• 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.
1. Looks like then he'll be running a platform for muscular foreign adventures and his own personality, then.

2. I don't play Victoria, so I must ask- do European nations attacking the continental U.S. happen often in wars? If so, cool. Spain and France sure are frisky in this timeline.

3. My biggest regret about not reading this AAR earlier is that I wasn't able to recommend for you to annex Baja California. I assume you don't plan on having another Mexican war. I'm always annoyed by how the negotiators at the Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo didn't bother to take the entire peninsula. California seems incomplete, somehow. And seeing as how your alternate U.S. has Colombia- why not also have Baja, to give the West Coast both sets of wings?
 
Last edited:
What a war. The Spanish in the Philippines are being far tougher than I would expect.
 
A House Divided and the Election of 1900
~~


Even in the throws of conflict, democracy moves on. For the United States, they came together. After the assault on Baltimore, a new wave of anti-war politicians arose. Led by Thomas Watson, the majority of the anti-war support came from the Populist ranks. Watson and John Peter Altgeld were prepared to go all the way to stop President Allen. It was only moments away from a full on mutiny. With the failure of the US assault on Manila, the pot finally boiled over. Altgeld, at the behest of Watson, called for a meeting of the party. Hundreds of Populist leaders assembled, and Altgeld called for the removal of President Allen from the Populist Party. It was an unheard of decision, calling for the party's removal of a sitting president. Despite Allen's protest, the movement was seconded, and the debate began.

On one side of the argument, the anti-Allen Populists railed against Allen's decisions promoting the Republicans and rebuilding the Democrats. They called his war with Spain a war of aggression and imperialism. These Populists, most dejected former supporters of President John Daniel, were quick to point to the losses in the Philippines and the burning of Baltimore, as signs of Allen's failures. They believed that the party would not keep the White House if Allen ran again, instead they feared that the Republicans, with their growing support in New England, would steal the election. Removing Allen from the party would ensure that someone else, namely Watson, could run in his place. The more Watson spoke, the more the party swung in his favor. President Allen, feeling unfazed, painted himself as the true successor to Daniel and the Populist cause. Former President Daniel, who came late to the meeting, only called upon the Populists to avoid strife.

EdwinChickBurleigh.jpg

Edwin C. Burleigh, governor of Maine

But Allen was not without supporters. Some of the less progressive Populists, led in great part by Edwin Burleigh, governor of Maine, rushed to Allen's defense. He described, in great detail, the many praises of President Allen. It was Allen who had made the party strong and united the country against the invading Spanish. For Burleigh, Thomas Watson represented a step backwards, towards a Lincolnian Socialism and away from the more Conservative policies of the present administration. Despite this support, the tide seemed turned against Allen, and the final nail was hammered when William Cameron, the founder of the party, voted to remove the President from the Populist Party. By a vote of 70 to 30, President Allen was officially cast out of the Party. But, despite John Daniel's calls, the 30 who had voted against expulsion went with Allen and quit the party. Suddenly, the great unified strength of the Populist party was split.

This was an unheard of event, seemingly a single moment that crushed a certain majority. The ever growing divide between the Socialist branch of the Populist party (sometimes labeled the "progressive populists") and the more conservative elements had finally erupted into true conflict. The cost was the final split of the party, never to be mended. All that was left was to see who would pick up the pieces. Immediately Thomas Watson began his campaign to take the White House back for the Populists. With William Jennings Bryan as his Vice Presidential candidate, Watson began traveling the North and West, drumming up Populist support from the grassroots level. Allen took a more practical turn. After four years of helping rebuild the Democrats and Republicans, Allen called in his favors.

governorcandler.jpg

Allen Daniel Candler, Governor of Georgia

Rather unceremoniously dumping his former Vice President James Clarke (technically Clarke 'chose' not to run again), President Allen looked to the governor of Georgia, Allen Daniel Candler, a Democrat, as his new running mate. With Candler as his VP, Allen received the full, and more importantly, the public, support of Matt Ransom and his "Council for the Continuance of a Democratic Alternative". Calling himself a Democratic-Republican, President Allen was officially endorsed and supported by both the Republican and Democrat parties. With the full force of the minority behind him, Allen took on Watson in a series of debates across the country. Widely publicized and heavily documented, these debates became the greatest record of one of the most heated rivalries in American history. Eventually the style of debate, one of rhetoric and theory over substance, became known as the Allen-Watson (or AW) debate style.

