I'd say the last Presidential election ('2020) can't be touched in respect to being one that was 'stolen'.

A possible alternative to this scenario would be Russia and the Ottomans joining on the Austrian side, makeing it a much longer and closer war, maybe even dragging it out to a point where it has simmilar aftereffects to our worlds WW1. This would be archived quite easily through Britian fearing a stronger Germany and Russia will kill the balance of power on the continent and the Ottomans simpy seeing Russia as too big of a threat to their existance and singing some kind of treaty with austria in the early stages of the war

what if Mama Cass shared her ham sandwich with Karen Carpenter they would both still be alive

there was that election in 2000 you know where Gore WON but Supreme Court said NOPE!

As a Chinese, if this China coming true. China probably stand on Germany side to fight with Soviet Union during WW2, instand stand on US side. If the united China happen in 1930 ~1940. Sino Russia conflict would be huge.

The disintegration of the Hungarian kingdom due to the Russians is unlikely, because the Croats and Slovenes hated them then and this has not changed to this day. The secession of the Slovaks is also unlikely without the Czechs. A unified Hungarian republic could have fought the Romanians and the Serbs. At that time, both the Romanian and Serbian states were weak and underdeveloped. They would not have been able to meaningfully support independence. Not to mention that if Hungary is a republic, minorities are also represented in the leadership, so there is less reason for rebellion. Croatia was largely independent anyway. What is an interesting question is whether the first world war would have broken out and, if so, whether Hungary, Serbia and Romania would have participated in it. In real life, the Hungarians didn't want to go to war with the Serbs, and the Romanians wouldn't have had a reason to.

This video was posted on April Fools Day😅

• Joe Biden, 2019: “I absolutely” agree that Trump is an “illegitimate president.” • Hillary Clinton, 2019: The election was “stolen.” • Jimmy Carter, 2019: “Trump didn’t actually win the election in 2016. He lost the election and was put into office because the Russians interference on his behalf.” • Kamala Harris, 2019: “Absolutely right” that Trump “didn’t really win.” • Karine Jean-Pierre, 2016: It was a “stolen election.” • Jerry Nadler, 2017: It was a “tainted” and “illegitimate” election. • Stacey Abrams, 2019: “We won!” • Cory Booker, 2018: “Stacey Abrams’ election is being stolen from her.” • Sherrod Brown, 2018: “They stole it. It’s clear.” • Hillary Clinton, 2018: “If she had a fair election, she already would have won.” • Kamala Harris, 2019: “Without voter suppression, Stacey Abrams would be the governor of Georgia; Andrew Gillum is the governor of Florida.” • Karine Jean-Pierre, 2020: “Brian Kemp stole the gubernatorial election.” • Terry McAuliffe, 2021: Abrams would have been governor “had the governor of Georgia not disenfranchised 1.4 million Georgia voters.” When Democrats get crushed this November, will they accept the results as legitimate? I wouldn’t count on it.

I imagine if China does turn democratic and went through rapid industrialization and economic growth during 80's (like the modern day Taiwan) then they would easily surpass USA and Europe earlier, however instead of the west being threatened by China's growth, they will be more at ease since they have an ally in the east to counter the Soviets or its potential ally India. A democratic China would result in Korea being under Seoul's government and Vietnam would be unified under democratic rule, Philippines would instead move closer to China instead of USA. They will easily reach a higher GDP and GDP per capita, and Southeast Asian nations will be under China's influence and would heavily rely on them for trade (pretty much like with the current day China). We could see an Asian version of EU happening in this timeline with a much more friendlier and democratic China and free trade between East and SEA.

So protect slavery with a Constitutional Amendment and everyone lives happily ever after . Your idea makes me appreciate Lincoln and Sherman even more

The conclusion of “the nation would be more united” only makes sense if black lives don’t matter and black people are excluded from being counted as part of the “nation”

"alternate history is being abused by many people who don't care about offering perspective, but rather, only care about entertainment" Brother, AltHis IS entertainment.

Jesus Christ, this channel is like WhatIfAltHist after a second sanding with an even finer grain of paper. This brain is SMOOTH. But hey, you gotta intentionally misrepresent shit for those sweet culture war outrage bait clicks!

