Keep Woodrow Wilson out of the White House

[Mikestone8]

That quite interesting (esp the story about Champ Clark helping avert a lynching). I don't know about Champ Clark's racial politics more broadly, however.

Me neither; but the fact that he attended the opening of that training school (in his position I'm sure he could have found some excuse not to, had he wished) suggests that he was ok with the idea of Blacks becoming Army officers; so he might well have been ok with having them in other federal positions also.

it seems likely that any Democrat at the time would have enabled policies like Wilson's.

Did Grover Cleveland purge Blacks from government posits? I hadn't heard of that. And given that Clark, since leaving KY as a young man, had been arguably more Midwestern than Southern, his Cabinet might have been less Southern in composition than Wilson's.

To be clear, a GOP administration would have been better for African-Americans than Wilson's.

OTOH Wilson's Republican successors did not reverse his action, which suggest that GOP interest in Black rights was at a very low ebb.

 

[Thomas1195]

OTOH Wilson's Republican successors did not reverse his action, which suggest that GOP interest in Black rights was at a very low ebb.

But unlike Wilson they would not actively introduce such things either. The pre-1912 status quo would be still better than Wilson's racial policies. But a Champ Clark Presidency might also prevent OTL re-segregation of federal government.

Maybe have Taft ending up a judge before 1908 as another POD. So, ITTL, after Root completing his term (there is a chance that he would not seek re-election), we may use someone like Hughes as a compromise candidate for the GOP.

 

[Mikestone8]

Maybe have Taft ending up a judge before 1908 as another POD. So, ITTL, after Root completing his term (there is a chance that he would not seek re-election), we may use someone like Hughes as a compromise candidate for the GOP.

Not sure I follow.

If Root has done well enough to give the GOP a realistic hope of winning in 1912, then he might as well run himself. If he hasn't, then they are heading for defeat, and picking a compromise candidate won't save them any more than it saved the Democrats in 1924. Hughes (or Hadley or any other compromise choice) will do no better than he actually did in 1916, and (given that passions are higher in 1912) probably a lot worse.

 

[Thomas1195]

If Root has done well enough to give the GOP a realistic hope of winning in 1912, then he might as well run himself

So we may have a two-term President Root. And in 1916 we may somehow have a different Democrat candidate to win.

 

[Mikestone8]

So we may have a two-term President Root. And in 1916 we may somehow have a different Democrat candidate to win.

Yes. If a Democratic victory in 1912 is somehow avoided (almost ASB in my view, but let it pass), the Republicans will almost certainly have worn out their welcome by 1916.

 

[Thomas1195]

Yes. If a Democratic victory in 1912 is somehow avoided (almost ASB in my view, but let it pass), the Republicans will almost certainly have worn out their welcome by 1916.

And he would be a one-term president if the US enters ww1.

 

[Mikestone8]

And he would be a one-term president if the US enters ww1.

Possibly even if it doesn't. Iirc food prices were going through the roof even before America entered the war, due to massive purchases by the Entente.

I agree though that a Declaration of War would put the tin lid on it, and amount to an elaborate suicide note.

 

[Catsmate]

It's a rather simplistic video, completely ignoring the consequences of British/French capital flight in 1914 and making the survival of Russia too easy.

 

[Thomas1195]

But I can see a Champ Clark Presidency delaying Federal Reserve

 

[Mikestone8]

But I can see a Champ Clark Presidency delaying Federal Reserve

Any thoughts on whether that would be a plus or a minus?

In particular, in Nov 1916 the Fed issued a warning against subscribing to unsecured loans [ie to the Entente]. Does this not happen or does the warning just get issued by someone else?

 

[Wendell]

Does the alternate 1912 Democrat win reelection?

 

[Mikestone8]

Does the alternate 1912 Democrat win reelection?

Probably. assuming he pursues domestic reforms similar to Wilson's.

Clark and Bryan (the likeliest alternatives) are both from the Midwest, so come 1916 may run slightly stronger there than Wilson. And a shift of only about 1% would move MN (12 electoral votes) and IN (15) into the Democratic column.[1] They might be weaker than Wilson in the Northeast, but even OTL Hughes made an almost clean sweep there, so the only potential loss would be the four votes of NH.

The same would apply to the Hoosier Marshall if he emerged as a dark horse nominee.

[1] Clark, a Kentuckian by birth and Missourian by adoption, might also be strong in the border States, and could pick up another six votes from WV.

 

[President Benedict Arnold]

Champ Clark would make an interesting POTUS

He greatly opposed entering WWI and the establishment of the Federal Reserve.

He would also be the first Speaker of the House to become President if he won and would have been a world apart from Woodrow Wilson and his administration.