It was not any great philosophical victory that eventually won the day for President Allen. Instead it was the greatest political collapse in history. Watson, while giving a speech in Chicago, railed against President Allen and the Spanish-American war. In his fervor, he began to attack other groups as well. First he targeted the Democrats, then Catholics and African Americans. It was too much for the crowd, seeing itself as a people on the verge of the 20th century, to take. Before long, the tirade of hate spread through papers and by word of mouth. It was not long before Allen's whole campaign was a mud slinging contest, stealing support away from the now defeated Thomas Watson.

Electionof1900.jpg

William Allen and Daniel Candler- Democratic-Republican- 305
Thomas Watson and Aaron T. Bliss- Populist- 110
 
Wow. I didn't think that Allen could explode like that. The only reason for the horrific fall is game mechanics, isn't it?

Also, will Thomas Watson and co. take up the Progressive mantle (or the Socialist one), or are you saving that particular name for a future upper-class urban academic movement?
 
Interesting turnaround to put it mildly!

As Strategos' Risk suggests, have you had some interesting game mechanices going on? Athough I would accept that in wartime during a period when the party structures were very fluid, voting patterns might be 'changeable'.

Do you have any numbers on the votes as well as the electoral college?
 
Strategos' Risk said:
Wow. I didn't think that Allen could explode like that. The only reason for the horrific fall is game mechanics, isn't it?

Also, will Thomas Watson and co. take up the Progressive mantle (or the Socialist one), or are you saving that particular name for a future upper-class urban academic movement?

It was rather strange. The Republican party won by a landslide in the midst of the war. But IRL, Thomas Watson lost a lot of popularity because he did in fact turn against a lot of minority groups. Although more successfull, his journey in the AAR was similar to IRL.

As to the history of the Populist/Socialists, just you wait and see :) In this history, Socialism is not really such a bad word. Lincoln was the socialist candidate way back when, but the party sort of faded into the wood work. Now the socialists just sort of represent the left wing of the left wing.

PrawnStar: Physical numbers would be a little closer than the map provides. Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania would all still have a large number of Populist party supporters, but just not enough to get the win.
 
Well, often a populace doesn't like to change midstream during a war. It's usually right after that it happens. But here, it simply looks like Watson self-destructed more than anything. That and Allen using the remains of the Republicans and Democrats helped him gain the majority.
 
Strong regional support for the socialists - surprising strong.

Another top-drawer election post. It makes me wonder what you would be able to do when detailing real life elections. I am sure it would be much more edifying than most political commentary.
 
Woah! that's an interesting election map! I need to catch-up, but I was sufficiently surprised by the change in the political landscape that I felt it was worth a comment.
 
Wow, that self-imploded quite spectacularly...

Democratic-Republican Party? Is that an ephemeral creation to drive out the Populists or will it actually be lasting?
 
It looks like the D-R's is just a vehicle for Allen pulling a successful 1912 Teddy Roosevelt. It's equivalent to if TR had been able to win the presidency despite leaving the Republicans and taking over the Progressives.

Considering the wonky nature of TFoIM American politics (I feel like re-skimming this thread again and listing all of the differences from OTL), I'm not surprised. And the country wouldn't really be "changing horses in midstream."

Elegant justifications, Estonianzulu.
 
Strategos' Risk: To answer your earlier questions. First, yeah, the Europeans often will land in the US. I've had the British, French and Spanish all land in America in my numerous games. As to Baha, I had never really thought of it. Strategically it could be useful for an extra naval base, but in terms of economics its really not very useful.

