AHC: Nixon vs. Humphrey vs. (Henry A.) Wallace

A Nixon-Humphrey-Wallace presidential election where the Wallace is Henry A.? Not impossible:

Let's say there's no Korean War. In OTL, Wallace broke with the Progressive Party over the war. Let's say that without the war, Wallace stays a Progressive and runs as a third party candidate in 1952 and 1956.

Without the Korean War, Ike may not run in 1952. So the GOP chooses a Taft-Nixon ticket, which narrowly wins. (Why would Taft choose Nixon? Young, from an important state, a tough anti-communist, ideologically compatible with Taft but not an isolationist, etc.) Taft dies of cancer on schedule and Nixon becomes president.

So all we need is to have Humphrey get the Democratic nomination in 1956.

(There are all sorts of reasons this scenario is unlikely: for one thing, Wallace would probably have eventually broken with the Progressive Party even without the Korean War--he was getting increasingly concerned about the Communist Party's influence among the Progressives.)
 
I tried to visualize this scenario, but I really couldn't for a number of reasons:
  • For the Progressives to remain a potent force they would have needed to perform far better in '48, meaning they would have had to make real progress at attaining the (10,000,000) votes they were projecting to get in November. While that is quite improbable, I suppose an amount equivalent to around (5,000,000) could have been reached were the Progressives able to purge their Communist wing in favor of fusion with the Socialist Party, taking a slight anti-Soviet stance. Whether that is realistic or not I'm not sure given I know very little in regards to Henry Wallace and how he conducted his campaign, in detail at least.
  • Robert Taft, if he was to pick any man from California, I believe leaned heavily towards William Knowland. Knowland did have Presidential ambitions throughout his career so I can't see any obvious reason for him to decline such an offer, and should there have been, I don't see him as being inclined to push for the nomination of his inner-party rival.
    • Then again this might be a moot point, as a more successful Progressive Party might have drained away enough Democratic support as to allow the election of Thomas Dewey; that would set up for a Democratic President being elected in '52, maybe.
So maybe for a setup we could have this:
  • The Progressives are able to reach the (5,000,000) mark under Wallace and Taylor, resulting in Truman losing to Dewey and Halleck.
  • The Dewey Administration is not considered particularly successful, finding itself embroiled in the Korean War. Senator Brien McMahon manages to capture the Democratic nomination whilst running a particularly intense Pro-War campaign, picking Hubert Humphrey as his running-mate; there is some protest from the Southern delegations at the nomination but a walkout is prevented, a number of minor concessions being granted. Glen Taylor dominates in a field of minor characters in seeking the Progressive Party nomination, and rallies the doves who want the Korean conflict to come to an amicable close. The Progressives fail to repeat their past success however, garnering about half their previous margin and still left without any proper representation on the federal level besides Vito Marcantonio (Glen Taylor formally being a Democrat). McMahon is able to comfortably brush aside then Vice President Halleck and Senator Knowland, but dies two months into his term from cancer.
That would allow for some setting of a scene that could achieve what you are looking for, as Hubert Humphrey would be the incumbent President if only accidentally, Richard Nixon could have potentially eclipsed William Knowland in the California GOP and made a comfortable run at the Republican nomination in '56, and Henry Wallace could dust himself off in an effort to save what seems to be a Party in need of rejuvenation, lacking other candidates of national stature.

It's not a clean concept by any means but, well, it seemed the most suitable.
 
Top