TR wins in 1912
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 07, 2024, 02:12:59 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs? (Moderator: Dereich)
  TR wins in 1912
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 20
Author Topic: TR wins in 1912  (Read 116207 times)
Hash
Hashemite
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,409
Colombia


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #75 on: May 11, 2008, 07:23:57 AM »

I thought I'd read it from where I left off- I was busy lately. A few issues, minor, here and there; mostly on the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

What issues are those; I might be able to explain them.

You asked.

Here.

Why on earth are Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Transjordan (as it should be known here) and Palestine given independence? Do you assume that the French and British feel nice (they never were very nice on colonial matters) and were in a pro-Arab independence mood that day? The French and British were carving up the Levant and Middle East long before 1918, while Lawrence was hanging out with the lunatic Hashemites, in fact. IMO, you made a big historical plausibility mistake by leaving out the whole mandates thing in the Middle East.

I'm also not sure about Turkey. The French (or any power for that matter; and you also forgot the Greeks, who had plans in Turkey) preferred to have a joke Ottoman 'Empire' under a puppet ruler instead of a republic. Ataturk founded the Republic in 1922, and he was anti-French/Greek/British.

You might want to read this from Wikipedia, quite good.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #76 on: May 11, 2008, 09:57:11 AM »

I thought I'd read it from where I left off- I was busy lately. A few issues, minor, here and there; mostly on the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

What issues are those; I might be able to explain them.

You asked.

Here.

Why on earth are Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Transjordan (as it should be known here) and Palestine given independence? Do you assume that the French and British feel nice (they never were very nice on colonial matters) and were in a pro-Arab independence mood that day? The French and British were carving up the Levant and Middle East long before 1918, while Lawrence was hanging out with the lunatic Hashemites, in fact. IMO, you made a big historical plausibility mistake by leaving out the whole mandates thing in the Middle East.

I'm also not sure about Turkey. The French (or any power for that matter; and you also forgot the Greeks, who had plans in Turkey) preferred to have a joke Ottoman 'Empire' under a puppet ruler instead of a republic. Ataturk founded the Republic in 1922, and he was anti-French/Greek/British.

You might want to read this from Wikipedia, quite good.


I did indeed read the wikipedia article; the major reason that these countries were not occupied is that, due to the Allies were already occupying the large European countries, they decided that it would be too difficult to retain control of all of these extra territories, so they gave them independence; however, they have established embassies in the Middle East, and intervene regularly in affairs there.


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.
Logged
Hash
Hashemite
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,409
Colombia


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #77 on: May 11, 2008, 10:52:12 AM »

I thought I'd read it from where I left off- I was busy lately. A few issues, minor, here and there; mostly on the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

What issues are those; I might be able to explain them.

You asked.

Here.

Why on earth are Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Transjordan (as it should be known here) and Palestine given independence? Do you assume that the French and British feel nice (they never were very nice on colonial matters) and were in a pro-Arab independence mood that day? The French and British were carving up the Levant and Middle East long before 1918, while Lawrence was hanging out with the lunatic Hashemites, in fact. IMO, you made a big historical plausibility mistake by leaving out the whole mandates thing in the Middle East.

I'm also not sure about Turkey. The French (or any power for that matter; and you also forgot the Greeks, who had plans in Turkey) preferred to have a joke Ottoman 'Empire' under a puppet ruler instead of a republic. Ataturk founded the Republic in 1922, and he was anti-French/Greek/British.

You might want to read this from Wikipedia, quite good.


I did indeed read the wikipedia article; the major reason that these countries were not occupied is that, due to the Allies were already occupying the large European countries, they decided that it would be too difficult to retain control of all of these extra territories, so they gave them independence; however, they have established embassies in the Middle East, and intervene regularly in affairs there.


Very unplausible scenario, then; sorry to say.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,708
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #78 on: May 11, 2008, 11:45:36 AM »

I thought I'd read it from where I left off- I was busy lately. A few issues, minor, here and there; mostly on the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

What issues are those; I might be able to explain them.

