FDR dies 6 months early

Let's say that Franklin Roosevelt suffers his fatal cerebral hemorrhage on October 12, 1944. This leaves his unpopular VP Henry Wallace, who has already been replaced on the Democratic ticket by Truman, as President less than a month before a presidential election. What happens next?
 
I don't know the first thing about this Wallace. According to wikipedia, he had a fascination with certain Asian cultures and religions: since the Hull note is still to come, does it mean the Japanese government tries harder to get on his good side? Or perhaps it makes things worse for the former since his sympathies lay more with China?
 

Asami

Banned
I don't know the first thing about this Wallace. According to wikipedia, he had a fascination with certain Asian cultures and religions: since the Hull note is still to come, does it mean the Japanese government tries harder to get on his good side? Or perhaps it makes things worse for the former since his sympathies lay more with China?

It’s 1944. War with Japan is already raging.
 
Wallace finishes out the term as President and we have a Truman vs. Dewey race four years earlier. Who Truman picks to be his running mate is anyone's guess, but I think with sympathy over FDR's death, Truman wins the election.
 
Wallace finishes out the term as President and we have a Truman vs. Dewey race four years earlier. Who Truman picks to be his running mate is anyone's guess, but I think with sympathy over FDR's death, Truman wins the election.

I'd think it would be a Henry Kaiser vs Dewey race in '48
 
Truman wouldn't run for a second term ITTL???

He was just one of the choices in '44, he just topped out the 'anybody but Wallace ' game.
With Wallace out of the picture, more scrutiny on Truman's connections to Pendergast

Kaiser no longer has WWII production pressures going on as much in this TL, so it's probable in making more an effort in the race, would be chosen an win easily
 
I don't see the Democrats tossing Truman out in 1948, they certainly had no serious moves in that direction OTL. Truman would become president on January 20, 1945. This means Wallace is president for about three months, during which time it is unlikely he would make any major changes especially since a lot of the wheels for various operations were rolling. Wallace was certainly quite "left" and would certainly be open to requests from the USSR for more aid, or other concessions. However given the fact that he was going to be out in three months, there is very little that he could do. I would suspect that he might not even be read in on the Manhattan Project, really no need to know under the circumstances. Perhaps he might be told of a "superbomb" project in process but in late 1944 success was still over the horizon. Any more detail than that is really needed. Now, had FDR died earlier, BEFORE the 1944 convention things would have been different (there are some T/Ls here about that).
 
Truman for VP is quite a different thing than Truman for Prez in '44

VP was still considered the piss bucket job while FDR was alive, so having a 'safe' non-entity like Truman was seen as par for the course, even after Teddy's example 40 odd years before.

But with a fresh election in '44? that's all together different, even with Truman nominated as VP.

He would stay the choice for VP, but someone else for the top job
 

manav95

Banned
Truman for VP is quite a different thing than Truman for Prez in '44

VP was still considered the piss bucket job while FDR was alive, so having a 'safe' non-entity like Truman was seen as par for the course, even after Teddy's example 40 odd years before.

But with a fresh election in '44? that's all together different, even with Truman nominated as VP.

He would stay the choice for VP, but someone else for the top job

Well the bosses thought FDR might not survive a 4th term, so they wanted to pick a good VP that could take over in the event of his death. Hence why they chucked out Wallace in the first place.
 
Truman for VP is quite a different thing than Truman for Prez in '44

VP was still considered the piss bucket job while FDR was alive, so having a 'safe' non-entity like Truman was seen as par for the course, even after Teddy's example 40 odd years before.

But with a fresh election in '44? that's all together different, even with Truman nominated as VP.

He would stay the choice for VP, but someone else for the top job

Isn't mid-October a bit late to hunt for a new face?
 
For the proverbial Smoke filled room?
No


Oh they could do it, but I was thinking of how they sell it to the voters.

Truman at least has some legitimacy, having been chosen by FDR. But how would they react to being presented with some odd body by the DNC? After all, if Truman was an unexciting choice, who else (given that Ike was unavailable while the war lasted) would be more impressive? By pulling such a stunt, they would risk landing themselves with President Dewey. Would they take such a chance?
 
Let's say that Franklin Roosevelt suffers his fatal cerebral hemorrhage on October 12, 1944. This leaves his unpopular VP Henry Wallace, who has already been replaced on the Democratic ticket by Truman, as President less than a month before a presidential election. What happens next?


Oh you devil Victor Hatherley what a can of worms you've opened! OK, 1st, Wallace really did want to
be President(IOTL, in 1948, he ran for the job on a third party ticket)so I think we can assume he would
have stood for re-election. As for whether he would have kept Truman on as his running mate, or if not,
who he would have replaced Truman with, I'm just gonna throw my hands up in the air & say I DON'T
KNOW! Let's just assume that satisfactory arrangements were(somehow)made & move on.

Second, what would the Democrats have done? Wallace was quite popular among liberal Democrats
IOTL. But most conservative Democrats(especially those in the South)were cool to downright hostile to
him. They thought Wallace's politics were much too radical, & regarded him personally as a star-gaz-
ing idealist(in other words, impractical, silly, & downright stupid). But I think in this ATL most @
any rate would have seen opposing Wallace would risk of splitting the Democrats & giving the White
House to the Republicans. So I think most of the party would have rallied- though some quite
unhappily!- to Wallace.

Third, how would the 1944 election have turned out? Historians generally agree that in 1944 IOTL,
with WWII still raging, voters were reluctant to change horses- i.e., parties- in midstream & thus
voted for Roosevelt(SEE for example A SHORT HISTORY OF PRESIDENTAL ELECTIONS by Eugene H Rosenbum, 1967, section
on 1944). Wallace was of course not the known quantity FDR was. But that desire to play it safe
would still, I think, have lingered. Plus Wallace & the Democrats would have done everything they could
to wrap themselves in FDR's mantle("He would have wanted us to carry on" etc. etc.)

So @ this point one would say: Wallace would squeak out a victory. But waiting in the wings
was a little bomb that would have blown the Wallace candidacy to bits. Nicholas
Roerich was a Russian artist & mystic(he claimed he could communicate with the spiritual sphere)who
in the 1930's corresponded with then Secretrary of Agriculture Henry Wallace. In these writings,
Wallace sometimes called Roerich the "guru", FDR the "Flaming One" the "Wavering One" & referred
to "Dark Ones""Steadfast Ones" & "vermin". He even sponsored a Roerich expedition to Asia in 1934
to find new grasses for agricultural purposes. The expedition failed & Wallace cut his ties to
Roerich. But IOTL Americans of the 1940's were not as acquainted with eastern religions & mysticism
as they are now. Had this come out, Wallace would have been regarded as a nut job. In 1940,
when Wallace was running with FDR against Wendell Wilke, the Republicans actually succeeded in
getting ahold of these letters. Fortunately for Wallace, the Democrats had evidence that Wilkie was
carrying on an affair with the book editor of THE NEW YORK HERALD TRIBUNE. In what we would to-
day call "a balance of terror" both parties agreed not to divulge the dirt they had on each other. In
1944 in this ATL the Republicans would not have been so constrained(there were no such skeletons in
Dewey's closet!) They would have published the letters, & when the dust had settled Dewey would
have succeeded in doing what IOTL he twice failed to do- getting elected President.
 
Last edited:
Top