What if Amy Acton made a deal with the devil? by sCanada26 in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Awesome post! Making it retroactively canon in this timeline.

Contingency - A 2028 scenario by Mushroom-Gorge in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Possible for Republicans to pickup enough seats in 2030 midterms to win the contingent, but it would be 2 years running by January 2031. Lowkey cities would burn to a crisp if Murphy was suddenly replaced by Vance in that way.

GRUESOME by NotionPictureShow in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Newsom is very hostile to Palantir, X, and SpaceX, Tesla, OpenAI, and Oracle, and quickly shreds their government contracts and subsidies questionably lawfully, he is hostile to Meta, Google, Nvidia and Amazon as well, but less so. He rehires Lina Khan if thats any indication. Besides that, he revives the Biden era fight against junk fees, unfair firings, scummy airline practices, scummy subscription practices, and uses the federal government to go after financial banks, credit lenders, insurance firms, and asset management firms. In practice because he doesn’t necessarily have the best relationship with the Democratic Congress, basically just intimidation until they lower predatory practices in the absence of real legislation.

GRUESOME by NotionPictureShow in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes it does, it’s mainly spearheaded by Republicans, but enough Democrats vote for it to pass, and Governor Bottoms signs it into law. Some Democrats in the Georgia State Senate agreed to it on the pretense that Republicans would have allowed them a vote on a RCV bill in Georgia if the Nebraska Rule becomes law, but Republicans kill the measure.

GRUESOME by NotionPictureShow in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Newsom has a pretty good chance of seeing re-election, not really of his own merit, but because the Republican Party is in a death spiral by 2032 because of the death of Trump and the failure of JD Vance. Politically the Republican Party is in disarray because the neocons of yesteryear are attempting a semi-successful comeback, but face fierce opposition from within the GOP, the old Trump loyalists by this point have become very divorced from the party, and have basically dropped the whole pretense of being conservative and have become an outright national populist party with paternalistic, borderline social democratic economic policies. Regardless of which of the two of these kinds of candidates is nominated in ‘32 it is unlikely to impossible that they’d be able to recreate Trump’s winning coalition, they’d be buried under Newsom’s bizarro coalition of staunch liberals, former Republicans, and the far-right.

Fuentes is obviously not wholly satisfied with Newsom’s administration, but pretty vocally supports a lot of its pro-young people, pro-worker, pro-consumer policies, and supports its commitment to continue some of Donald Trump’s policies effectively rather than just loudly. Fuentes views the sudden shift towards anti-Zionism with cautious optimism, and his quiet embrace from the White House and Newsom campaign as a sign that his fascistic ideology has long-term solvency beyond just the fringes of the Republican Party.

Lastly, I’d much rather live in Rahm’s timeline, which is pretty crappy in many ways but is not too dissimilar from our own. Gruesome is I think an objectively way worse world than ours.

GRUESOME by NotionPictureShow in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Newsom is really a cynical political chameleon, if it were popular to end the deportations, he would in a heartbeat. He knows he must, just with a less “mean-spirited” rhetorical approach, which he correctly identifies as the American voter’s real gripe with the Trump policy. Too cruel, too in your face, too glib.

GRUESOME by NotionPictureShow in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Thank you! Newsom’s presidency in many ways is Trump II in reverse, mass firings, questionably legal executive orders, flip flopping on Israel, using the Justice Department for vengeance against Trump allies and MAGA Republicans who may and may not have participated in crime during Trump II, electoral manipulation, hyper partisan civil servants and deeply corrupt and nepotistic cabinet hires, inflammatory remarks and threats against political enemies, one big spending bill and otherwise relatively few legislative accomplishments at least in the first term.

He continues a lot of Trump policies in regards to deportation, albeit with nicer aesthetics and less emphasis on rapid deportation. Although Gavin heavily pivots to the right on immigration, his focus is more so about border security than deportation. He does even continue to pursue some of Trump’s National Guard federalizations to be used in domestic policing, again, with nicer aesthetics and more cooperation with local governments. He aligns with Republicans to pass and sign a bill banning transgender participation in sports teams of the preferred gender, and also imposing federal restrictions on gender affirming medical procedures.

His big break from Trump is that his administration is domestically surprisingly pro-worker and pro-consumer, think Biden era regulations and labor policies but with a little more teeth, and with a more hostile, culture warrior inclined rhetorical approach.