You asked.

Here.

Why on earth are Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Transjordan (as it should be known here) and Palestine given independence? Do you assume that the French and British feel nice (they never were very nice on colonial matters) and were in a pro-Arab independence mood that day? The French and British were carving up the Levant and Middle East long before 1918, while Lawrence was hanging out with the lunatic Hashemites, in fact. IMO, you made a big historical plausibility mistake by leaving out the whole mandates thing in the Middle East.

I'm also not sure about Turkey. The French (or any power for that matter; and you also forgot the Greeks, who had plans in Turkey) preferred to have a joke Ottoman 'Empire' under a puppet ruler instead of a republic. Ataturk founded the Republic in 1922, and he was anti-French/Greek/British.

You might want to read this from Wikipedia, quite good.


I did indeed read the wikipedia article; the major reason that these countries were not occupied is that, due to the Allies were already occupying the large European countries, they decided that it would be too difficult to retain control of all of these extra territories, so they gave them independence; however, they have established embassies in the Middle East, and intervene regularly in affairs there.

Not likely in the Age of Empires.


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser. I assume that for Papen to be elected, his cronies in the Defense Ministry would have to have lots of power.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #79 on: May 11, 2008, 12:03:10 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

I thought I'd read it from where I left off- I was busy lately. A few issues, minor, here and there; mostly on the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

What issues are those; I might be able to explain them.

You asked.

Here.

Why on earth are Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Transjordan (as it should be known here) and Palestine given independence? Do you assume that the French and British feel nice (they never were very nice on colonial matters) and were in a pro-Arab independence mood that day? The French and British were carving up the Levant and Middle East long before 1918, while Lawrence was hanging out with the lunatic Hashemites, in fact. IMO, you made a big historical plausibility mistake by leaving out the whole mandates thing in the Middle East.

I'm also not sure about Turkey. The French (or any power for that matter; and you also forgot the Greeks, who had plans in Turkey) preferred to have a joke Ottoman 'Empire' under a puppet ruler instead of a republic. Ataturk founded the Republic in 1922, and he was anti-French/Greek/British.

You might want to read this from Wikipedia, quite good.


I did indeed read the wikipedia article; the major reason that these countries were not occupied is that, due to the Allies were already occupying the large European countries, they decided that it would be too difficult to retain control of all of these extra territories, so they gave them independence; however, they have established embassies in the Middle East, and intervene regularly in affairs there.


Very unplausible scenario, then; sorry to say.

Oh well Sad  I'm not too discouraged; the Middle East will sort itself out.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,708
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #80 on: May 11, 2008, 12:24:27 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #81 on: May 11, 2008, 12:57:13 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,708
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #82 on: May 11, 2008, 01:39:52 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #83 on: May 11, 2008, 02:11:33 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,708
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #84 on: May 11, 2008, 06:48:33 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #85 on: May 11, 2008, 06:50:12 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,708
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #86 on: May 11, 2008, 07:26:06 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.

Then give me a general composition of the Reichstag, by percent.

[I'm so mean.]
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #87 on: May 11, 2008, 08:30:30 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.

Then give me a general composition of the Reichstag, by percent.

[I'm so mean.]

Each of the 19 Constituent States has three members of the Reichstag, resulting in 57 members, with 29 needed for a majority:
Partisan Divide in 1937 (members of the coalition in bold)Sad
Arbeitskräfte (Labor): 17 seats
Konservative (Conservative): 14 seats
Liberale (Liberal): 10 seats
Zentrisch (Centrist): 10 seats
Monarchisch (Monarchist): 6 seats
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,708
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #88 on: May 11, 2008, 11:31:35 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.

Then give me a general composition of the Reichstag, by percent.

[I'm so mean.]

