Teddy was the running mate of Bryan’s opponent in 1900. That’s the real problem, they were in opposing parties.
If Theodore Roosevelt wins in 1912 what year does he get the US to join WW1?
- Thread starter Malone
- Start date
Teddy was the running mate of Bryan’s opponent in 1900. That’s the real problem, they were in opposing parties.
Teddy has been described as a " damn cowboy", at least in part due to his unpredictable nature. I really wouldn't be comfortable betting on a earlier US entry just due to how pro entente Wilson was.
Moreover, as alluded to early, this is back in the day when congress retained a measure of authority on this sorta thing.
Moreover, as alluded to early, this is back in the day when congress retained a measure of authority on this sorta thing.
Going back to the Blockade, does anyone out of hand know the British position during the Russo-Japanese War?
As President Roosevelt was active as a diplomat there, could a massive change from the British there be a "fly in the ointment" type that sours him as a President towards Britian?
Becasue as I understand the thread right now, his belingerent attitude could swing both ways while still favoring the Entente somewhat. At least as OTL German actions made him see it.
As President Roosevelt was active as a diplomat there, could a massive change from the British there be a "fly in the ointment" type that sours him as a President towards Britian?
Becasue as I understand the thread right now, his belingerent attitude could swing both ways while still favoring the Entente somewhat. At least as OTL German actions made him see it.
I think Roosevelt could get us in by 1916 as president. I also think he’d either declare war on Mexico or install a different regime once the Zimmerman telegram is intercepted, if that even still happens.
This. Roosevelt had the stature and had actually met all the players.
There are two ways you can mediate a conflict. You can be a truly neutral, honest broker. Wilson was to obviously pro-Britain to do this. Roosevelt had enough appreciation for both sides to be an honest broker. The other way is to be blatantly on one side and threaten to intervene. Wilson wasn't honest enough to make the threat and was too weak to be taken seriously if he did.
Just a side point: T.R. winning is pretty unlikely. The Republican Party was fracturing at the core between the progressives and the conservatives. A previous President ousting his successor is going to be very divisive for the party. Allan Lichtman accounts that working against the incumbent GOP was their poor performance in the midterm (1), their nomination contest (2), their third party split (3), their lack of policy change (4), their lack of foreign/military achievement (5), and their lack of a charismatic incumbent (6). That's one too many factors working against them. If Theodore Roosevelt challenges William Howard Taft and gets the nomination, the GOP is still going to lose the nomination fight key (Roosevelt won't be able to win ~2/3rds of his party's vote) and the charisma key (in 1912, he was a less culturally unifying figure) but they're also going to lose the incumbency key, which puts them in a worse place. Also, the GOP is still in danger of losing the Third Party key even if Roosevelt doesn't go Bull Moose. Eugene Debs pulled in 6% of the vote in 1912. I don't see any reason why he wouldn't perform similarly if Roosevelt is the head of the Republican ticket.
A President losing re-nomination is just a really bad thing for the incumbent party because it's almost impossible to make the case why they are competent enough to remain in power when the head of the ticket did not. Ironically, the only thing that could make Roosevelt win the 1912 is if the Taft administration does a better job with regards to major policy change or a foreign military achievement, the kinds of things that might prevent Roosevelt from running in the first place.
A President losing re-nomination is just a really bad thing for the incumbent party because it's almost impossible to make the case why they are competent enough to remain in power when the head of the ticket did not. Ironically, the only thing that could make Roosevelt win the 1912 is if the Taft administration does a better job with regards to major policy change or a foreign military achievement, the kinds of things that might prevent Roosevelt from running in the first place.
The Brits were heavily invested financially in both nations, more so with Japan. In the latter case there were some lucrative shipbuilding contracts. This finance leverage worked both ways. Japan required hefty credit in the behemoth London and New York banking centers. Roosevelt used that as leverage in getting Japan to the negotiating table in 1905.
Beyond that. In political terms Britain was still seeing Russia as a top tier threat. The great game in central Asia and all that.
Last edited:
More likely he would never have allowed the tensions wi Mexico to progress to that point. Wilsons misjudgment and racism had more to do with it than the attitudes of the Mexican leaders. Roosevelt had better instincts and was able to think around his racial prejudices.
