Hoover-Lindbergh Republican ticket nominated and elected in November 1940

rainsfall

Banned
Of course, Herbert Hoover could never have been elected President again, considering his very poor handling of the Great Depression during his Presidency.

But suppose Calvin Coolidge had decided to run for a third term in 1928, with butterflies resulting in Ottinger defeating FDR in the race for NY GovernorWith Coolidge's handling of the Great Depression being even worse than Hoover's, the Democrats decide to nominate a right-wing reactionary in 1932 following a deadlocked Convention; Bennett Champ Clark, Henry Skillman Breckinridge, William H. Murray and James A. Reed come to mind. The Democrats manage to get re-elected in 1936, but tax hikes and spending cuts lead to the 1937-1938 Recession turning into a Second Great Depression, and the GOP seizing back control of both houses of Congress in 1938.

By 1940, it is clear that the Republicans are going to win the next general election, but the Convention deadlocks once again. (Willkie doesn't run as he remains a Democrat without the TVA, or alternatively dies earlier). The Convention then turns to former Secretary of Commerce and Governor of California Herbert Hoover as a dark horse candidate, with aviator Charles A. Lindbergh as his running mate. The GOP ticket then goes on to win in November...
 
Last edited:

rainsfall

Banned
P.S. Dystopian What-If: A left-wing Jew proceeds to immediately assassinate Hoover, leaving the POTUS in the middle of World War II as none other than famously anti-leftist and white supremacist Charles A. Lindbergh...
 

rainsfall

Banned
Would the Dems have been that daft during the Depression?
Murray and Reed were fairly serious candidates for the nomination in 1932. In the absence of a clear frontrunner like FDR, stranger things have happened in deadlocked conventions.
 
Murray and Reed were fairly serious candidates for the nomination in 1932. In the absence of a clear frontrunner like FDR, stranger things have happened in deadlocked conventions.
No, they weren't. Reed had retired in 1929, Murray didn't win any primary. Clark and Breckinridge didn't hold any major office.

If FDR wouldn't have made it, in all probability you will see President Garner. And while he was more conservative than FDR on certain issues, he wasn't a Hoover or a Coolidge.
 

rainsfall

Banned
No, they weren't. Reed had retired in 1929, Murray didn't win any primary. Clark and Breckinridge didn't hold any major office.

Murray won the same number of primaries as Garner! As for Reed, remember that Davis won the nomination in 1924 without winning a *single* primary: stranger things have happened in deadlocked conventions before. Clark was a Senator on the powerful Foreign Affairs Committee and the son of Speaker Champ Clark to boot: TR Jr., Robert Taft and FDR JR. could all have become Presidents under marginally different circumstances. If FDR loses in 1928 against Ottinger, the Democrats would probably have blamed FDR's loss on his progressivism and instead decided that they had to win with a conservative like Breckinridge in 1930 or 1932...
If FDR wouldn't have made it, in all probability you will see President Garner. And while he was more conservative than FDR on certain issues, he wasn't a Hoover or a Coolidge.
Garner is more likely than Smith, who was despised by the South for his Catholicism, but he still has his visible weaknesses: John L. Lewis hates Garner, and Garner is even more anti-labor and racist than James F. Byrnes.
 

marktaha

Banned
How many would have bolted to Norman Thomas-or would there have been a Progressive third party led by Wheeler, Borah or La Follwette jr-or even Huey Long?
 

rainsfall

Banned
How many would have bolted to Norman Thomas-or would there have been a Progressive third party led by Wheeler, Borah or La Follwette jr-or even Huey Long?
Whether or not the Progressives have a shot at winning really depends on their level of ballot access across the states, something which Henry Wallace struggled with in 1948...
 

marktaha

Banned
Whether or not the Progressives have a shot at winning really depends on their level of ballot access across the states, something which Henry Wallace struggled with in 1948...
Wallace was a Communist dupe. La Follette snr got 16% in preDepression 1924.
 
Top