Don't try to make him llok like a good person! Salazar was fascist or rather as close to one as one can be... he idolized Mussolini and even had his portrait on his desk, had friendly connections to Franco's Spain, with Mussolini's Italy (from who he brought fascist architecture to Portugal by recruiting Mussolini's architects to the country) and Hitler's Germany since he considered them to be too pagan for his taste but even so he borrowed a lot from their ideals. He implemented christian corporatism which was heavily related to Mussolini's ideals and his government was a combination of authoritarian nationalist, conservative and anti-liberal tendencies. And by the way.,.. as for the higher literacy you mentioned, he just raised the compulsory education from the 3rd to the 4th grade... nothing more. The finances did become better at first by making everyone except the already wealthy families, as poor as possible, and under the thumb of the catholic church who were his biggest allies... And when we entered the colonial war the he and Marcelo extended as much as possible, all that extra wealth was spent in a war only they still wanted to keep going for 13 years... thousands of young men were forcedly conscripted and if the attempted to escape or showed any signs of leaning left, they would be sento to the front lines, forced to work in the offices of PIDE (the state police that dealt with any political dissention by arresting, torturing and killing and even trained Gestapo officers in Portugal during 1930's) or sent to the state ran concentration camp of Tarrafal, in Cape Verde. So, he might not have been exactly like the other fascist governments, but he behaved like one in so many aspects. So many killed, tortured and forced into exile. It was the military and the Portuguese people, who ended the regime he created and since then we became a much more modern country in a democracy, with all the good and all the bad that it caries with it, but at least we are free of 48 years of terror!

Since both adams are father and sun ofcourse he was related to both . That wasn't even nesacary to da say. That is like saying Jeb Busgh is related to both Bushes

The funniest part about this is that it was LINCOLN who co-authored the Corwin amendment which would've enshrined slavery. Razorfist has a great video going over this and more.

It also happened in the 2020 election, and no one will ever be able to tell me any different!

Can you make the next video about what if the fascist toppled the government in the years of lead

Disgusting

He had a death worthy of a dictator.Fell from a chair 🪑.So ironic

We can only wish

whomp whomp

whomp whomp

I bet real reason is bc brotha is jealous of PH for having 80K more subs than him

The Confederacy wasn't legitimate even in the South. They had murdered and fought their way into power. The events in Kansas spreading to more states more likely would have sparked the war just later than any lost cause illusion of peace.

Great video, but I disagree with certain aspects of this alternative history. FIRST, assuming McClellan had pulled a victory out of his hat in 1864, he wouldn't have been inaugurated until March 1865. That said, the union war effort would have continued as it did with Lincoln still at the helm (in spite of being a lame duck) and the South would have continued to die on the vine at the hand of union forces. By the time Little Mac became President, negotiations would have been pointless as the North would have been at the brink of victory, and McClellan, as a "War Democrat" would not likely have been inclined to seek peace while virtually at the finish line. Therefore, I still see the war ending at its normal timetable in April 1865 with the surrender at Appomattox. The 13th Amendment ABOLISHING SLAVERY would still have passed both houses of Congress by January 1865 and sent to the states for ratification as Lincoln (as in real life) would have ensured these things occurred before he left office in March. SECOND where I see a McClellan victory making the most difference is with the PEACE afterwards. With a President McClellan, believe it or not, I can see LINCOLN'S desire for a quick and drama-free restoration of the union taking place. Like Andrew Johnson, I can see McClellan moving rapidly to pardon Southerners who would take a simple loyalty oath to the union and subsequently have their rights of citizenship restored. With slavery decimated in all of the former Confederate states, it would be asinine to even think of letting these states restore the "peculiar institution", not to mention be a huge affront to the 600k+ people who had died from 1861-65 to extinguish it from America. The 13th Amendment still gets ratified, though perhaps not as quickly with McClellan as President. I still argue that it would have been ratified by the required 26/38 states no later than early 1866, not much different than the original timeline in December 1865. I can still see the Radical Republicans seeking to not only enforce the abolition of slavery, but also protect the civil rights of southern blacks in this period. Like with Andrew Johnson, we may have seen some resistance from McClellan, but as a Northerner with greater political skills, McClellan would have likely not be AS RESISTANT. He would likely have worked out a deal of sorts with the Radicals (especially after 1866) in order to avoid angering them too much, getting his vetoes overriden, and risking impeachment. Whether he would have signed the Civil Rights Act of 1866 into law is a huge question, and a veto as with Johnson would have certainly still led to the enactment of the 14th Amendment for ratification by the states. Though he may not have supported a military occupation of the south, he would not have done very much to oppose and undermine this. There are likely many other aspects of Reconstruction where he and the Radical Republican controlled Congress would likely have disagreed, but again, I do not see him being as confrontational with them as was Andrew Johnson (fighting was not Little Mac's strong point). With a 1865-1869 McClellan term, the biggest difference I can see from Johnson is no impeachment. Ultimately, the Radicals would have their way, and McClellan, though an able President would not likely remain in office for more than one term, being viewed as too conservative by Republicans and too lenient by Democrats. My timeline has him either not-running for re-election in 1868 or being dumped by the Democrats for a more conservative candidate. In either case, I still have Ulysses S. Grant winning the Presidency in 1868 and the normal timeline of events taking place as in reality.

