You would have to make the government a lot less stable and the international presence a lot less. So let’s go with this - Taft and TR patch things up before 1912. Not sure how, but the reason TR ran in 1912 was because he thought Taft was doing a shitty job and his friendship with the man turned to hatred.
Avert that and you avert Wilson. Put in leaders who don’t want to get involved in WWI - the equivalent of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade goes over instead. The survivors tell horrific tales, and America collectively decides, the hell with that. It continues to stay isolationist, up to and including possible conflict in the Pacific.
So without American involvement in WWII, the Nazis still get the shit kicked out of them by the Russians, but Japan spreads them too thin, and the USSR collapses, leaving a huge void in Eurasia. The UK can’t afford to hang onto its colonies and keeps only a few, and communism dies out in most of the world. As such, no Cold War and no taboo against communism in America. The economy eventually recovers.
Civil Rights takes an uglier turn and sows a lot of distrust between the races as well as different economic classes. Most whites who support the movement figure out they have little in common with many opponents other than race.
So assuming trickle-down becomes a thing, the backlash to it happens in the 2000s during a severe economic downturn. Minorities and disaffected whites overthrow the government and institute communism, either unaware of the brutality of Stalin and his ilk or deciding it’s better than what they had.