Each of the 19 Constituent States has three members of the Reichstag, resulting in 57 members, with 29 needed for a majority:
Partisan Divide in 1937 (members of the coalition in bold)Sad
Arbeitskräfte (Labor): 17 seats
Konservative (Conservative): 14 seats
Liberale (Liberal): 10 seats
Zentrisch (Centrist): 10 seats
Monarchisch (Monarchist): 6 seats

Making up parties now, are you? Wink

Seriously, go to Wikipedia. Look up Prussia. Then look up Schaumburg-Lippe.
Logged
Hash
Hashemite
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,409
Colombia


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #89 on: May 12, 2008, 06:52:19 AM »

Are the Centrists in Germany christian democrats/Catholic party or is it entirely different?
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #90 on: May 12, 2008, 07:21:45 AM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.

Then give me a general composition of the Reichstag, by percent.

[I'm so mean.]

Each of the 19 Constituent States has three members of the Reichstag, resulting in 57 members, with 29 needed for a majority:
Partisan Divide in 1937 (members of the coalition in bold)Sad
Arbeitskräfte (Labor): 17 seats
Konservative (Conservative): 14 seats
Liberale (Liberal): 10 seats
Zentrisch (Centrist): 10 seats
Monarchisch (Monarchist): 6 seats

Making up parties now, are you? Wink

You will recall that for ten years, the British were in power; the Germans who were in power after the occupation decided to continue the British model, as it was the form of government that people were familiar with.

Are the Centrists in Germany christian democrats/Catholic party or is it entirely different?

The German Centrist Party is a Christian Democratic Party, although it welcomes non-Christians as well.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,708
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #91 on: May 12, 2008, 10:46:54 AM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.

Then give me a general composition of the Reichstag, by percent.

[I'm so mean.]

Each of the 19 Constituent States has three members of the Reichstag, resulting in 57 members, with 29 needed for a majority:
Partisan Divide in 1937 (members of the coalition in bold)Sad
Arbeitskräfte (Labor): 17 seats
Konservative (Conservative): 14 seats
Liberale (Liberal): 10 seats
Zentrisch (Centrist): 10 seats
Monarchisch (Monarchist): 6 seats

Making up parties now, are you? Wink

You will recall that for ten years, the British were in power; the Germans who were in power after the occupation decided to continue the British model, as it was the form of government that people were familiar with.

Well, merge the Conservatives with the Monarchists, change Labor to the Social Democrats, and change te Centrists to the Center and it'll actually make sense.

Still waiting on an explanation as to why Prussia and Schaumburg-Lippe have the same number of seats, though.

Are the Centrists in Germany christian democrats/Catholic party or is it entirely different?

The German Centrist Party is a Christian Democratic Party, although it welcomes non-Christians as well.

But are they the exclusively Catholic party that they were in the Empire?
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #92 on: May 12, 2008, 02:01:44 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.

Then give me a general composition of the Reichstag, by percent.

[I'm so mean.]

Each of the 19 Constituent States has three members of the Reichstag, resulting in 57 members, with 29 needed for a majority:
Partisan Divide in 1937 (members of the coalition in bold)Sad
Arbeitskräfte (Labor): 17 seats
Konservative (Conservative): 14 seats
Liberale (Liberal): 10 seats
Zentrisch (Centrist): 10 seats
Monarchisch (Monarchist): 6 seats

Making up parties now, are you? Wink

You will recall that for ten years, the British were in power; the Germans who were in power after the occupation decided to continue the British model, as it was the form of government that people were familiar with.

Well, merge the Conservatives with the Monarchists, change Labor to the Social Democrats, and change te Centrists to the Center and it'll actually make sense.

Still waiting on an explanation as to why Prussia and Schaumburg-Lippe have the same number of seats, though.

The British did not want to waste the money on having a census, and so they decided to give each State equal representation.  The new German government, having a lack of money due to the Treaty, has yet to perform a census.

Are the Centrists in Germany christian democrats/Catholic party or is it entirely different?

The German Centrist Party is a Christian Democratic Party, although it welcomes non-Christians as well.

But are they the exclusively Catholic party that they were in the Empire?

