We know what on December 21th 1945 Dwight D Enishower died several months after World War II from a heart attack at his Kansas home

And we all know that George Patton would go on and beat President Truman in 1948 and Thomas Dewey in a electoral college tie.

What would of happened if Patton died instead of Enishower on that day?
 

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
I know Eisenhower was deeply interested in infrastructure, such as a national highway system not dissimilar to the AutoBahn, so he might be involved with that.

Very much doubt he'd be involved in politics to the same extent Patton was. After all, in '43 he was visited by a political and it was suggested that he should run for President. He kicked him out and wrote that no man serving as Army Chief of Staff should desire Political Office.

That said, there is that story from 1945 where Truman told Eisenhower that, if he wanted, he'd help him run and win in '48.
 
I know Eisenhower was deeply interested in infrastructure, such as a national highway system not dissimilar to the AutoBahn, so he might be involved with that.

Very much doubt he'd be involved in politics to the same extent Patton was. After all, in '43 he was visited by a political and it was suggested that he should run for President. He kicked him out and wrote that no man serving as Army Chief of Staff should desire Political Office.

That said, there is that story from 1945 where Truman told Eisenhower that, if he wanted, he'd help him run and win in '48.
Well Patton is the reason why there wasn't a president from the two party system untill Reagan in 1976.
 
Yeah some people don't like Patton because he almost started war with Russia.
"Almost". He would have if he had his way. As it was, over three dozen aircraft went down during the Berlin Airlift less than a week after Patton took office, and only the Russians' backing down prevented WWIII. He tried again with the nuking of Sinuiju, Manpo, and Hyesan during the Korean War.
 
Well, Attorney General Nixon wouldn't have had the chance to screw up as badly as he did during Patton's second term, that's for sure. What was Patton thinking when he put someone so young and inexperienced in his cabinet, anyway?

If Sparkman and Kennedy still wound up on the same ticket in '57, do you think they would've had a chance?

OOC:It means double blind so yeah
OOC: I think what they meant to say was "Oh, it's that kind of Double Blind where one person makes up vast swaths of it on their own"
 

shiftygiant

Gone Fishin'
OOC:
OOC: I think what they meant to say was "Oh, it's that kind of Double Blind where one person makes up vast swaths of it on their own"
That's part of it, as that should be in the OP if that's really what OP wants to discuss, but generally I'm turned off the "one party and probably pseudo-fascist post-War America" cliche, especially when this is unlikely in the time frame the OP gives.
 
OOC:That's part of it, as that should be in the OP if that's really what OP wants to discuss, but generally I'm turned off the "one party and probably pseudo-fascist post-War America" cliche, especially when this is unlikely in the time frame the OP gives.

OOC: Ahh, ok. If it gives you any inspiration to add to the TL, I interpreted "there wasn't a president from the two party system untill Reagan in 1976" as a series of Independents or possibly third parties running the show between '57 and '76.
 
OOC: Presidents this TL till 1976

Patton/Barkley:Indpendent (After no one reaches 265 electoral votes) 49-53

Patton/Thurmond: 53-57 on the newly formed Bun Run Party

Strom Thurmond/Bailey: Bull Run 57-65

Barry Goldwater/H.R Gross:Libertarian Party 65-70 (President Goldwater is assassinated

H.R Gross-70-71

Gross/Richard Nixon-71-73


Noam Chomsky/Phillp Hoff 73-77
 
OOC: Presidents this TL till 1976

Patton/Barkley:Indpendent (After no one reaches 265 electoral votes) 49-53

Patton/Thurmond: 53-57 on the newly formed Bun Run Party

Strom Thurmond/Bailey: Bull Run 57-65

Barry Goldwater/H.R Gross:Libertarian Party 65-70 (President Goldwater is assassinated

H.R Gross-70-71

Gross/Richard Nixon-71-73


Noam Chomsky/Phillp Hoff 73-77

OOC: But whats the point of them not being one of the two parties.
 
Yeah, a lot of people wanted Eisenhower to be President, but let's be honest here - he was a better fit for a Cabinet position. Could you imagine what kind of system we would have if he were something like Secretary of Transportation? I mean, the current system is just, in the words of former President Gore, a giant steaming mess. Even at its peak, you couldn't drive from NYC to LA in less than a week, and that was in good weather and assuming you didn't hit some bridge out on a back road in Kansas. And air travel was an even bigger nightmare until the low-budget airlines came in and made the big guys straighten things out. I heard that Daesh and Hezbollah were plotting an attack on America's transport system for years using planes or something and they got so frustrated with the logistics that they attacked the NYSE and ended up humiliating themselves.

One positive long-term seems to be this high-speed rail that's being developed. It's bringing back a lot of the jobs the auto industry's failure lost. Also, it looks like it may breathe some life into that ghost city Detroit or even the entirely rural state of Michigan, abandoned after GM and Ford went belly-up and Chrysler merged with Toyota and moved operations to Japan. I mean, who really needs that many cars anyway? People just soup up the old ones, since they figured out how to after all those old domestic cars fell apart from the shitty roads. And people can even put their cars on freight rails now. The way I see it, let the rich have their fancy new cars. Our soup shops do an amazing job of overhauling our old cars.

Also, I wonder if we would even have urban agriculture if Eisenhower's vision came to pass. Cities pretty much only need resources now in order to sustain themselves; they have food figured out.
 
OOC: But why do these parties suddenly skyrocket to the White House within such a short time frame? What're the social & economic factors behind it?

If the GOP implodes and people are sick of the Dems in 1948, someone has to take their place. Basically if the GOP puts up and unlikable candidate and people flock to Patton, a new party would emerge, probably marginalizing the Republicans (most likely the Republicans, as the Democrats would have 16 years of success to build off of.)

A populist party that bleeds from the Dixiecrats would likely be the new oppposition to the Dems. They would start off as populist and evolve from there, with the Dems becoming the party of civil rights and the Republicans, or what's left of them, serves big business. The question becomes how big business and organized labor fall in the realignment and eventually where Christian conservatives and parental moralists fall later, and if there's room in either party for the libertarian movement.

The list above seems plausible at first but I'm not sure where the author is goin with it by the 70s.
 
Top