The D-R is really just a tool, as you described. In TFoIM, the development of political party loyalty has really not be significant. More often than not it is the strength of individual politicians or political blocs that has developed power.

coz1: As Strategos mentioned, its not really a switch. They stuck with the man, rather than the party.

stnylan: But unlike CNN, I don't have the giant touch screen computer. Man, that would be awesome though.

VILenin: Always glad for comments!

RGB: The fact that the Democrats and Republicans, so typically opposed, united tells you all you need to know about this party. Its not long lasting, just a temporary compromise to upturn the Populists.

demokratickid: Thanks! Welcome aboard.
 
Originally Posted by Estonianzulu
But unlike CNN, I don't have the giant touch screen computer. Man, that would be awesome though.
Oh good, I'm not the only person drooling over that election map setup at CNN - it really is spectacular (I want one, I don't know why or what 'd do with it but I want!).


Meanwhile, do you forsee the arrival of class/party loyalty based politics?
 
Interesting stuff, I didn't see a vast, vaguely social party lasting long anyway, as you've included, I think the socialists will begin to form a greater identity away from the Populists, or what is left of them.

This reminds me of the British Labour Party in 1929. They won their first majority following the Great Depression, only to see the conservative leadership face a mutiny from the grass-roots and younger leaders regarding their unwillingness to intervene in the economy. The leaders broke off, forming a 'National Labour' group, that relied on Tory/Liberal support to survive, while the real LP was left in the wilderness into WWII
 
Why Allen Won and the Two Brothers of Spain
~~

President Allen triumphantly returned to the White House in 1900, seeking to end the war with Spain just as triumphantly. But for Allen, it was a quiet ethnic group which would receive the majority of his (domestic) attention. Not since the rise of the Republicans in the South had African-Americans had such an impact on the turning of an election. It was the African American vote, disenchanted with the Populist mainstream and still, in some ways, tied to the pseudo-Populist Republicans of the post-war era, who won many of the Southern states for Allen. They turned out, in great number, to vote. And unlike many other election years, the White democrats of the South did not fight against him. Indeed for the first time since 1858 and the election of William Patterson, a Democrat, and before that 1836 and the election of Andrew Jackson, had the South and North voted together. So, for the first time in nearly fifty years, the Deep South and New England presented a united front.

Two men led this drive towards relevance for the African American voters in the South. The first was Booker T. Washington, the leader and driving force behind African American education in the South. Washington, based from Tuskegee University in Alabama, helped promote and encourage the rise of politically active blacks. From Tuskegee, and its sister schools in Virginia, Arizona and California, Africa-American political philosophers rose to great prominence. The writings of these men would influence political culture, both black and white, for decades to come. Chief among these was George Henry White originally of North Carolina. It was White who wrote first of the rise of the minority politics which would come to shape much of the American political scene in the 20th century. As a congressman, and later in literature, he described the rise of the minorities as such:

"but let me say, Phoenix-like he will rise up some day and come again. These parting words are in behalf of an outraged, heart-broken, bruised and bleeding, but God-fearing people; faithful, industrious, loyal, rising people – full of potential force."​

Indeed it was this philosophy, of the phoenix rising from the ashes to re-invigorate the South, that drove many blacks to the ballot box. All of these various philosophies, from the Phoenix movement of White, to the "United Front" socialist philosophies of the California blacks, were organized, catalogued, and most importantly published, by Washington. Over the course of the 1890's, Washington helped spread political literacy all across the South. And with the help of Henry P. Cheatham, of North Carolina, this literacy turned into action. It was Cheatham who, according to some, made deal with the devil. Cheatham, along with the Republicans and Democrats, formed the tripartite power structure that brought Allen to power. Blacks were undeterred, for the most part, in their attempts to vote, and Cheatham made sure they all voted for Allen. It was a sacrifice for practical purposes, as this single event helped create the African-Americans as a significant force once and for all in US politics.

