The best leaders that your country has never had?

sparky

Ad Honorem
Jan 2017
5,249
Sydney
Seward was beholded to the New York Irish vote ,
a big no no in a country rabid about Popery
Lincoln had dabbed in the populist nativist movement of the "Know nothing"
that gave him a groundswell of support in the swing states of the Midwest
 

AlpinLuke

Forum Staff
Oct 2011
27,251
Italy, Lago Maggiore
I was talking about the best leaders that your country has never had, though. So, basically, I was talking about people who actually had a realistic chance to become your country's leader and who you think would have done an extremely good job had he or she actually became your country's leader but who never actually managed to become your country's leader in real life.
Ops, I misunderstood ...

In this case there is an obvious historical figure to remind: Giuseppe Garibaldi.

General Commander of his own army during the independence wars, elected representative in the Italian Kingdom [and in the French Republic ...], so appreciated by President Lincoln that he offered him the command of a Northern Army in occasion of the American Civil War [but Garibaldi declined the offer] ... actually he never had the occasion to become Prime Minister of the Kingdom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist
Oct 2019
5
Athens
Meet Eleftherios Venizelos. A charismatic man who was responsible for doubling the territories of Greece. He was an advocate of the Megali idea(great idea). His plan was for Greece to cover all the territories where Greeks dwelled . Among them were what is now European Turkey and Western Turkey. He actually almost succeeded it. In 1919 the treaty of Sevres gave Greece most of what is now European Turkey except Istanbul/Constantinople and the area of Izmir/Smyrna in Anatolia.
He was about to make “Greece great again”. Unfortunately for him , he made a mistake and held elections in the midst of war. He wasn’t even elected an mp because of the oddities of the voting system( even though his party took most of the votes it came in second with a big margin). The new government isolated by the international community and with the lack of financial aid was soundly defeated and the Asia Minor catastrophe occurred .
After the Turkish war of independence, or Anatolian disaster( depending on which side someone sees it) Venizelos returned in power , but Greece was never the same again. By then it was a country full of impoverished Greek refugees , impoverished locals , a problematic economy and an unstable democratic regime. Does this remind you of modern Greece ? If yes , this is where the landslide of modern Greece began .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist
Oct 2019
17
America
Possibly--though his advanced age might have made it rather difficult. Being 84 years old at the time of his death, he was older than any US President was at the end of their term by more than six years!
Yeah, and considering that George Washington was a shoe in and the first election was only 1 year before he died George Washington would have to only have one term and Franklin would have to live to be 90 to have his full term, which would, going from Ben Franklin for a moment, stop the idea of a 2 term president from becoming the Norm with 1 term being the "limit".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

stevev

Ad Honorem
Apr 2017
3,572
Las Vegas, NV USA
Seward was beholded to the New York Irish vote ,
a big no no in a country rabid about Popery
Lincoln had dabbed in the populist nativist movement of the "Know nothing"
that gave him a groundswell of support in the swing states of the Midwest
It seems the Irish vote is would be a local issue. However I did allow that Seward's abolitionist stance would be a bigger issue. Neither Lincoln nor Seward were going to win any slave states. Seward, like Lincoln, would benefit from the splitting of the Democratic Party. Perhaps that alone would be enough for Seward to win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,423
SoCal
It seems the Irish vote is would be a local issue. However I did allow that Seward's abolitionist stance would be a bigger issue. Neither Lincoln nor Seward were going to win the slave states. Seward, like Lincoln, would benefit from the splitting of the Democratic Party. Perhaps that alone would be enough for Seward to win.
It probably would be enough for Seward to win considering that Lincoln won in 1860 in real life without even cracking 40.0% in the popular vote.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevev

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
22,423
SoCal
Yeah, and considering that George Washington was a shoe in and the first election was only 1 year before he died George Washington would have to only have one term and Franklin would have to live to be 90 to have his full term, which would, going from Ben Franklin for a moment, stop the idea of a 2 term president from becoming the Norm with 1 term being the "limit".
Or my homeboy GWash can serve two terms followed by a single term for Ben Franklin. Of course, he'd have been 95 by March 1801--which wasn't a completely impossible age to reach back then, but was probably nevertheless much harder to reach back then than it is to reach this age nowadays.

Interestingly enough, in Israel, Shimon Peres was Israel's President up to age 90 (almost 91); he died two years later at the age of 93. Of course, Israel's President is a purely ceremonial position, so yeah. Also, this guy was Vietnam's President until his death at the age of 91, but again, his position as President was purely ceremonial:


Robert Mugabe, on the other hand, had actual power in Zimbabwe right up to the age of 93, when he was ousted in a military coup.