Alternate Republican nominees in 1920

We've had several threads discussing alternate Republican candidates in 1920, and it seemed time the thread was renewed. Any possibilities are open to discussion, but I'm focusing on these two.

Charles Evans Hughes - Many Republicans wanted to give Hughes another chance in 1920, but Hughes refused to be considered for the nomination after his daughter Helen died of tuberculosis. If she doesn't die, I think Hughes could receive the nomination.

William Cameron Sproul - The governor of Pennsylvania had been gaining support at Lowden's expense before the convention. I'm not sure how likely Sproul being nominated is, as Pennsylvania was a solidly Republican state for the most part.
 
Last edited:
Philander C. Knox - Taft's Secretary of State was a senator for Pennsylvania in 1920, and a member of the "Old Guard", but ot seems he was still viewed as a possible compromise candidate. Boies Penrose supporting Knox over Sproul had a definite effect on the latter's candidacy. Hiram Johnson not releasing his delegates to his friend Knox was a surprise to many, though I don't think it impossible Johnson could have chosen to do so.

Henry J. Allen - I can't find much information on the governor of Kansas, but he did support Mussolini's industrial court legislation, passing similar laws in Kansas.
 

trajen777

Banned
From reading teddy was a shoe in in 20. He died in 19 writing a speech. Take away the river of doubt and he would be a lock ..
 
From reading teddy was a shoe in in 20. He died in 19 writing a speech. Take away the river of doubt and he would be a lock ..
It would be interesting seeing TR run in 1920, even if he could die before completing his term. I think a conservative like Harding could get the VP nomination.
 

trajen777

Banned
Yep -- the 12 campaign was a disaster for the Republicans -- the 16 was a compromise between the Progressive and Conser candidate for the Rep (Hughes) -- and in 20 the party was back to a more united party and TR was a shoe in. Interesting Wilson wanted to run for a 3rd term but was denied by the Dems ---
 
Philander C. Knox - Taft's Secretary of State was a senator for Pennsylvania in 1920, and a member of the "Old Guard", but ot seems he was still viewed as a possible compromise candidate. Boies Penrose supporting Knox over Sproul had a definite effect on the latter's candidacy. Hiram Johnson not releasing his delegates to his friend Knox was a surprise to many, though I don't think it impossible Johnson could have chosen to do so.

Henry J. Allen - I can't find much information on the governor of Kansas, but he did support Mussolini's industrial court legislation, passing similar laws in Kansas.

If Knox got the nomination--and Boies Penrose championed the idea--likely a more progressive candidate would have been Knox' running mate. The near-miss VP candidate of 1920 IOTL, Irvine Lenroot, comes to mind. Had that been the case, Lenroot would have become president sometime in 1921, assuming Knox' health continued as it did IOTL: Knox died on 12 October 1921. By the way, that would have made the Knox presidency the third briefest in US history, behind William Henry Harrison and James Garfield.

If somehow William Sproul had gotten the nomination, Penrose notwithstanding, you'd have (as best I can tell) a moderate-to-progressive candidate. That might have paved the way for Calvin Coolidge as vice president--but if that had happened, it seems unlikely that Coolidge would ever have had the presidency for more than a brief caretaker period if that. Note that Sproul died on 21 March 1928, meaning that Coolidge would have been president for perhaps four months when the convention rolled around. That suggests to me that a more dynamic candidate (say, Charles Dawes) wold have gotten the 1928 GOP nomination over Coolidge.
 
If Knox got the nomination--and Boies Penrose championed the idea--likely a more progressive candidate would have been Knox' running mate. The near-miss VP candidate of 1920 IOTL, Irvine Lenroot, comes to mind.

But the delegates decisively rejected Lenroot in favor of Coolidge in OTL--is there any particular reason to think they would have approved him simply because he would be Knox's running mate rather than Harding's? The dislike of Wisconsin--and the dislike of the way that a "senatorial oligarchy" was supposedly trying to dictate both the presidential and vice-presidential nominations--would presumably still be there.

In any event, there were at least two objections to Knox. First, he (like Johnson) was too much of an Irreconcilable on the League issue--a majority of Americans probably still wanted some sort of League, if not Wilson's; the vagueness of the GOP platform reflected this. [1] Someone like Harding who could talk vaguely about an association of nations might be a stronger candidate. Second, he was from a very safe GOP state (PA had not vote for a Democratic presidential candidate since her own James Buchanan).

[1] "The Republican party stands for agreement among the nations to preserve the peace of the world. We believe that such an international association must be based upon international justice, and must provide methods which shall maintain the rule of public right by the development of law and the decision of impartial courts, and which shall secure instant and general international conference whenever peace shall be threatened by political action, so that the nations pledged to do and insist upon what is just and fair may exercise their influence and power for the prevention of war.

"We believe that all this can be done without the compromise of national independence, without depriving the people of the United States in advance of the right to determine for themselves what is just and fair when the occasion arises, and without involving them as participants and not as peacemakers in a multitude of quarrels, the merits of which they are unable to judge..." https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/republican-party-platform-1920
 
How about Nicholas Murray Butler? On the first ballot, he got more votes than Harding! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1920_Republican_National_Convention

Despite his reputation as an internationalist, Butler really wasn't too far out of the mainstream of the Republican Party on foreign policy in 1920. His position was similar to that of Root and Taft, believing that Article X was wrong, and that the growth of law through a world court was a better path to peace, and signing the "statement of the 31" that had been drafted by Root. https://books.google.com/books?id=j0ZKDK4Bg8kC&pg=PA393

Of course there was the "do we really want another university president in the White House?" problem.

(My real interest in him is in seeing a GOP president in the 1920's who was vehemently anti-Prohibition...)
 
Hadn't thought about Butler. He could have been the anti-Wilson university president, and the anti-prohibition slant is fascinating: maybe play up the unenforceable / waste of tax dollars aspects and get repeal before the 1924 election?
 
Hadn't thought about Butler. He could have been the anti-Wilson university president, and the anti-prohibition slant is fascinating: maybe play up the unenforceable / waste of tax dollars aspects and get repeal before the 1924 election?

Probably too soon to go that far.

OTOH. had a Republican POTUS, rather than the hated Wilson, vetoed the Volstead Act, it is at least conceivable that he could have persuaded enough Republicans to sustain his veto.

No doubt the Act would eventually have passed in some form, but perhaps in a milder one, allowing some beers and wines to pass muster. This might have had the ironic effect of an anti-Prohibition POTUS enabling Prohibition to go on longer.
 
If the Republicans run a Hughes-Harding ticket in 1920 (and presumably 1924 as well), could Harding's relations with women (Nan Britton in particular) turn into a scandal? I doubt the Ohio Gang would be a problem ITTL with Harding only being VP, so that's dealt with.
 
If the Republicans run a Hughes-Harding ticket in 1920 (and presumably 1924 as well), could Harding's relations with women (Nan Britton in particular) turn into a scandal? I doubt the Ohio Gang would be a problem ITTL with Harding only being VP, so that's dealt with.

I doubt that many people would pay attention to VP Harding. If they did, I'm sure that Harding would (involuntarily) step away from the 1924 ticket in favor of someone else.

If elected in 1920, I don't see why Hughes wouldn't serve two full terms from 1921-1929. Obviously, his administration would'n't have the corruption of Harding's. What else might Hughes handle differently?
 
Top