Hitler defeated early, US Political consequences?

WI Either there was a Czech war, or there had been a plan and rescourecs for an early offensive (Sept 39) Or luck had gone differently in both Norway and Belgium

It is clear that WW2 will result in a clear defeat for the Nazis before the US Presidential conventions.


I am guessing FDR does not run.

Who are the candidates?

What is the result?

(Oh and is there still a Pacific war)
 
No takers, I am disapointed. Here are some guesses

It somewhat depends on timing. If it were a Czech war or a succusseful Sept 1939 Anglo French offensive then the war will be practically over. That takes away a big economic stimulus and makes the depression deeper.

I tend to assume that a fairly mainstream Republican would take office.

Unless Japan manages to make war of the US with other European powers not otherwise occupied the depressing carries on.

Any other thoughts
 
List of Presidents to 1960

FDR 1933-1941 D - Dose not run for third term

Wendell Wilki 1941-1945 R

Henry Wallace 1945-1953 - Dose not accept Communist Endorsements and dose not praise the U.S.S.R

Douglaus Mac Arthur 1953-1961

A millitant Conservative he wins both terms due to ideological split between Northern and Southern Demcorats
 
FDR probably doesn't run for a third term, which probably means he has a slightly more mixed legacy, since the problems of his second term will be a much greater part of his legacy than historically. And by the problems in his second term I mean the recession and court packing mostly. If the United States isn't involved in a war at all, then the depression lasts longer. There's an argument others have made that if Nazi Germany collapses before December 7th 1941, Japan is unlikely to be willing to fight the US and a British Empire free of continental distractions. So, perhaps a longer Great Depression? In 1940, as far as I know, there really isn't any successor in the wings. That means the Democratic nomination may be a bit of a mess. Of course perhaps I'm betraying my ignorance. As far as I know Roosevelt did not have a designated political successor. Obviously I don't mean in the Vice Presidential sense. I mean I'm not sure who Roosevelt wanted to have the nomination if he stayed out. I'm not sure Roosevelt would let the party nominate Garner.

A quick war may be a boon to the isolationists. So perhaps a less internationalist Republican candidate? Either Dewey or Taft are distinct possibilities.
 
FDR probably doesn't run for a third term, which probably means he has a slightly more mixed legacy, since the problems of his second term will be a much greater part of his legacy than historically. And by the problems in his second term I mean the recession and court packing mostly. If the United States isn't involved in a war at all, then the depression lasts longer. There's an argument others have made that if Nazi Germany collapses before December 7th 1941, Japan is unlikely to be willing to fight the US and a British Empire free of continental distractions. So, perhaps a longer Great Depression? In 1940, as far as I know, there really isn't any successor in the wings. That means the Democratic nomination may be a bit of a mess. Of course perhaps I'm betraying my ignorance. As far as I know Roosevelt did not have a designated political successor. Obviously I don't mean in the Vice Presidential sense. I mean I'm not sure who Roosevelt wanted to have the nomination if he stayed out. I'm not sure Roosevelt would let the party nominate Garner.

A quick war may be a boon to the isolationists. So perhaps a less internationalist Republican candidate? Either Dewey or Taft are distinct possibilities.

FDR privately promised several different aides and cabinet members his support - James Farley, Cordell Hull, and even Harry Hopkins (who was unlikely to run).

If US entry to the war is unlikely, then Wendell Wilkie's nomination doesn't happen. GOP nominates Taft or Dewey.

And it may well be a close race or even a Republican victory.
 
I'm more interested in the international consequences. It makes a big difference whether Hitler goes down due to a Czech war versus an Entente II victory by say late 1940, because of the position the Soviet Union would take. With a Czech war, the Russians were on the Entente side, at least rhetorically; by late '39 they'd have surely done something parallel to the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact and they'd be on the wrong side.

The place of the Soviet Union in world politics would in turn react strongly on US domestic politics. Since this thread is (rather myopically IMHO) focused on that, I pretty much withdraw, with the comment that you can't really disentangle the latter from the former, as the remark above about Wilkie's candidacy demonstrates.
 

Perkeo

Banned
I think it all depends on one single question: Do the Japanese still attack Pearl Harbour?
 
The defeat of the Nazis before 1941 must be in France, and the best way to do that is to have the French still be skeptical asshats but put a large number of their heavy tanks right at the Ardennes, increasing German problems and weakening the overall German attack sufficiently that the German offensive peters out in 1941, at which point the Allies start massing their own offensive. The USSR winds up the big winner of this WWII, which has removed one of its most immediate clear and present dangers and illustrated that the armies of democracy are rather more fragile than they seem.
 
I'd think the USA is likely to remain rather isolationist, looking on the problems of Europe as 'interesting, but not our concern.' If Japan attacks the USA, then there will likely be a somewhat shorter Pacific war, since the USA can concentrate more naval assets in the Pacific, although she still has to build up her strength; of course, with no D-Day/European theater to worry about, the USA can attack Japan's outposts all over a lot faster. If Japan doesn't attack, then the USA will carry out it's plan for 'tidying up' the Phillipines and giving them independence (with the US base at Subic Bay still in place).
 
I think Japan is still likely to embark on an Imperial adventure in China but I dont think war with Britain or France will be a factor. They may still attack the US, but the war would be very different.
 
Top