 

[cpip]

But I can see a Champ Clark Presidency delaying Federal Reserve

It's also possible (see Roger Lowenstein's America's Bank: The Epic Struggle to Create the Federal Reserve), that he would've gone for a more centralized Federal Bank, more in the Bryanist-agrarian mold. Wilson, and McAdoo, were more willing to see compromises in some respects. One of Clark's biggest backers in the House was Arsene Pujo, of the Pujo committee, which had pushed against the "money trust" and the private banking system; it's not inconceivable that a Clark presidency would see Pujo in a cabinet position.

That quite interesting (esp the story about Champ Clark helping avert a lynching). I don't know about Champ Clark's racial politics more broadly, however.

On the one hand, Clark wasn't as racist as some. On the other, his infamous quote about Hawaiian statehood: "How can we endure our shame when a Chinese Senator from Hawaii, with his pigtail hanging down his back, with his pagan joss in his hand, shall rise from his curule chair and in pigeon English proceed to chop logic with George Frisbie Hoar or Henry Cabot Lodge?"

Certainly, he had no problem with making common cause with racists. To be fair, it would've been near-impossible for anyone intending senior position in the Democratic Party of the early 20th century to not sit with racists. Still, one of the chiefs of his campaign was noted bigot-of-all-stripes Fred DuBois, who hated blacks, Asians, and Mormons all with significant fervor.

 

[mspence]

Keep McKinley from being assassinated. Roosevelt becomes President after McKinley's 2nd term, followed by Taft.

 

[Wendell]

Who would Champ Clark's VP be?

 

[Mikestone8]

Who would Champ Clark's VP be?

Could still be Marshall. OTL he was promised the job in return for switching his convention votes to Wilson, and might have done the same for Clark had Clark retained his lead longer. And in both 1900 and 1908 the Democrats had run a ticket of two Midwesterners.

Alternatively, he might have picked Governor John Burke of ND (a Wilson supporter, recommended by Bryan) or George Chamberlain of OR (also suggested by Bryan). Finally, had Bryan recently died (or been too ill to be available for office himself) it might have gone to his brother Charles, who OTL would get the 1924 spot while WJB was still alive.

 

[Mikestone8]

On the one hand, Clark wasn't as racist as some. On the other, his infamous quote about Hawaiian statehood: "How can we endure our shame when a Chinese Senator from Hawaii, with his pigtail hanging down his back, with his pagan joss in his hand, shall rise from his curule chair and in pigeon English proceed to chop logic with George Frisbie Hoar or Henry Cabot Lodge?"

Sad, but nobody's perfect.

My essential point is that, if Republican victory is impossible - which it probably is unless you go right back to 1905 for your PoD - then we have to look for the best Democrat, and from what I can see, Clark is the best bet. BTW, iirc he also supported women's suffrage.

Mattruvintress, what did other politicians have to say about Hawaii statehood? I hadn't realised that it was even under serious consideration at that time.

 

[cpip]

Sad, but nobody's perfect.

My essential point is that, if Republican victory is impossible - which it probably is unless you go right back to 1905 for your PoD - then we have to look for the best Democrat, and from what I can see, Clark is the best bet. BTW, iirc he also supported women's suffrage.

Clark's definitely one of the best, and he absolutely supported women's suffrage. His daughter wouldn't have allowed it any other way -- she was a rather outspoken suffragist.

Underwood, had he a shot, might not have been as bad as some might imagine -- his anti-racist bona-fides were pretty solid, being staunchly anti-Klan, but his otherwise conservative and pro-business tendencies might have proven difficult in some of the other problems.

Nearly any of them would've been less conciliatory towards Britain than Wilson (concerning the Panama Canal tolls, for instance), and some of the other candidates might not have been as assertive against the Joint Board of the Chiefs of Staff as Wilson was during the brief war scare of 1913, and that could have spun into a bigger crisis than it turned out to be.

 

[SlideAway]

Did Grover Cleveland purge Blacks from government posits? I hadn't heard of that. And given that Clark, since leaving KY as a young man, had been arguably more Midwestern than Southern, his Cabinet might have been less Southern in composition than Wilson's.

No. (His record on race was not good either, and he was hostile to black voting rights and opposed integration in NY schools.) But segregation and Jim Crow was also deeper and more widespread by Wilson's terms. It took a few decades for Redeemers to purge Southern governments of African-Americans, and remember that Plessy v. Ferguson was decided in 1896.

Something that is hard to comprehend and often overlooked is that segregation and restrictions on voting rights were often spearheaded by progressives, in keeping with prevailing ideas about social reform, "uplift," quarantining "unhealthy influences," temperance, etc.

I am not denying that Wilson was a racist. Nor am I denying that his administration's record on race was atrocious. I'm just pointing out that his views and actions may well have been fairly mainstream among Democrats and many white progressives and reformers. That isn't to say there weren't whites (let alone blacks of course) who had more progressive racial views, just that Wilson's views were fairly mainstream.