Let's say that a coalition of Taft and Stassen blocks Dewey in 1948. The Taft-Stassen ticket loses to Truman. (Even if it does better in the Midwest, which I doubt, it is very unlikely to carry New York, which Dewey won only narrowly in OTL--and which in those days had 47 electoral votes.)
In that case, would not Dewey--who as in OTL would presumably easily win re-election for governor of New York in 1950 http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=94339 be the front-runner for the GOP nomination for the presidency in 1952? True, there is the fact that he lost to FDR in 1944. But he could point out that he had lost to the master American politician of the twentieth century during a world war when people were understandably reluctant to swap horses in mid-stream--whereas Taft had lost to a Pendergast crony from Missouri in a peacetime year when the Democrats faced splits from both left and right, and everything seemed to indicate a GOP victory. (Very likely the Taft-Stassen ticket would even lose Minnesota decisively; in OTL it went for Truman by over 17 points. This would not help Stassen's prospects in 1952...) As for Dewey's having lost the battle for the GOP nomination in 1940 and 1948, don't forget that Dole failed to be nominated in both 1980 and 1988--yet still got nominated in 1996. And Dewey (unlike Dole) could plausibly argue that if he *had* been nominated in 1940 or 1948, he would have done better than the actual nominees.
I am assuming that Eisenhower will not run; in OTL he did not announce his candidacy until after Dewey declared he would not be a candidate for 1952, and it is possible that with a well-known internationalist like Dewey as a plausible winner of the GOP nomination, Ike will not feel a need to run.
IMO Dewey, if nominated, will beat Stevenson (or whoever the Democrats nominate if somehow Stevenson's nomination is butterflied away)--though not by Ike's landslide margin. Yes, one can point to 1948, but so much has happened since then, above all the Korean War and the intensification of the Red Scare (as well as the corruption issue, also known as the "mess in Washington"), that even with Dewey's problems as a campaigner, he is in a much more favorable position in this alt-1952 than in OTL's 1948.
Some of Dewey's cabinet choices will presumably be the same as Ike's: John Foster Dulles as Secretary of State and Herbert Brownell as Attorney General, for example. But I would expect Dewey to be a bit to the left of Ike on some domestic issues, notably civil rights.
(And no, despite his image as a racket-busting district attorney, I don't expect him to be more effective in fighting organized crime than Ike was. As Michael Woodowiss wrote of Dewey, "His failure to respond to the problem of organized crime as Governor has been given little serious attention, although it is more representative of the country's response at the time than that of briefly effective local prosecutors..." *Crime, Crusades, and Corruption: Prohibitions in the United States, 1900-1987,*, p. 60.)
In that case, would not Dewey--who as in OTL would presumably easily win re-election for governor of New York in 1950 http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=94339 be the front-runner for the GOP nomination for the presidency in 1952? True, there is the fact that he lost to FDR in 1944. But he could point out that he had lost to the master American politician of the twentieth century during a world war when people were understandably reluctant to swap horses in mid-stream--whereas Taft had lost to a Pendergast crony from Missouri in a peacetime year when the Democrats faced splits from both left and right, and everything seemed to indicate a GOP victory. (Very likely the Taft-Stassen ticket would even lose Minnesota decisively; in OTL it went for Truman by over 17 points. This would not help Stassen's prospects in 1952...) As for Dewey's having lost the battle for the GOP nomination in 1940 and 1948, don't forget that Dole failed to be nominated in both 1980 and 1988--yet still got nominated in 1996. And Dewey (unlike Dole) could plausibly argue that if he *had* been nominated in 1940 or 1948, he would have done better than the actual nominees.
I am assuming that Eisenhower will not run; in OTL he did not announce his candidacy until after Dewey declared he would not be a candidate for 1952, and it is possible that with a well-known internationalist like Dewey as a plausible winner of the GOP nomination, Ike will not feel a need to run.
IMO Dewey, if nominated, will beat Stevenson (or whoever the Democrats nominate if somehow Stevenson's nomination is butterflied away)--though not by Ike's landslide margin. Yes, one can point to 1948, but so much has happened since then, above all the Korean War and the intensification of the Red Scare (as well as the corruption issue, also known as the "mess in Washington"), that even with Dewey's problems as a campaigner, he is in a much more favorable position in this alt-1952 than in OTL's 1948.
Some of Dewey's cabinet choices will presumably be the same as Ike's: John Foster Dulles as Secretary of State and Herbert Brownell as Attorney General, for example. But I would expect Dewey to be a bit to the left of Ike on some domestic issues, notably civil rights.
(And no, despite his image as a racket-busting district attorney, I don't expect him to be more effective in fighting organized crime than Ike was. As Michael Woodowiss wrote of Dewey, "His failure to respond to the problem of organized crime as Governor has been given little serious attention, although it is more representative of the country's response at the time than that of briefly effective local prosecutors..." *Crime, Crusades, and Corruption: Prohibitions in the United States, 1900-1987,*, p. 60.)
Last edited:
