WI: Smith loses reelection, who is nominee in 1928?

The 1928 DNC was interesting in that it seemed pretty much everyone knew who would be the nominee. Al Smith, Governor of New York, was the only real credible and strong candidate running for the noimination. The dry rural populist wing that had once dominated the party made a feeble attempt for the nomination through Senator James Reed and Thomas Walsh, but they didn't get very far. The rest were Southern and very racist politicians that had no chance either. So it was that Al Smith easily became the nominee and charged forward to be annihilated at the ballot boxes. However, many credit him with changing the Democratic Party from that rural populist coalition to a more urban and progressive party, paving the way for FDR's New Deal Coalition.

But Al Smith also had some reasonably close races before he got the presidential nomination. In 1924, he had a tight match against Theodore Roosevelt Jr. and in 1926, he had a not really close but a reasonable race against businessman Ogden Mills. It's not hard to imagine 1924 going the other way, and while 1926 would be harder, a better candidate might have managed to flip New York red.

If Al Smith is out of the picture, who would the Democrats turn to in 1928? Perhaps McAdoo may give it another shot but the whole Klanbake thing crippled his political future and the Klan was far far weaker at this point. Maybe Walsh or Reed would have had a decent shot, but thy seemed like desperate attempts by the rural dry faction to stop Smith without much enthusiasm for them on their own. So who would the party turn to?

And what would the effect of Smith's defeat be on the move to an urban progressive party? Would the rural populists maintain their control for much longer for instance in time for 1932 to get one of theirs in the White House?
 
Thomas Walsh is an interesting possibility--a Catholic but a westerner, not as business-friendly as Smith, not connected with urban machines, and a "dry" on Prohibition. In short, someone acceptable to all McAdooites except hardcore anti-Catholics. But Hoover will win anyway.
 
Thomas Walsh is an interesting possibility--a Catholic but a westerner, not as business-friendly as Smith, not connected with urban machines, and a "dry" on Prohibition. In short, someone acceptable to all McAdooites except hardcore anti-Catholics. But Hoover will win anyway.
Once 1932 comes around, does a nominee Walsh mean the Democratic Party remains dry and rural and nominates someone accordingly? My understanding is the dry and rural wing was mostly gone after 1926.
 
Top