Have any sitting presidents (after their first term ended) run with a different VP? What the reason, did they win, and how did the VP that got dropped feel about it?

Having arguably the most power wielded by a single person ever, did Stalin ever attempt to step away from all that?

Both the Soviet Union and the Nazis took a keen, ideological interest in the production-side innovations of "Fordism," but to my knowledge only the Nazis parroted Henry Ford's statements on the benefits of automobility and made any attempt to promote mass automobile ownership. Why didn't the Soviet Union develop any program similar to the KdF-wagen (Volkswagen)?

Obviously James I was himself Scottish, but would the rest of English society be familiar with Thanes/Thegns? Would they know anything about the historic Kings Duncan or Macbeth?

Wouldn't it be more profitable if they harvested a self sustaining population?

Engels assisted in writing the communist manifesto, but he was not given aclaim on such a wide scale like marx, why?

From the Roman period onward, there are records of honorifics used to address emperors, popes, and so on: "Your Grace," "Your Holiness," etc. Do we have any records of similar honorifics used in Bronze Age Egypt or Mesopotamia?

(Just to be clear, I'm not asking about royal titles like "Lord of X, Y, Z," but about honorifics used in direct address.)

I understand the Persian empire was not at its peak, when Alexander invaded, but it was still extremely powerful and wealthy

What were some of the military innovations the Macedonians did

or did Alexander really single handily change the tide of battle to his side in every encounter with the Persians

or just pure luck?

.

According to Takehisa Udagawa,'Wako'(Japanese Pirate) was the first to obtain the matchlock gun technology from Malacca(now Malaysia)and later copied by Japanese people,while according to many sources,Portuguese was the first to introduced the matchlock gun to Japanese.So who was the first to introduced these technologies to Japanese people?

How did people explain the brief sting of static discharge after walking across a rug, before electricity was well understood? How did these explanations differ across cultures?

Right now I have a 1911 article (Irwin Neff, Boston Medical and Surgical Journal) in front of me arguing that alcoholism represented a crisis of public health rather than public morals, but I am curious to know more about the origins of this idea.

Also, if anyone could help place this in the greater context of the temperance movement, that would be cool to learn about too.

Good information from reliable sources seems quite hard to find. Any suggestions would be appreciated but book recommendations would be preferable. An in-depth look at subjects such as the "Dreamtime" and various ancestral spirits is what I'm looking for. Thanks.

Why does Germany exist in present day?

I wondering why the name "Germany" was still used after being reestablished. I understand why the Allies didn't keep Germany I guess. A little confused on that but after everything that had happened I wouldn't have thought Germany would have existed at least not in that sense.

This question may be confusing.

Between 1933 and 1945, Germans and other collaborators - fueled by a vitrol hate - committed mass scale atrocities toward Jews, disabled, etc. Just a few short years after the end of the war, the Germans appear remorseful of their actions. Besides losing the war, - what led to the end of the Nazi ideology, mentality. How did the seemingly brief and revolutionary change of mind and heart occur?

I'm just reflecting on how difficult it would be to change a trump fan into a Hillary Fan - wonder how it was done with an entire nation? context: I'm a curious non historian

I preface this with saying that I am aware of the Tuesday Trivia and Friday Free-for-All threads, but I will argue here that they don't fill the same purpose as the type of thread I am proposing.

Specifically, in order of what I think would be most popular, I'm proposing a bi-weekly thread where users submit questions that are:

• Example-seeking (ex: "What are some of the biggest political gaffes in recorded history?) Edit: Poll-type questions may fall under this category as well.
• What ifs (ex: What would have happened if Germany had been first to use a nuclear bomb, deploying it in Britain?)
• Recent History, using a 10-year rule (ex: What was the driving force behind the United States' push to invade Iraq in 2002?

Now, I can hear the clucking of tongues and the gentle harrumphing that may accompany the idea of encouraging such questions.

And, I do know that "Example-seeking" questions can be asked in the Friday-Free-For-All Threads. And Tuesday Trivia threads can be a source for them as well, but those are usually driven by one question at a time, as opposed to opening it up to all users. Though anyone can submit a question for the Tuesday Trivia threads, only one gets a moment to shine at a time.

In the past "What if" thread submitters have been encouraged to visit /r/HistoryWhatIf, but unfortunately that sub is almost entirely made up of question-askers and not question-answerers with a background in history.

Recent history might be a harder sell, but there are issues within the past 10-19 years that I believe have been researched to the satisfaction of the subreddit's usual high standards of quality.

The hope is that some of those questions that people are always itching to ask can get sequestered and answered in their own thread. The idealist in me hopes that this might actually reduce the mod workload of filtering out questions that otherwise would not be allowed. But the pragmatist in me thinks that that would not be feasible, short of directing people to those threads on the actual submission page for the sub.

I'm hoping to discuss this idea honestly and openly, which is why I am being transparent about the shortcomings that I see, but also about the positive effects of allowing a dedicated place for these type of questions.

Thanks for reading all this!

I'm just now reading an article on the history of the Canadian constitution, and the author mentions in passing that the first American Congress had proposed that inhabitants of Quebec join them in rebelling against Britain. The (what were to become) French Canadians did not join them, why not?

Thanks for your time everyone!

My understanding is that the Emperor Nero brought groups of "fans" to his artistic performances. These men applauded the Emperor and even roughed up members of the audience who were insufficiently enthusiastic.

Is this true? Did these "fans" have a name?