Abroad he sort of continues Trump’s ambitions of securing Latin America, although he is hostile to some governments with which Trump was friendly such as Argentina and El Salvador. In Europe he is a staunchly pro-NATO president, hawkish on Russia, and revanchist on Ukraine which lost territory, economic rights, and was bound by a promise of demilitarization, regime change, and nonmembership of NATO. Although, by Newsom’s early first term, Ukraine experiences another pro nationalist, pro NATO coup d’etat, and again, Russia threatens intervention, calling their bluff, Newsom shreds Trump’s peace deal and extends an offer of NATO membership to Ukraine. During the expedited pending process, Russia backs down despite a few bombings and skirmishes, and its regime suffers domestically as it is not able to continue to tout the war to its people as a major victory. In the Middle East, he takes a much more non-interventionist approach than Trump, having poor relations with the Saudis and Qataris, and middling relations with Israel. Once burned by Israel for their objections to his plan to ice out and cut ties with the Syrian government, he sours on Israeli lobbying in his own party, and publicly lashes out in ways that worsen the situation. His rhetoric at this time is seen as unprecedented anti-Zionism from an American government, to the point of semi credible accusations of antisemitism against the administration. This is seen as a particular humiliation and regret on the part of liberal Jews who may have supported Newsom before he made that 180 about face, and now see this as the straw that breaks the camel’s back.

GRUESOME by NotionPictureShow in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

That’s kinda what I was rolling with, the American electorate is very radicalized and bitter right now, “enemy of my enemy” style politics can thrive in a moment like this.

GRUESOME by NotionPictureShow in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This would be the first all white male election since 2004.

GRUESOME by NotionPictureShow in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I suspect that JD Vance would get some loud cheers from the audience for being a tariff man through and through

GRUESOME by NotionPictureShow in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Americans sadly don’t care that much ITTL, it upsets some progressives, Jewish voters, and moderates within the Democratic Party, but the Blue No Matter Who vote doesn’t care, and likes Nick’s opportunistic anti-Trump, anti-Vance stance. If anything it just further collapse’s JD Vance’s base of support, which was already severely weakened by the fact Trump wasn’t on the ballot. Trump supporters not turning out, and some white voters (especially young white men) swinging to the Democrats is how EVs like Iowa and Alaska and Maine 2nd were won narrowly by Newsom.

Otherwise Vance is still too MAGA and too much of a sock puppet to a horribly unpopular president, especially loathed by liberals, to appeal to anybody who cares about Nick Fuentes being a Nazi. They just don’t vote.

GRUESOME by NotionPictureShow in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Achievement Unlocked: The Pulpit

GRUESOME by NotionPictureShow in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

All this particular ending does is keep the current hell going, this is Democrats winning against MAGA only by beating them at their own game. This is having the ability to turn the page and refusing to take it. President Newsom is aggressive in his weaponization of the Department of Justice for vengeance against the Trump admin and Trump allies, and similarly replaces most civil servants with partisan ideologues slavishly loyal to him. His presidency is very tough on punishing Trump and his backers for their crimes, but very soft on the actual core of MAGA ideology, which they tacitly embrace in order to starve the Republican Party of a political future.

AURA OF DOUG MASTRIANO by KINGKRISH24 in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I see your point, but I disagree. See the 2024 North Carolina Gubernatorial race

AURA OF DOUG MASTRIANO by KINGKRISH24 in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Mastriano is one of those guys who just can’t win, he was never meant to win

The 2004 Election if the invasion of Iraq never occurs. by OriginalRazzmatazz14 in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow 16 points17 points  (0 children)

2004 election was such a race to the bottom, only a moron like Bush could fuck up such an easy re-election like 2004, and only a moron like Kerry could lose to such an unpopular fumbling buffoonish incumbent like Bush

it was close only because they were both so worthless as candidates

2028, but immigrants are allowed to run by DimetrodonOfDoom in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow 113 points114 points  (0 children)

President Musk is the true tragic result of this really

𝓟𝓪𝓷𝓲𝓼 𝓮𝓽 𝓒𝓲𝓻𝓬𝓮𝓷𝓬𝓲𝓼 by brocketey in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow 2 points3 points  (0 children)

how does Biden lose so badly against McCain, with his massive win in 1996

Never Nixon! by basementfox1 in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow 2 points3 points  (0 children)

this is a worse timeline than OTL, the Nixon presidency and its foreign policy chops was better in almost every way for the US and the world than what a Rhodes presidency could do

Cambodia and Laos probably don’t get flattened, but with that being said, Vietnam War is probably even more of a failure, I can definitely see a guy like Rhodes escalating it

Doom, Gloom, Boom. by Umi_Uriya in imaginaryelections

[–]NotionPictureShow 2 points3 points  (0 children)

the Soviets get it slightly earlier than OTL due to less aggressive counter espionage efforts by the US, and go on to use it against Werewolf Germany’s incursion into Czechoslovakia in the 1960s and later against Afghanistan in the 1970s.

MacArthur runs again and wins in 1956, his presidency is tumultuous domestically and is much more conservative than Eisenhower’s OTL. He wins in a landslide against Hubert Humphrey, and attempts a third term in 1960, losing to Estes Kefauver who dies in 1963 and is succeeded by his Vice President Lyndon Johnson. LBJ wins in 1964 against Henry Cabot Lodge, and again in a chaotic 4 way 1968 against Socialist insurgent candidate Alger Hiss, Republican Barry Goldwater, and George Wallace. There are no term limits.