bradley was a much more jingoistic candidate than any other potential president of 1945, and had the least trust in the UN. What remained to see was whether this attitude and Bradley’s reputation as a war hero were enough to beat Emerson’s links to McCahill and more careful foreign policy.

The Candidates/Tickets of 1945​

Election Manifesto of the Liberal-Progressive Party

Presidential Candidate: Calvin Emerson
Vice-Presidential Candidate: Robert Horshington​

Fellow Americans. It has been a tough decade-and-a-half since the Great Crash brought our economy to a standstill. We have seen Depression, death, starvation and a war like no other the earth has ever experienced. But we have emerged triumphant. We have emerged stronger. We are a phoenix. We look toward prosperity as no nation on earth has ever dared to imagine. It is but a stone’s throw away. My fellow Americans, let me walk there with you.

- Calvin Emerson, President Pro Tempore and Liberal-Progressive nominee

Domestic Policy:
Much has been achieved in the past four years. The Veterans Act and welfare reform have put in place a system which ensures that no American will see poverty, and no veteran will be without the opportunities the war almost denied them. I pledge to protect that achievement of good government.

Economic Policy:
There is no question about it. Good government pays its debts and ensures the solvency of its programs. The US Tax Code of 1941 will secure the United States’ government’s ability to do both these things. Fair taxation will return as planned under an Emerson administration, and that money will be used to protect the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness of every American.

Europe is in ruins. We have seen what ruin and destitution breed; fear and violence. The United States will not turn its back on Europe’s problem and allow it to descend back into fear and violence as it did after the last war. I pledge to rebuild all Europe through extensive financial aid and free trade. Prosperity for the Old World will secure peace and prosperity for the new.

Foreign Policy:
The United States cannot go back into isolation. A world that’s most powerful nation ignores it is not a stable world. But neither can we be its policeman. Imposing justice on our own will only breed fear and resentment. That is why we will exert our influence primarily through the United Nations.

In cooperation with the nations of the world, we will ensure that the two foundations of peace; liberty and prosperity, flourish throughout the globe. Only when our nation is under immediate threat, or the UN has failed completely, shall we act outside the approval of the UN on the international stage. I repeat that we cannot become a lone policeman, but neither can we become an accompanied do-nothing.

Election Manifesto of the Republican Party

Presidential Candidate: Henry G. Bradley
Vice-Presidential Candidate: William Gallatin​

1. Peace at Home, Peace Abroad

The United States of America will focus, first and foremost, on ensuring Peace and Security at home and abroad. On the Home Front, the United States Government shall set up several funds for returning Soldiers, so that they may take up a college career, to get more educated and produce an educated workforce for the United States. While this helps with the home front, Abroad is something that must be dealt with. The United States will enforce, with her military and her Economic and Military Might, Peace in the World. No longer will we stand by as Europe burns. We refuse to accept any changes in Europe, and will make sure that Freedom and Democracy flourishes in Europe.

2. Military Expansion

The United States must be able to maintain Peace in this World, so in doing so, as President I will massively increase military spending, to both increase the standing size of the United States Army, and to make sure that we have enough conventional, and unconventional weapons, to keep America and the World safe from any rising tides of extremism and anything that could be a threat to Democracy and the United States.

3. Social Welfare

Even with this military expansion, the United States must be able to care for her people at home. While the United States does already have a good Social Welfare net, we must harness our Economic Power, and make sure that every man is able to have a decent-paying Job, a decent-house, food and water for their survival, clothes for their comfort! The United States can and will accomplish this!

4. Rebuilding Europe

Europe, as it is, is in ruins. As with my previous statement about our Economic Power, we can, must, and will make sure that Europe is rebuilt, under the guiding hand of the United States. The previous War has decimated Europe, and only led it down to the path to war. We cannot have this stand anymore. The United States will fund the rebuilding, re-education, and revitalization of Europe. No matter which side they fought on.

If there is a Bradley Presidency, I can assure the United States and the World that Peace shall be accomplished and it will remain the norm!

-------------------------

Exceptional Situation(s):

None. Vote please.
 
I, Phillip JJ McCahill, endorse the Liberal-Progressive Party and their candidate Calvin Emerson, for whom I shall be voting come election day.

Peace is not a time for war; there is no need for excessive militarism, nor any to increase military spending and we certainly don't need a General in the White House. Only through meaningful international cooperation can we secure future peace, and that is something I think only the Liberal-Progressive Party is offering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back