No; they welcome people of all faiths, but their Policy is based on Christian Democracy.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,708
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #93 on: May 12, 2008, 02:27:54 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.

Then give me a general composition of the Reichstag, by percent.

[I'm so mean.]

Each of the 19 Constituent States has three members of the Reichstag, resulting in 57 members, with 29 needed for a majority:
Partisan Divide in 1937 (members of the coalition in bold)Sad
Arbeitskräfte (Labor): 17 seats
Konservative (Conservative): 14 seats
Liberale (Liberal): 10 seats
Zentrisch (Centrist): 10 seats
Monarchisch (Monarchist): 6 seats

Making up parties now, are you? Wink

You will recall that for ten years, the British were in power; the Germans who were in power after the occupation decided to continue the British model, as it was the form of government that people were familiar with.

Well, merge the Conservatives with the Monarchists, change Labor to the Social Democrats, and change te Centrists to the Center and it'll actually make sense.

Still waiting on an explanation as to why Prussia and Schaumburg-Lippe have the same number of seats, though.

The British did not want to waste the money on having a census, and so they decided to give each State equal representation.  The new German government, having a lack of money due to the Treaty, has yet to perform a census.

In that case, wouldn't the old imperial apportionments be in use?

Are the Centrists in Germany christian democrats/Catholic party or is it entirely different?

The German Centrist Party is a Christian Democratic Party, although it welcomes non-Christians as well.

But are they the exclusively Catholic party that they were in the Empire?

No; they welcome people of all faiths, but their Policy is based on Christian Democracy.

How did they manage to get Protestants on board?
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #94 on: May 12, 2008, 02:41:24 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.

Then give me a general composition of the Reichstag, by percent.

[I'm so mean.]

Each of the 19 Constituent States has three members of the Reichstag, resulting in 57 members, with 29 needed for a majority:
Partisan Divide in 1937 (members of the coalition in bold)Sad
Arbeitskräfte (Labor): 17 seats
Konservative (Conservative): 14 seats
Liberale (Liberal): 10 seats
Zentrisch (Centrist): 10 seats
Monarchisch (Monarchist): 6 seats

Making up parties now, are you? Wink

You will recall that for ten years, the British were in power; the Germans who were in power after the occupation decided to continue the British model, as it was the form of government that people were familiar with.

Well, merge the Conservatives with the Monarchists, change Labor to the Social Democrats, and change te Centrists to the Center and it'll actually make sense.

Still waiting on an explanation as to why Prussia and Schaumburg-Lippe have the same number of seats, though.

The British did not want to waste the money on having a census, and so they decided to give each State equal representation.  The new German government, having a lack of money due to the Treaty, has yet to perform a census.

In that case, wouldn't the old imperial apportionments be in use?

To be honest, the British were extremely lazy in their rule of Germany.  Their main goal was to make sure that Germany became a Democracy, so they decided to have the government entirely equal.

Are the Centrists in Germany christian democrats/Catholic party or is it entirely different?

The German Centrist Party is a Christian Democratic Party, although it welcomes non-Christians as well.

But are they the exclusively Catholic party that they were in the Empire?

No; they welcome people of all faiths, but their Policy is based on Christian Democracy.

How did they manage to get Protestants on board?

There are very few Protestants; it is probably 75% Catholic, 20% non Catholic, and 5% non-Christian.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,708
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #95 on: May 12, 2008, 02:43:20 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.

Then give me a general composition of the Reichstag, by percent.

[I'm so mean.]

Each of the 19 Constituent States has three members of the Reichstag, resulting in 57 members, with 29 needed for a majority:
Partisan Divide in 1937 (members of the coalition in bold)Sad
Arbeitskräfte (Labor): 17 seats
Konservative (Conservative): 14 seats
Liberale (Liberal): 10 seats
Zentrisch (Centrist): 10 seats
Monarchisch (Monarchist): 6 seats

Making up parties now, are you? Wink

You will recall that for ten years, the British were in power; the Germans who were in power after the occupation decided to continue the British model, as it was the form of government that people were familiar with.

