If Not Roosevelt, Who Could've Ran in 1940?

Why not Wendell Willkie?

He was a registered Democrat until he decided to run for the GOP nomination.

He supported most of FDR's big projects, and was an internationalist, so he might be acceptable.

However to get Willkie as the DEM nominee, we need either the GOP, led by Taft, Vandeberg, and Dewey to say "NO we don't want you"

or

Have FDR suffer a stroke, or some other health debilitation right after the 1938 midterm election that makes a run in 1940 impossible. Perhaps in that position, FDR might want a young, charismatic, forward looking man to continue his legacy.

I'm not sure on running mates, but no Willkie means either taft, or Vandeberg are the GOP nominee.

Wishing you well, his majesty,
The Scandinavian Emperor
 

Stolengood

Banned
Wallace could've brought his enthusiasm to balance out Hull's guardedness on the ticket.

Hull-Wallace, perhaps?
 

Stolengood

Banned
Some of the leaders in the democratic party wanted John Nance Garner to run.
But Roosevelt didn't, and if Roosevelt wasn't running, he'd certainly be allowed to influence the choice of his successor -- and he and Garner were like chalk and cheese.

There's no way Roosevelt would let Garner become the nominee.
 
Wouldn't FDR move heaven and earth to prevent a Wheeler nomination? He isn't going to want to see an isolationist in the White House and was really insulted by Wheeler's comment on Lend Lease, describing it as "the rottenest thing that has been said in public life in my generation."

Wheeler's OTL vote against Lend-Lease was in 1941. FDR would be opposed to an Isolationist, but if he doesn't think the world crisis requires him, then it's not such an important issue.

Also, if FDR is forced to withdraw by last-minute illness - he won't have time to organize against Wheeler, and the convention will be "thrown wide open". And FDR may be too ill to do anything.
 
Top