Challenge: Socialist Party Popular In Rust Belt

How could the Socialist Party of the early 1900s become a major political force in the Rust Belt (Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania)? Any POD is acceptable.
 
How could the Socialist Party of the early 1900s become a major political force in the Rust Belt (Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Pennsylvania)? Any POD is acceptable.

I can think of several different PODs. I'll go through them chronologically.

1. McKinley isn't assassinated, keeping TR's pragmatic progressivism out of the White House, dwindling the chances for reform within the two major parties.

2. At the SP convention in 1912, have the left win control of the national executive, so that the Socialist Party follows the German model of party development.

3. Have the US remain neutral in WWI, thus negating the Red Scare. Socialist pick up a foothold in the House in 1918-20.

4. If WWI does occur, keep the Left-Wing from being expelled in 1919. The party organization, though beaten by the Red Scare, remains in tact, and picks up a foothold in the House when demobilization goes sour.

5. Have the SP's cooperation with the AFL in LaFollette's 1924 campaign continue, leading to the AFL's official endorsement. Socialist Party starts kicking northern Democrats out of their seats.

6. Failing all of that, have business as usual continue during the Great Depression. A conservative Dem wins in 1932, but conditions fail to improve sufficiently, and the government appears to be doing nothing. The Socialist Party has a decent shot in the 36 election and after.

7. Finally, have the CIO go left, and endorse a Socialist/Communist popular front in the 30s. Find a way to stop Taft-Hartley or things of the kind, and the coalition could stick.

In basically all of the scenarios, the SP only will become a major player after the start of the Great Depression. And, at any rate, given America's electoral system you're more than likely going to kill one of the major parties. Which one it is will depend on how the Republicans respond. They will have to work to beat the Democrats on their own turf in the South, or once the Socialist Party takes the Rust Belt and New York, it will be game over for the Republican Party
 

Hendryk

Banned
Finally, have the CIO go left, and endorse a Socialist/Communist popular front in the 30s.
Those are interesting ideas, but the concept of "popular front" doesn't have much relevance in a country where Communism is marginal as a political force. Popular fronts were set up where Communist Parties commanded the loyalty of a significant percentage of the working class.

I see US-style Socialism to be more of the Fabian school anyway.
 
Those are interesting ideas, but the concept of "popular front" doesn't have much relevance in a country where Communism is marginal as a political force. Popular fronts were set up where Communist Parties commanded the loyalty of a significant percentage of the working class.

I see US-style Socialism to be more of the Fabian school anyway.
It was something that Earl Browder tried to arrange IOTL anyway, under the Comintern's "popular front" policies.

I disagree about the Fabian assessment. The SPA was always much more spiritually connected with the German SPD, and largely adopted the SPD's methods of organization, as opposed to the Fabianism and Labourism of Britain. In 1912, the SPA tried to switch to the British route, but ultimately that ended up leading to the party's disastrous split in 1919.
 
As Jello Biafra has stated, you really have to make sure that Teddy Roosevelt is out of the White House and that progressivism becomes mainstream. McKinley's own successor is definitely going to be a conservative, and the marginalization of even moderate progressivism is going to send otherwise progressive voters into the open arms of the Socialists.

IMHO, if it comes down to it and we see the disintegration of one of the two major political parties, the Republicans are probably going to avoid the chopping block, for two reasons: first and foremost, the GOP is much better organized than the Democrats ever have been, even outside the South, and this owes to their key base (the business community) and two, is exactly because of their base. Big Business and the GOP go together like peas and carrots. The Democrats will probably fracture apart as Southern whites bleed into the GOP and African-American voters desert the GOP for the Socialists.
 

MacCaulay

Banned
Well, how did the Social Credit movement gain such traction at this time in Canada? Those were similar people in similar circumstances, but for some reason they gravitated to a much different idea than did the majority of their midwestern neighbours south of the parallel.
 
Mac: They gained traction because the incumbent Farmers' Party (rural populist) premier was caught having an affair with his secretary. Underlying economic conditions were starting to weaken, and Bill Aberhart rode a wave of what would now be called Religious Right sentiment to the Alberta Premier's office.
 
Well, how did the Social Credit movement gain such traction at this time in Canada? Those were similar people in similar circumstances, but for some reason they gravitated to a much different idea than did the majority of their midwestern neighbours south of the parallel.
1) Social Credit in Canada was certainly populist, but pretty conservative, rather than socialist.

2) the settlement of the Canadian west was rather different from the settlement of the American west. In part, it's a matter of the law being there before settlement in Canada, rather than after. In part, it's a different attitude to Indians. (Canada didn't treat them BETTER, just more politely - so there weren't settler/Indian conflicts in the same way.) In any case, the US had this 'rugged individual frontiersman' meme, and Canada was different. Prairie Socialism (Yay CCF) grew out of farmers working together to help each other, threshing gangs, barn raisings, etc., etc.
 
1) Social Credit in Canada was certainly populist, but pretty conservative, rather than socialist.

2) the settlement of the Canadian west was rather different from the settlement of the American west. In part, it's a matter of the law being there before settlement in Canada, rather than after. In part, it's a different attitude to Indians. (Canada didn't treat them BETTER, just more politely - so there weren't settler/Indian conflicts in the same way.) In any case, the US had this 'rugged individual frontiersman' meme, and Canada was different. Prairie Socialism (Yay CCF) grew out of farmers working together to help each other, threshing gangs, barn raisings, etc., etc.

That's not to say that those sorts of communitarian impluses didn't grow in the American praries. And it did show: IOTL, the Socialist Party had significant support in Montana, the Dakotas, Missouri and Oklahoma.
 
Top