Well, merge the Conservatives with the Monarchists, change Labor to the Social Democrats, and change te Centrists to the Center and it'll actually make sense.

Still waiting on an explanation as to why Prussia and Schaumburg-Lippe have the same number of seats, though.

The British did not want to waste the money on having a census, and so they decided to give each State equal representation.  The new German government, having a lack of money due to the Treaty, has yet to perform a census.

In that case, wouldn't the old imperial apportionments be in use?

To be honest, the British were extremely lazy in their rule of Germany.  Their main goal was to make sure that Germany became a Democracy, so they decided to have the government entirely equal.

Just admit that you screwed up, and everything'll be all right.

Are the Centrists in Germany christian democrats/Catholic party or is it entirely different?

The German Centrist Party is a Christian Democratic Party, although it welcomes non-Christians as well.

But are they the exclusively Catholic party that they were in the Empire?

No; they welcome people of all faiths, but their Policy is based on Christian Democracy.

How did they manage to get Protestants on board?

There are very few Protestants; it is probably 75% Catholic, 20% non Catholic, and 5% non-Christian.

OK, that makes sense.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #96 on: May 12, 2008, 02:47:46 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.

Then give me a general composition of the Reichstag, by percent.

[I'm so mean.]

Each of the 19 Constituent States has three members of the Reichstag, resulting in 57 members, with 29 needed for a majority:
Partisan Divide in 1937 (members of the coalition in bold)Sad
Arbeitskräfte (Labor): 17 seats
Konservative (Conservative): 14 seats
Liberale (Liberal): 10 seats
Zentrisch (Centrist): 10 seats
Monarchisch (Monarchist): 6 seats

Making up parties now, are you? Wink

You will recall that for ten years, the British were in power; the Germans who were in power after the occupation decided to continue the British model, as it was the form of government that people were familiar with.

Well, merge the Conservatives with the Monarchists, change Labor to the Social Democrats, and change te Centrists to the Center and it'll actually make sense.

Still waiting on an explanation as to why Prussia and Schaumburg-Lippe have the same number of seats, though.

The British did not want to waste the money on having a census, and so they decided to give each State equal representation.  The new German government, having a lack of money due to the Treaty, has yet to perform a census.

In that case, wouldn't the old imperial apportionments be in use?

To be honest, the British were extremely lazy in their rule of Germany.  Their main goal was to make sure that Germany became a Democracy, so they decided to have the government entirely equal.

Just admit that you screwed up, and everything'll be all right.

Fine; I screwed up Tongue
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,708
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #97 on: May 12, 2008, 03:02:23 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.

Then give me a general composition of the Reichstag, by percent.

[I'm so mean.]

Each of the 19 Constituent States has three members of the Reichstag, resulting in 57 members, with 29 needed for a majority:
Partisan Divide in 1937 (members of the coalition in bold)Sad
Arbeitskräfte (Labor): 17 seats
Konservative (Conservative): 14 seats
Liberale (Liberal): 10 seats
Zentrisch (Centrist): 10 seats
Monarchisch (Monarchist): 6 seats

Making up parties now, are you? Wink

You will recall that for ten years, the British were in power; the Germans who were in power after the occupation decided to continue the British model, as it was the form of government that people were familiar with.

Well, merge the Conservatives with the Monarchists, change Labor to the Social Democrats, and change te Centrists to the Center and it'll actually make sense.

Still waiting on an explanation as to why Prussia and Schaumburg-Lippe have the same number of seats, though.

The British did not want to waste the money on having a census, and so they decided to give each State equal representation.  The new German government, having a lack of money due to the Treaty, has yet to perform a census.

In that case, wouldn't the old imperial apportionments be in use?

To be honest, the British were extremely lazy in their rule of Germany.  Their main goal was to make sure that Germany became a Democracy, so they decided to have the government entirely equal.

Just admit that you screwed up, and everything'll be all right.