& the US cash. Loans from the US banks were important to the Entente nations & as in the Russo Japanese war could be used as leverage.
He'd have to do it darned quickly. A/H declared war on Servia 29 July, and Germany declared war on Russia August 1. Once things started moving, they moved *very* fast.
Aphrodite
Banned
Roosevelt winning is a giant nothingburger. The US is not going to war any earlier than 1917.
Many Americans had emigrated from Europe to avoid military service.
the Irish hated England and the Jews hated the Tsar
Even with submarine warfare, the Russian Revolution and the Zimmerman telegram, 50 Representatives and six Senators voted against the war and there were many abstentions as well.
after war was declared, 30% of eligible men either didnt register for the draft, didnt report when called or deserted before finishing boot camp.
Wilson won on "he kept us out of war". African Americans opposed to Wilson's racism was one of the largest blocs Hughes got.
If Roosevelt pushes for war, he'll get creamed in 1916- especially if the Democrats run someone less blatantly racist
Many Americans had emigrated from Europe to avoid military service.
the Irish hated England and the Jews hated the Tsar
Even with submarine warfare, the Russian Revolution and the Zimmerman telegram, 50 Representatives and six Senators voted against the war and there were many abstentions as well.
after war was declared, 30% of eligible men either didnt register for the draft, didnt report when called or deserted before finishing boot camp.
Wilson won on "he kept us out of war". African Americans opposed to Wilson's racism was one of the largest blocs Hughes got.
If Roosevelt pushes for war, he'll get creamed in 1916- especially if the Democrats run someone less blatantly racist
I have to say I am sceptical. Mediation was put forward several times IOTL by several parties and never went anywhere. The powers involved would need to be in a very different mindset than OTL for it to be accepted and I don’t think TR being president would come close to doing that.
TR would, I think, have enough respect to be an obvious contender as mediator if negotiations do go ahead. But even if he ends up in the same room as all parties there is no guarantee he would be able to work out a compromise. He got his Nobel prize for negotiating between combatants that both wanted, even needed, and end to the war. Russia had lost a lot and was now dealing with a revolution at home. Japan was in dire financial straits and had hit the end of a list of targets that they could conceivably reach. It would be a very different prospect negotiating between fresh empires who believe that not fighting now will lead to them being eclipsed or even destroyed in the future.
One of the points worth noting is that France was ideologically pandering to America from the very start of the war, presenting it as a war where the Western democracies were trying to survive German aggression, something which was made quite easier by the German ultimatum to France, first, and the German violation of Belgian neutrality, second.
The mobilization were haphazard and the situation initially murky even with the declarations of war.
Actually, Congress would be dominated by Democrats and progressive Republicans.
I imagine that TR, one of the most respected world leaders at this point, would try to offer to mediate the July Crisis and write letters to various heads of state. If this fails, then there really is not anything he can do whatsoever except sending notes of protests to Germany over things like the rape of Belgium. After the Lusitania he proposed seizing German vessels docked in American ports, but not an outright declaration of war.
The reason that the US eventually entered the war was that by 1916 the British blockade of Germany was working and the Germans resorted to USW as a last ditch attempt to break the blockade in 1917. The Kaiser understood this could lead to US intervention, but believed that the Germans would win before America had a chance to make an impact on the battlefield. USW is what ultimately brought the US into the war, and without that or a similar incident Congress will not declare war.
It is possible that after the Lusitania sinks TR will make decisions that lead to an incident between the US and Germany, sparking war, but I think that seizing German vessels will be enough to convince the Kaiser to back down in 1915. It's even possible that TR's more aggressive stance would actually deter the Germans from adopting USW, having already been whacked by Teddy's big stick.
I don't see him convincing the German military of it. In hindsight invading Belgium was a really stupid idea, but at the time the German military thought it was their best (and only) option to win, because if they didn't they'd be facing a long war on two fronts, which was their nightmare.
I imagine that in such a situation that TR would lean on the military to start gearing up for action sooner, especially with regards to artillery and machine guns which the us army had pathetically few of compared to the other powers