Love it. I couldn't agree more. Except I doubt the protection of slavery would have ended the war, as it wasn't even the reason it began (Emanc Proc wasn't brought up until 1863). But regardless of whether the South was able to seceed or was kept in the Union, slavery would have been phased out through industrialization and technological advancements within agriculture i.e. the single-piston assistance mechanism,the tractor, hay bailer, combine, etc.

They'd look different to the thumbnails.

I think you missed a key point... If McClellan won, he would have reintegrated the south, but allow gradual emancipation. And under the most famous federal gradual emancipation plan for the states (Henry Clay's) didn't have slavery being abolished in every state until the 1920s.

Lol someone trying to be relevant be like:

The war wasn’t over after Lee surrendered at Appomattox, only mostly over. It was 16 months after Appomattox that the war was declared over.

We would all be speaking with a twang.

Sic Semper Tyrannis

Live in your looser what if world where you worship slavery.

If Wilson lost we woulve entered WW1 sooner. That saves Russia because their provisional government oversees a victory which delegitemizes Lenins revolution and gives America more of a say in who gets the blame in the war which would mean the treaty would be less severe on Germany. And if they dont have to pay that massive fine and they manage to be stable thatd mean theres no call for radicalization in Germany. So in total, no Soviet Union, no WW2, no cold war and by proxy no destructive proxy wars which would mean no Afghanistan invasion by any superpower which means no terrorism abroad. If a time machine is ever invented im gunnin for him.

If Germany had refused to sign the treaty of Versailles, there would have been a bunch of threats and counter threats being thrown about the place, but eventually US and Britain would have persuaded France into accepting a less severe version of the treaty. One where perhaps in exchange for loans from the USA, France makes less demands on Germany to make reparations. This in turn helps to stabilize Germanys economy and thi=us staving off the rise of socialism within the country. I feel that there is no way a more democratic and economically stable Germany would have entered into secret negotiations with Russia to attack Poland.

Ballot box stuffing is how biden won

The old folks were right again, dammit!! History does indeed repeat itself!! The hamster on the wheel effect. ☕☕☕😎🇺🇸

and the 2024 election!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

i tried to scroll down to find 1 comment siding with Josh and gave up after like a little over 5 minutes of scrolling, i find that fact incredibly funny

OH NO it was the most pristine election in history,

If Lincoln lost nothing would have changed. The confederate army was totally crushed by March 20th 1865. There is no way George McClellan would have let them succeed from the union.

Italy and Greece

In 1860 the vast majority of people in the North were NOT in favor of Abolition. They were United against the expansion of slavery to the Western lands.

I was hoping to hear more about the survival of Lincoln and his impact on politics in the latter part of the 19th century.

If Lincoln lost in 1864 Presidential elections he wouldn't be assassinated in 1865 and would lived longer

Sounds like 2020.

Most important thing. Lincoln may have lived longer.

Extra decades of slavery “somehow” makes the South less racist is a weird take. This would not happen. Plus by 1864 there had been so many dead on both sides in the war that resentment alone would make peaceful reintegration difficult if not nearly impossible. Getting the slavery is constitutionally protected amendment would not have been able to pass.

Fredda is a European communist in a echo chamber