Fine; I screwed up Tongue

Want to try again, with a Reichstag with 500-odd members and real parties?
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #98 on: May 12, 2008, 03:03:53 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.

Then give me a general composition of the Reichstag, by percent.

[I'm so mean.]

Each of the 19 Constituent States has three members of the Reichstag, resulting in 57 members, with 29 needed for a majority:
Partisan Divide in 1937 (members of the coalition in bold)Sad
Arbeitskräfte (Labor): 17 seats
Konservative (Conservative): 14 seats
Liberale (Liberal): 10 seats
Zentrisch (Centrist): 10 seats
Monarchisch (Monarchist): 6 seats

Making up parties now, are you? Wink

You will recall that for ten years, the British were in power; the Germans who were in power after the occupation decided to continue the British model, as it was the form of government that people were familiar with.

Well, merge the Conservatives with the Monarchists, change Labor to the Social Democrats, and change te Centrists to the Center and it'll actually make sense.

Still waiting on an explanation as to why Prussia and Schaumburg-Lippe have the same number of seats, though.

The British did not want to waste the money on having a census, and so they decided to give each State equal representation.  The new German government, having a lack of money due to the Treaty, has yet to perform a census.

In that case, wouldn't the old imperial apportionments be in use?

To be honest, the British were extremely lazy in their rule of Germany.  Their main goal was to make sure that Germany became a Democracy, so they decided to have the government entirely equal.

Just admit that you screwed up, and everything'll be all right.

Fine; I screwed up Tongue

Want to try again, with a Reichstag with 500-odd members and real parties?

Wait for the next update, and you'll see.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,708
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #99 on: May 12, 2008, 03:07:37 PM »


In that case, I assume it's esentially become a military state?

Not really; the President is more of a figurehead.

Really? In the Weimar Republic, the President was, with a few minor adjustments, an Ersatzkaiser.

Remember, though, that this is not the Weimar Republic.  Germany, in this TL, is much more a copy of the British system, where the Chancellor has most of the power, and the President is more ceremonial.

Eh. Well, how well do the Communists do?

Not that well; at the moment, the German Communist Party is in its infancy; the British were able to keep the Party out of Germany during the Occupation.

Then what about its IRL predecessor, the Independent Social Dmeocrats?

In the British controlled government, Parties remotely associated with Communism, and with far left politics, did very poorly.

Why? Germany was a hotbed for left-wing activism.

Although the causes are not known for sure, it rumored that the British rigged elections, in order to assure that no radical parties gain power in post-occupation Germany.

Then give me a general composition of the Reichstag, by percent.

[I'm so mean.]

Each of the 19 Constituent States has three members of the Reichstag, resulting in 57 members, with 29 needed for a majority:
Partisan Divide in 1937 (members of the coalition in bold)Sad
Arbeitskräfte (Labor): 17 seats
Konservative (Conservative): 14 seats
Liberale (Liberal): 10 seats
Zentrisch (Centrist): 10 seats
Monarchisch (Monarchist): 6 seats

Making up parties now, are you? Wink

You will recall that for ten years, the British were in power; the Germans who were in power after the occupation decided to continue the British model, as it was the form of government that people were familiar with.

Well, merge the Conservatives with the Monarchists, change Labor to the Social Democrats, and change te Centrists to the Center and it'll actually make sense.

Still waiting on an explanation as to why Prussia and Schaumburg-Lippe have the same number of seats, though.

The British did not want to waste the money on having a census, and so they decided to give each State equal representation.  The new German government, having a lack of money due to the Treaty, has yet to perform a census.

In that case, wouldn't the old imperial apportionments be in use?

To be honest, the British were extremely lazy in their rule of Germany.  Their main goal was to make sure that Germany became a Democracy, so they decided to have the government entirely equal.

Just admit that you screwed up, and everything'll be all right.

Fine; I screwed up Tongue

Want to try again, with a Reichstag with 500-odd members and real parties?

Wait for the next update, and you'll see.

Okay, that works. Smiley
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 20  
« 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 0.143 seconds with 10 queries.