AET: 1944, WWII Ends a Year Early

Say WWII ended with a victory for the allies in early 1944 (both Europe and Japan) -- note, this thread is putting aside the question of how,* instead focusing on how the US Presidential Election of that year would play out. Would FDR run for a fourth term without an ongoing war? And if not who would the Democrats nominate instead -- for that matter, is Dewey still the GOP frontrunner? Then how does the general play out?

*reason being that I've got an ASB in mind
 
I'm not sure you really can separate the "how" entirely from the "what". Once the war is over, the party that held the reins of power (no matter which) is going to have to answer for its conduct.

If the "how" involves mass use of chemical weapons (just as an example), you can probably count on a larger than OTL anti-war movement.

If the war ended with a negotiated settlement, you can probably look forward to a political lynch mob chasing down the party 'too spineless to see The War through to a definite end!! REMEMBER PEARL HARBOR!!!"'.

Wasn't it Bob Hope who, during one of his Korean War shows, said something along the lines of "Look at all those Republicans!" while looking over his audience? It was funny, but it had a grain of truth in it...the Democratic party paid for the Korean War...and if World War II comes to anything *but* a suitably final end, whatever party ran the show will pay in the next election.
 
I don't think FDR runs ITTL. I don't know who wins the nomination. As for the how, we cut off Japan's oil supply and we keep France in the war. wWith France in the war North Africa falls earlier.tThe invasion of Italy happens in November 1942. tThen DDay happens in 1943 and Germany surrenders in 1944.
 
I'm not sure you really can separate the "how" entirely from the "what".

Then to answer your concerns (without getting into the ASB details):
*no (additional) war crimes are committed to bring about the peace; in fact there have been far fewer deaths than OTL
*the militaries of Japan, Germany, and Italy -- their navies, air forces, and forces abroad -- are fully neutralized
*the Axis leaders are captured and tried by the Allies (though the full occupations may or may not still happen, that details unclear to me as yet)

I don't think FDR runs ITTL. I don't know who wins the nomination.

I agree FDR's unlikely to run; I'm also pretty certain Harry Truman won't be nominated for his job. Right now, the frontrunner looks to be VP Wallace.
 
You have to effectively offer one party Japan or Germany a good deal to surrender with conditions. Today the answer is easy do it to Japan as they viewed are far better then Germany at least to people today. But, to go back to WW2 offering such terms to Japan in 1943/44 was politically impossible as Japan was hated far more then Germany at the time.

Germany is offered a good deal to surrender instead of Unconditional Surrender and Plan Morgenthau. Hitler refuses and gets overthrown by people willing to take what they can get in mid 1943. The USSR realizes they can't fight on in a one front war in Europe and has to make peace as well.

Stalin is still going to try to grab what he can from Japan in Asia even with the U.S. not agreeing with them to go to war a certain number of days after Germany surrenders. That combined with the U.S. hitting Japan with everything it has leads to a surrender with slightly better conditions for Japan then OTL, but they are still occupied.
 
Last edited:
So, bottom line, Germany gets a negotiated peace (absent Hitler), and Japan gets occupied, with the Soviets holding a much smaller sphere of influence at the end? Sounds about right for what I have in mind...
 
So, bottom line, Germany gets a negotiated peace (absent Hitler), and Japan gets occupied, with the Soviets holding a much smaller sphere of influence at the end? Sounds about right for what I have in mind...

Yes, that sounds rights for a politically feasible way to end the war in the time frame set out.
 
I agree FDR probably doesn't run here.

I'm not sure Wallace would come close to getting the nomination-considering the powers that be prevented him from running for VP IOTL.Truman isn't a likely prospect either-the bosses had enough trouble persuading him to run with FDR as it is.

Not sure who'd we ssee as the Dem nominee, but my guess is that Alman Barkley would have a good chance of being nominated. I still think it's more than likely that Dewey ends up the GOP nominee, though their's a chance that Taft could win the nod with a Return To Normalcy style message.

Assuming Barkley is the Dem nominee, I say he wins comfortably over Taft, though a Barkley/Dewey match-up will be closer and could go either way (though I do think Barkley is probably still the winner).
 
Top