With the Democrats in decline, the anti-Republican voters need to find someone to vote for.Interesting to see Farmer-Labor rising up here. Good work.
With the Democrats in decline, the anti-Republican voters need to find someone to vote for.Interesting to see Farmer-Labor rising up here. Good work.
Also, I needed the Farmer-Laborers and Progressives to split the vote, or else the Democrats would rebound like OTL and there wouldn't be any major changes.With the Democrats in decline, the anti-Republican voters need to find someone to vote for.
It happened OTL, but didn't get that many votes.A New York fusion of Socialists and Farmer Labor? Good signs for a left alternative in the future...
Yeah. In ATL, its different.It happened OTL, but didn't get that many votes.
Unionist is mostly good, but it invokes images of the Civil War political system.
In 1924, the Federated Farmer-Labor Party (FF-LP) sought to nominate La Follette as its candidate. The FF-LP sought to unite all progressive parties into a single national Labor Party.
However, after a bitter convention in 1923, the Communist-controlled Workers Party gained control of the national organization's structure. Just prior to its 1924 convention in St. Paul, La Follette denounced the Communists and refused to be considered for the FF-LP endorsement. With La Follette's snub, the FF-LP disintegrated, leaving only the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party.
He's going to be disliked by his own party for vetoing that bill since it was overridden. Some might call him too conservative and want a middle of the roader, perhaps?
I doubt they'd prefer Robert LaFollette's Progressivism, but they might consider trying to push for someone other than Harding. Then again, even in 1924 it had been 40 years since a sitting President was denied the renomination, and Arthur had almost been chosen anyway even when he wouldn't push for it, so it might be hard for the GOP to nominate anyone else.
So, I guess it will be Harding anyway. though this Farmer-Labor Party is interesting, I wonder if LaFollette gets a lot more support by combining forces with them.
Wow, you did an amazing job predicting a lot of things I have planned for this next election. However, no Socialist and Farmer-Labor merger has taken place yet, and indeed if anything the Farmer-Labor Party will have less revolutionary socialists since Debs' better 1920 campaign has revived the Socialist Party compared to OTL. Meanwhile, the Farmer-Labor Party is doing a lot better OTL, giving it more mainstream support and sidelining the most radicals. Plus, there's a reason why a left alternative will be needed in the near future...Robert LaFollette was already set on making a third-party run in '24, which left California Governor Hiram Johnson as the Progressive standard bearer. Johnson would cruise through the primaries that were held except maybe those in the Northeast (even there though he would have been competitive) which would likely have netted him more delegates than Harding; to expand on that point, Hiram Johnson would be far from a majority, but you would have more than a few favorite sons controlling their own delegations and refusing to back either Johnson or Harding, waiting to have their own name introduced (William Sproul, Frank Lowden, Nicholas Murray, Pierre Du Pont, etc). Calvin Coolidge would be put forward and be neck and neck with Johnson in terms of delegate support until Harding inevitably withdrew (with scandals of this size only the most conservative delegates would support him), at which point the nomination would most likely go to Coolidge.
Considering the stronger voice of the Progressives here the party bosses would have attempted to placate them in regards to the second-spot, while also making sure said figure was willing to represent some of their pet interests. Herbert Hoover seems to fit this bill to a T and, contrary to OTL, would almost certainly have the support at the convention to be nominated (especially one that seems liable to go on for multiple ballots).
As stated above LaFollette did not want to work with the Farmer-Labor party or receive its endorsement because of the participation of the Communists within it. If the Communists are intertwined with the party organization as they were in OTL then LaFollette is going to distance himself and refuse to run under its banner; with the influx of Socialists into the Farmer-Labor party that is actually going to make the ejection of the Communists even less likely, and very likely will results in the nomination of two competing Progressive tickets (LaFollette on one side, William Foster possibly on the other).
The Farmer-Labor party is liable to collapse in this election then with the taint of Communism associated with it, much like it did in OTL; the only difference is that it is liable to bring the Socialists down with it given that they will have lost all ballot access and their party organization will have been eliminated after two and a half decades of construction and maintenance.
That doesn't leave many choices for a Left alternative come '28, and most of the Republican Progressives would have united behind either Johnson or Hoover by then, defanging whatever would be left of the Progressive Party from '24 (if you could call it a party; it was almost exclusively a vehicle for LaFollette's Presidential run. Given the loss of influence Progressives experienced in '12 following Roosevelt's bolt, LaFollette was determined to keep Progressives in the Republican party and motioned for them to stay to the primary process rather than running third-party in the general).
Wow, you did an amazing job predicting a lot of things I have planned for this next election. However, no Socialist and Farmer-Labor merger has taken place yet, and indeed if anything the Farmer-Labor Party will have less revolutionary socialists since Debs' better 1920 campaign has revived the Socialist Party compared to OTL. Meanwhile, the Farmer-Labor Party is doing a lot better OTL, giving it more mainstream support and sidelining the most radicals. Plus, there's a reason why a left alternative will be needed in the near future...
Yeah. In ATL, its different.
The Republican leaders feared that if they were seen as the party for the black man, all of their progress in winning seats in the South would be instantly undone.
However, I stand by my point that the Socialists will be less likely to kick out the Communists when the Federated Farmer-Labor Party, or its substitute, comes about.
The Republicans certainly are willing to throw the blacks under the bus to gain Southern seats, as seen by their abandonment of any attempt to stop lynching. The Democrats won't become the party of Civil Rights any time soon though, since in their current state if the South flips that's the end of the Democratic Party...But that would not have been possible in the 1920s or 1930s. Many Republicans (including some "progressives" like Roosevelt) accepted Jim Crow and white supremacy in the South. If the Solid South broke down in the 1920s, the Republican Party could acquire and accept a wing of Dixublicans. If the national Democrats embrace civil rights, the entire white supremacist South could flip, dragging the Republican Party into the swamp, making them the 20th century equivalent of the Doughfaces.