1948: Thomas Dewey refuses to accept defeat

He claims that Democratic machines in Chicago and Cleveland stole Illinois and Ohio, and that unnaturalized immigrants, especially Mexicans, illegally voted in California. (See http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/pres/1948.txt for the extreme closeness of these three states, which would have given Dewey a majority in the Electoral College.)

(This is of course about 1948 and is in no way inspired by any recent events, so no discussion of contemporary politics, please!)
 
He claims that Democratic machines in Chicago and Cleveland stole Illinois and Ohio, and that unnaturalized immigrants, especially Mexicans, illegally voted in California. (See http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/pres/1948.txt for the extreme closeness of these three states, which would have given Dewey a majority in the Electoral College.)

(This is of course about 1948 and is in no way inspired by any recent events, so no discussion of contemporary politics, please!)

If you think this implausible, imagine the three states being even closer than in OTL. I'm not quire sure what could make California closer but in the case of Illinois and Ohio, it is easy: full ballot access for Henry Wallace. (Wallace was not on the ballot at all in Illinois and in Ohio "The Progressive electors were on the ballot without party designation, and a citizen wishing to cast his vote for Henry A. Wallace was faced with the necessity of making twenty-five separate X's--one before each name." https://groups.google.com/d/msg/soc.history.what-if/qjXw_dpE0uk/WuJattXpId8J) Anyway, let's say full ballot access lets Dewey carry Illinois and shaves Truman's margin in Ohio to something like 700 instead of 7,000. Would Dewey be as quick to concede as he was in OTL, especially if for some reason California were even closer than in OTL?
 
Last edited:
Nixon conceded defeat in 1960 when he lost despite it being shady. However this scenario also has the polls getting it wrong and so adding to the rigged election element.
 
Nixon conceded defeat in 1960 when he lost despite it being shady.

Nixon needed to overturn BOTH Illinois AND Texas, and Texas was a one party state to the point that de facto no legal avenue for a recount or appeal existed.

Basically things would have to be so bad and well documented that the federal government HAD to intervene, and that's no easy thing in 1960, something like voters being turned away en masse at gunpoint - caught on film.
 
He claims that Democratic machines in Chicago and Cleveland stole Illinois and Ohio, and that unnaturalized immigrants, especially Mexicans, illegally voted in California. (See http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/pres/1948.txt for the extreme closeness of these three states, which would have given Dewey a majority in the Electoral College.)

(This is of course about 1948 and is in no way inspired by any recent events, so no discussion of contemporary politics, please!)

As I noted in another forum, this would be unlikely, because the consensus after the election was that it had been Dewey's election to win, but he fumbled it. A post-election claim of fraud would be look too much like a "bad loser" trying to dodge the consequences of his own failure.
 
Top