Henry%20P.jpg

Henry P Cheatham, US Congressman

With political discussions aside, a war was still being fought. And for the commanders of the US Army, apart from those busy stuck in the Philippines, conquests had to be made to end the war. On December 27th, Cuba was finally 'liberated' by US forces, and all of the Mediterranean and South-American colonies of Spain were under United States control. And so it was determined, by both the General Staff and the President, that an invasion of Spain was necessary to end the war and re-enforce the Monroe Doctrine on European politics. Two brothers, General Leonard Wood and Admiral Charles Wood, devised a plan for striking into the heart of the Spanish empire. Their plan called for a three stage strike. The first involved capturing the Canary Islands and The Balearic Islands. From here, the coast of Spain would be available for assault. The second phase was a two front strike on Spain. The first involved a naval assault on the city of Barcelona. The navy was determined to force the Spanish to move their defense north, or risk having the city of Barcelona burnt in retribution for Baltimore. The final step was the landing of US forces in Valencia.

TwoFrontAssault.jpg

The assault on Spain

The plan was approved, with the end game being a victory over a Spanish army in Spain. The sight of American victory in Spain would force a peace treaty, especially with Austrian forces pressing into Southern France. The British were already putting pressure on Spain to come to terms with the Americans. Regardless, the presence of American troops in Valencia would change the shape of the conflict. The invasion began as planned, as Admiral Wood led the US Atlantic fleet against the Spanish. The Spanish attempted to attack the US fleet three times, and each time the Spanish were defeated. After the third battle, the US fleet gave chase, allowing the transports to unload marines onto the Canary Islands. Admiral Wood's fleet managed to catch the Spanish armada in the straights of Gibraltar. The Battle of the Rock occurred within sight of land, and the sight of the American fleet destroying, almost entirely, the Spanish was nothing if not a deterrent to a continued war.

However, after General Wood failed to seize the Balearic Islands, the plan had to altered. The US Fleet could not risk leaving Wood to assault the mainland on his own, and instead a joint-invasion of Valencia took place. Although the landings went without much resistance, the Spanish mobilized quickly to throw troops in between the Americans in Valencia, and their eventual target, Madrid. On May 27th, 1900, Leonard Wood and the 1st Corp landed in Spain and began their assault. From May to August, Wood attempted to reach Madrid. But he knew that any strike inward would risk his army being cut off from the resources of the fleet. Instead, he marched his army south across the coast, eventually sacking Almeria and Granada. But even as he moved West, the Spanish were on his tail. Eventually Wood made his stand, with newly arrived reinforcements, in Cadiz. Here he would come to blows with the Spanish army in the first great modern military battle.
 
Last edited:
My, my...the US certainly has entered the 20th century. Fighting on European soil and the black electorate swinging elections. It's an early beginning. I wonder if your century will be as bloody as the real thing.
 
Indeed, the twentieth century has opened with a bloody bang.
 
It should be interesting what comes out of the Populist collapse. The D-R's won't last long, just like the D-F's didn't last at the beginning of the XIXth century, but what party will rise from the ashes of this? I can see Socialism growing into that populist niche, but it'll probably come down to the Republicans and the Democrats again.

Good luck with the invasion of Spain, and be careful with the mountainous terrain there. You should probably finish off the Spanish in the Philippines so that you can divert those soldiers to other Spanish overseas holdings.

And, don't forget to sack Madrid, Baltimore shall be avenged! And of course, take the Balearic islands as a base to keep Europe in check in the future.
 
sanmartin said:
And, don't forget to sack Madrid, Baltimore shall be avenged! And of course, take the Balearic islands as a base to keep Europe in check in the future.

As you wish :D The Balearic islands would be a nice little perk, but after all the cost of this way, I'll be happy to get out of if with a historically accurate ending.

And I'll give you a hint. One of the two parties will still be around after the next election, the other will have radically changed.

coz1: Chances are good that it will.

stnylan: The best kind of bang.

All: I'm going to write up a time-line of events and post a link underneath the 'list of politicians' to keep a wrap up so new people can sort of keep track of things.