Eisenhower as a Democrat

In 1951 Truman tried to convince Eisenhower to run for the Presidency under the banner of the Democratic party. Of course, in OTL he declined and ran as a republican.

But, let's say he accepts Truman's argument and runs for the nomination of the Democratic Party, wins and is the Democratic candidate in the 1952 election. (I know Ike had disagreements on many positions of that party, but let's just go with this for the fun of it.)

Who would have been a likely dem veep for Ike? Maybe an Ike/Stevenson ticket?
Is there anyone the GOP could have successfully run against him?
How does this change the political landscape of the US going forward from the 1950's? Does Nixon's career go anywhere without being Ike's VP for eight years? Can the dems still win again in 1960 after eight years of Ike (and a total of 24 years of democratic presidents)? Does this butterfly away JFK?
 
If Eisenhower was going to run as a Democrat at all, it would be in 1948--and even then IMO it's' pretty unlikely unless MacArthur got the GOP nomination. https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...-eisenhower-d-1948-1956.450093/#post-17473503

A good deal of the speculation about Eisenhower as a Democratic candidate came from the mistaken assumption that because he was an internationalist he must somehow be a sympathizer with the New Deal as well. But Ike himself in Crusade in Europe wrote that "With some of Mr. Roosevelt’s political acts I could never possibly agree. But I knew him solely in his capacity as a leader of a nation at war – and in that capacity he seemed to me to fulfill all that could possibly be expected of him.” https://books.google.com/books?id=WGQLGxE8LyAC&pg=PA409 This seems to be a juxtaposition of FDR as New Deal president vs. FDR as wartime leader. In 1949 he remarked that if all the American people wanted was security, they could go to prison. https://books.google.com/books?id=gpNZDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA246 The truth is that Ike was perfectly happy with any Republican president who was not an isolationist. He even would have accepted Taft if Taft had been willing to give him reassurances about collective security--which however Taft at a conference with Ike failed to do to Ike's satisfaction. https://books.google.com/books?id=SscfBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA75

As I wrote here, "I have never seen any evidence that Eisenhower considered running as a Democrat in 1952. Sure, plenty of Democrats including Truman wanted him to--but where is the evidence that Ike himself considered it? Clark Clifford would later write in his memoirs: "Neither the President nor I realized at the time that Eisenhower had no intention of running as a Democrat because he privately disagreed with much of both the New Deal and the Fair Deal." Sure, Ike disagreed with Taft on foreign policy (on some domestic issues like housing, Taft was actually to the left of Ike) but felt that the way to fight Taft on issues like collective security was within the Republican Party--and with Dewey discredited by past defeats, Ike was the only man who might plausibly keep Taft from the nomination." https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...33-1961-cultural-impact.432734/#post-16214562
 
If Eisenhower was going to run as a Democrat at all, it would be in 1948--and even then IMO it's' pretty unlikely unless MacArthur got the GOP nomination. https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...-eisenhower-d-1948-1956.450093/#post-17473503

A good deal of the speculation about Eisenhower as a Democratic candidate came from the mistaken assumption that because he was an internationalist he must somehow be a sympathizer with the New Deal as well. But Ike himself in Crusade in Europe wrote that "With some of Mr. Roosevelt’s political acts I could never possibly agree. But I knew him solely in his capacity as a leader of a nation at war – and in that capacity he seemed to me to fulfill all that could possibly be expected of him.” https://books.google.com/books?id=WGQLGxE8LyAC&pg=PA409 This seems to be a juxtaposition of FDR as New Deal president vs. FDR as wartime leader. In 1949 he remarked that if all the American people wanted was security, they could go to prison. https://books.google.com/books?id=gpNZDgAAQBAJ&pg=PA246 The truth is that Ike was perfectly happy with any Republican president who was not an isolationist. He even would have accepted Taft if Taft had been willing to give him reassurances about collective security--which however Taft at a conference with Ike failed to do to Ike's satisfaction. https://books.google.com/books?id=SscfBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA75

As I wrote here, "I have never seen any evidence that Eisenhower considered running as a Democrat in 1952. Sure, plenty of Democrats including Truman wanted him to--but where is the evidence that Ike himself considered it? Clark Clifford would later write in his memoirs: "Neither the President nor I realized at the time that Eisenhower had no intention of running as a Democrat because he privately disagreed with much of both the New Deal and the Fair Deal." Sure, Ike disagreed with Taft on foreign policy (on some domestic issues like housing, Taft was actually to the left of Ike) but felt that the way to fight Taft on issues like collective security was within the Republican Party--and with Dewey discredited by past defeats, Ike was the only man who might plausibly keep Taft from the nomination." https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...33-1961-cultural-impact.432734/#post-16214562


If Taft or MacArthur were nominee in 1948, Eisenhower would accept the Democratic nomination just to stop them. It'd be amusing to see Truman be his running mate - which Truman had apparently offered to do.

I think if Truman is VP, he likely gets tired of it and goes for Senate in 1950. He considered it OTL. In which case, I suppose Eisenhower would pick Adlai Stevenson or Estes Kefauver as his running mate.

Truman would be the first President to return to the Senate since John Quincy Adams. I wonder if that would give him additional weight. OTL he was something of a supporter of Fidel Castro prior to Castro leaning towards the Soviets. Maybe a Pro-US or neutral Castro could emerge. If Truman isn't an ex-president living in poverty TTL, then we won't see the emergence of presidential pensions.

Eisenhower might avoid the Korean War (due no vague State Department indication that the US doesn't care about SK). No Korean War might mean Korean Unification (as a lot of support for the southern regime was due to opposition to the north following the war) and definitely means no Kim Dynasty as we know it. The US was also starting to lean towards accepting the PRC as the real China and abandoning Taiwan prior to the Korean War. Perhaps there'd be an earlier Sino-American Rapprochement.

Eisenhower was opposed to the New Deal and Fair Deal, but I'd hardly call him a conservative either. IIRC, Goldwater said his administration was a dime-store New Deal. Eisenhower would probably face some pressure from within the party to do stuff.
 
If this is going to happen clearly Truman will remain a powerful man in Democratic Party: in 1948 he engines Einsenhower candidacy, in 1950 he returns to Senate, in 1952 he selects Stevenson as Ike VP.
In 1956 Stevenson easily wins Dem nomination, picking Kefauver, Johnson or Kennedy as VP, and facing William Knowland from California as GOP nominee. I guess Democratic fatigue could throw the election to the Reps.
If not in 1960 Nelson Rockfeller will defeat Goldwater for nomination and then will become the first Republican President since 1932.
 
Top