A few hundred votes change in Brooklyn - Do they grow closer or further apart?

What result in the future if Brooklyn doesn't merge into NYC

  • They do anyway in first third of 20th century, too much of a draw

    Votes: 6 54.5%
  • They do during the Depression, poverty makes them feel the need

    Votes: 1 9.1%
  • They do in latter half of 20th century, just due to natural growing closer

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • They never merge but the cities draw much closer, have lots of co-operation

    Votes: 3 27.3%
  • Brooklyn grows apart from NYC with its own identity, draws different busiensses, etc.

    Votes: 1 9.1%
  • Other (specify)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    11
The 1894 vote to merge the boroughs of New York did very well - over 55% approval in one, over 60% in 3 major ones - but it passed by only a few hundred votes in Brooklyn.

Let's say those votes change for whatever reason. Some story of corruption with Tammany Hall ("We're *never* going to let that corrupt machine dominate us - we can build our own" :) ), just something dumb said by one campaigner or a memorable quote by another - a number of thigns could change several hundred votes.

With it being that close, do others try again? From what the Wiki says, Progressives were the main ones pushing for it; but would they necessarily try again in years to come or give up? And, would the cities draw closer together anyway, or drift apart?

Brooklyn is mostly residential, I think - it may have been then, too. It might not have a lot of tax revenue from businesses; but it might from small ones, mom and pop stores and the like. Whether that could become too much for the city of Brooklyn to handle after a while, I don't know.

But, this means a lot of people would still be going to work in NYC. Would there be some element of co-operation that develops to draw them closer together, anyway? Maybe even city leaders in New York saying, "The problem was the campaign - maybe we were too forceful? We'll let them come to us when they're ready?" (Depending on the POD that causes the votes to shift, that could be very plausible - a leader makes it sound like New York wants to steal the Brooklyn identity, and suddenly the vote turns to be 52% opposed to the merger where they thought they had it in the bag, and whoever the person was who gave that speech might be sweeping streets instead of the high end job he had.)

Or, would it drive them further apart. This Brexit (well, they're never *in* New York here to exit it, but I couldn't resist the name) might cement the individual identity of the city and cause them to try to double down on remaining free from New York influence. Perhaps they push for expanded shipyards so commerce can become more of a draw. Perhaps tyhey try to lure new industries there as they sprout up.

P.S.: I finally saw where tags can be included at first. :)
 
I don't want to rain on your parade, and I think it's definitely worth investigating what would happen in non-Consolidation scenarios, but I do want to note that it's very possible that even if the plebiscite failed, Albany would glom Brooklyn onto NYC anyway. Certainly no one had asked the southern bits of Westchester County before they became the Bronx. Now, one of the largest cities in the country is not a few towns that no one cares about, but there was a lot of will for the merger both in the New York state government and in Brooklyn, and I don't think that 50.1% against Consolidation would scupper the project; Albany would just say "it was a plebiscite of the entire population to be merged, and they all said yes!" Or a recount would miraculously turn out the other way.

Worst case, they'd do as you say and merge the other 4 and then do another referendum a couple years later, and "do it right" this time.
 
My hope, as a Brooklynite, would be to see Brooklyn as a major city in the US. The hope would be the Brooklyn Dodgers would end up staying.
 
One other thing I was just looking at too. Brooklyn not joining probably doesn't impact the 1897 New York mayoral race, but But Seth Lowe can't run if Brooklyn isn't in New York City. Does William Hearst run 4 years early? Does Charles Evans Hughes try as a fusion candidate?

Or, does Boss Croker get the blame and Francis Murphy becomes the head of Tammany hall a couple years early? Definitely, I think, if someone from Tammany hall made the blunder to turn those votes. And probably they would otherwise anyway. Murphy was able to convince enough people that Tammany hall had to get out of the police and crime businesses in our time line a few years later. He could easily do so earlier, although I'm not exactly sure how their elections went he could definitely make good arguments that the key to bringing Brooklyn in is for Tammany hall to go reformist.
 
Top