In 1944, Democratic Party bosses were insistent that Vice-President Henry Wallace be dumped from the presidential ticket. But FDR stuck to his guns, and pushed through Wallace's renomination and pelated party bosses via federal patronage. But what if FDR had left the bosses to their own devices, and Wallace had been dumped from the 1944 ticket? Who might've replaced Wallace? What impact would this decision have on US history?
 
It would had been better for everyone that Wallace would had been dropped. He practically worked as useful idiot of Stalin. Without him Stalin couldn't had got so much of Germany and Austria. Wallace too allowed Soviets capture North Japan and whole Korea. Probably Manchuria too wouldn't had ended hands of Commies where Mao founded People's Republic of China. And his presidency was real messy for United States.

I think that almost anyone Democrat would had been better president excluding these Southern racists.
 
It would had been better for everyone that Wallace would had been dropped. He practically worked as useful idiot of Stalin. Without him Stalin couldn't had got so much of Germany and Austria. Wallace too allowed Soviets capture North Japan and whole Korea. Probably Manchuria too wouldn't had ended hands of Commies where Mao founded People's Republic of China. And his presidency was real messy for United States.

I think that almost anyone Democrat would had been better president excluding these Southern racists.

Well, to be fair Stalin only took East Germany (and East Berlin). FDR would probably have done the some thing, although I doubt he would've taken the drastic step of giving the USSR reparations using German money.

Any Democrats in particular who you think would've done better than Wallace? How about Supreme Court Justice Bill Douglas, who challenged Wallace in the 1948 primaries? He was a civil libertarian but also a staunch opponent of Communism. I would've liked to see someone like him in charge during the Cold War.
 
@President_Lincoln Do you have any opinion on this? I definitely think that FDR would've won more decisively in 1944. IOTL he only got 50.1% of the vote, with 1.3% going to the Dixiecrats (who didn't win any states, but got some unfaithful electors in the South), and 48.2% going to Dewey. People gave credit for Dewey waving a surprisingly close race against Roosevelt. But that was only because of Wallace's "guru letters" scandal and the Dixiecrats splitting the vote. Without those factors FDR would've beaten Dewey with room to spare, probably preventing a comeback for Dewey in 1948.
 
President Wallace surely deserves his place in history for Americans alongside such greats as Washington and Lincoln.
He ensured peace and justice spread throughout the world. What a great man he was.
I cannot imagine any notion of how the world would look now without his wisdom. Of course, Stalin ensured Hitler was beaten but working with Stalin, Wallace brought about the end to the war with Japan, the end of colonism and guaranteed peace.
Roosevelt, never the man Wallace was, knew this and talk of him planning to dump Wallace I refuse to believe.
 
President Wallace surely deserves his place in history for Americans alongside such greats as Washington and Lincoln.
He ensured peace and justice spread throughout the world. What a great man he was.
I cannot imagine any notion of how the world would look now without his wisdom. Of course, Stalin ensured Hitler was beaten but working with Stalin, Wallace brought about the end to the war with Japan, the end of colonism and guaranteed peace.
Roosevelt, never the man Wallace was, knew this and talk of him planning to dump Wallace I refuse to believe.

Can't tell if that's drugs or Russian trolling, but the only Presidents Wallace mentioned against are Buchanan and Harding.
 
President Wallace surely deserves his place in history for Americans alongside such greats as Washington and Lincoln.
He ensured peace and justice spread throughout the world. What a great man he was.
I cannot imagine any notion of how the world would look now without his wisdom. Of course, Stalin ensured Hitler was beaten but working with Stalin, Wallace brought about the end to the war with Japan, the end of colonism and guaranteed peace.
Roosevelt, never the man Wallace was, knew this and talk of him planning to dump Wallace I refuse to believe.

Then how come he managed to lose every state in the Union in the 1948 election (under the Progressive Party ticket, with Glen Taylor as his running mate), after he was denied his own party's nomination (the reason why is below), to the Republican ticket of Thomas Dewey and Harold Stassen (not to mention the Democratic ticket of Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson (1) and the Dixiecrat ticket of Strom Thurmond and Beauford Jester)?

Please, he deserves his place in history as the worst 20th-century American president (he's even managed to top Harding and Buchanan in many polls to this day, and the latter let the Civil War start under his watch!!!). Of course, his becoming one of only a few presidents to lose his own party's nomination was inevitable after the revelation that he'd managed to appoint two Soviet spies (Alger Hiss and Harry Dexter White) as Secretary of State and Secretary of the Treasury and his subsequent firing of J. Edgar Hoover (not that that was any big loss, IMO, given what came out about Hoover); the only reason he escaped impeachment was because it was near the election, and many thought it was a waste of time...

At least Ethel Rosenberg hadn't come forward yet; otherwise, he'd have been run out of Washington on a rail (and many Republicans and Democrats wanted to do that anyway) for giving A-bomb information to the Soviets...

Oh, and such greats as Washington and Lincoln? Wallace doesn't deserve to be in the same universe as them...

(1) At least Truman and Johnson managed to restore their reputations later in life (Johnson through supporting high-speed rail for Texas); hell, even Wallace, towards the end of his life, apologized for supporting the Soviet Union...
 
Last edited:
Top