AHC: Taft as one of the Greats

AHC:My challenge is to try and make President Taft regarded as one of the greatest presidents of the USA. I was reading up on him and he doesnt seem that bad a President, he busted more Trust than Roosevelt and kept the USA on the straight and narrow. His main problems were the fact he didnt want to be in office and was bit slow to act.

Bonus points if you gets to become Chief Justice of Supreme court.
 
World War I starts early and we get involved under Taft. After all, Wilson is one of the Greats in the American historical canon, despite the fact that he was an utter piece of shit as POTUS.

I agree that Taft is far underrated. IMO, he's one of the better Republican Presidents. Then again, his legacy in the Philippines goes unnoticed, pre-presidency.
 
1910 wasn't a particularly good Republican year, and the argument can be made that the tides were flowing in a Democratic direction by 1912, even aside from the split in the Republican party. In other words, Taft could still possibly lose in 1912 without Roosevelt's involvement. Of course, he'd have a much better chance than he historically did. I am not sure that him keeping us out of war would be enough for him to be remembered as a Great President. Sadly, generally speaking, Presidents are better remembered for how they dealt with catastrophic events rather than the extent to which they avoided them. If American was not involved in WWI, you can bet that there would be grumblings about the impact of that in some American political circles. After all, they won't and cannot know what the result of our involvement could have been, but they will be well aware of what the impact of our neutrality was in their history.

Besides, while Taft will certainly set the stage for continued American neutrality, if the war lasts through 1917 isn't he going to have to share the credit for that accomplishment with whoever wins in 1916, which probably will not be Taft.
 
Start in 1901, when commissioner Taft recommends the Philippines for statehood [in OTL, he recommended setting them on a path to eventual independence]. 1910 is probably too early to actually achieve this, but being instrumental in adding new states always makes Presidents look better.

Next, have his sense of responsibility trump his personal ambition during his first term. 6 of the 9 Supreme Court Justices died or retired during his term; only Washington has been able to reshape the Court so profoundly. Taft squandered the opportunity by appointing old and infirm men with spines of taffy so that he could dominate or replace them later. Had he stuck 6 Progressives on the SCOTUS, he'd be remembered as the father of a legal era, probably have a very positive effect on the economy as well as jurisprudence, and still has a fair shot at becoming Chief Justice later.

To give him a second term, just keep Roosevelt out of the race in 1912. This requires killing Roosevelt, but then, we've got all the use out of him we were likely to get anyway. (obligatory joke: this timeline unfortunately belongs in ASB, because the means of killing Theodore Roosevelt wouldn't be invented until 1951 or so by Edward Teller.)
 
Maybe don't kill Roosevelt but say have him get captured by rebellious natives on an expedition at an inconvenient time and by the time he escapes it is too late to enter the race
 
Start in 1901, when commissioner Taft recommends the Philippines for statehood [in OTL, he recommended setting them on a path to eventual independence]. 1910 is probably too early to actually achieve this, but being instrumental in adding new states always makes Presidents look better.

Whut?

I´d say Cuba would be a more realistic goal but even that...
 
Roosevelt is easy enough to kill. He was shot in the chest while running IOTL. Have him finish his speech, but by then it's too late.
 
Top