List of US Presidents, 1960 to 2020

Gorrister · Apr 25, 2015

Dewey '60

1960: Thomas Dewey / John F. Kennedy (Republican / Democratic) [1]
1962: John F. Kennedy (Democratic) [2]
1964: John F. Kennedy / Stuart Symington (National Democratic) [3]

1968: Ronald Reagan / David Cargo (Republican) [4]
1972: Eugene McCarthy / Martin Luther King, Jr. (Progressive Alliance) [5]

1976: Eugene McCarthy / Martin Luther King, Jr. (Progressive Alliance) [6]

1980: Martin Luther King, Jr. / Walter Mondale (Progressive Alliance) [7]

1984: Jack Kemp / Raymond P. Shafer (Republican) [8]
1988: Jack Kemp / Raymond P. Shafer (Republican) [9]

[1] After Nixon announced that he would not contest the 1960 election, the New York Republicans - driven by New York mayor John Lindsay - convinced former-Governor Thomas Dewey to return to politics and run for the presidency. Dewey clinched the nomination, and promised to improve both levels of employment and standards of living. Lyndon Johnson - the Democratic candidate - took a conservative approach to civil rights and called for a tougher line against the Soviet Union. To balance his ticket, he appointed John F. Kennedy as his running mate. Due to a controversial faithless elector in Arizona (who decided not to vote in the Electoral College) the election was a draw. Repelling Johnsonian conservatism, the House elected Dewey (223-212) whilst Kennedy stole the Senate (52-48).
[2] As the East and West reached one of the heights of the Cold War during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Dewey suffered a massive heart attack. Kennedy was swept into office at a time of national crisis.
[3] Perhaps appropriately in the wake of such an international crisis, the 1964 election was anarchy. Just as the Republican factions fought bitterly as Goldwater sought to fracture the party, the battle between the Kennedian and Johnsonian groups within the Democrats hit crisis point in the early stages of the campaign. Despite surviving the Cuban Crisis, Kennedy was unpopular for his accords with the USSR regarding missiles in Eastern Europe (Greece and Turkey) and his liberal approach to civil rights. When the Democrats deadlocked over the nomination between JFK and LBJ, Kennedy walked out with his half of the party and - in a tight election - narrowly clinched the electoral vote.

[4]The full Kennedy term was horrible; as crucial youth voters protested about the war in Vietnam, he survived a number of assassination attempts. With the United States struggling in the Tet Offensive, Kennedy announced he would not seek a second term. With the Democratic Party on the verge of collapse, Hubert Humphrey was the only logical choice. On election day, Ronal Reagan took the White House for the Republicans by a healthy margin.

[5] Reagan began his presidency strongly, with the Nantes Accord in July 1969 setting the stage for the beginning of American withdrawal from Vietnam. However, following the revelations that Senator Richard Nixon had deliberately sabotaged peace negotiations in 1966 Reagan was lucky to avoid impeachment. Challenged by Rockefeller, Reagan became the first since Rutherford Hayes to concede the Republican nomination. Nevertheless, the Progressive Alliance (created in 1970) managed to captivate an electorate eager for persistent change with over 50% of the popular vote.

[6] With such a strong turn in public opinion, the Progressive Alliance was unlikely to be shifted from office in a hurry; as McCarthy made huge dents into civil rights, the post-Rockefeller Republicans desperately sought to modernize and moderate the party. The Democratic Party had completely collapsed by 1978, and most of the remainder joined the Progressive Alliance - the 1980 election held a record number of candidates elected under "Independent" tickets.

[7] With the Republicans still rather disorganized and a plethora of even more disorganized Independent tickets to siphon off support from the Republicans, the Progressive Alliance rolled the dice and put forth the increasingly popular MLK Jr. as the party's new head. Although it was a risk, it certainly paid off - though the Republicans began to gain back some power due to King's more left-leaning stances.

[8] The commitment of the Alliance to significant social spending and welfare engagements hit hard times at the beginning of the economic slump of the 1980s. Whilst King retained a semi-fanatical following, across the latter-half of his tenure middle voters were lured by the Republicans once more. Kemp won the election by a single state in a very close contest; American military spending was to increase and international prestige regained at the cost of the USSR and PRC.

[9]: An empowered Kemp won re election easily over a limping PA in 1988. In 1990, he enacted his wide ranging "Economic Plan". A national sales tax of 10% would be introduced, most subsidies on housing would be replaced with credits, tax rates would be slashed by at least 10%, and the tax code would be simplified. However, he targeted the vital center on some issues. On housing, he acted surprisingly liberal with his "fair housing" program of rent controls and enterprise zones. On gay marriage, he decided not to take action following a Supreme Court ruling in Shaw v Haltson, where discrimination based on sexual orientation was officially banned. However, Democrats took Congress in 1990 and forced Kemp to moderate on economics too. Bored with this, he turned to the global sphere, intervening in the Pakistani Civil War, which had begun to spin into Afghanistan and India. Elsewhere, he oversaw the reunification of Germany, and further detente with the Soviets.

Premier Taylerov · May 6, 2015

Dewey '60

1960: Thomas Dewey / John F. Kennedy (Republican / Democratic) [1]
1962: John F. Kennedy (Democratic) [2]
1964: John F. Kennedy / Stuart Symington (National Democratic) [3]

1968: Ronald Reagan / David Cargo (Republican) [4]
1972: Eugene McCarthy / Martin Luther King, Jr. (Progressive Alliance) [5]

1976: Eugene McCarthy / Martin Luther King, Jr. (Progressive Alliance) [6]

1980: Martin Luther King, Jr. / Walter Mondale (Progressive Alliance) [7]

1984: Jack Kemp / Raymond P. Shafer (Republican) [8]
1988: Jack Kemp / Raymond P. Shafer (Republican) [9]

1992: Jerry Brown / Ronald Daniels (Democratic/Progressive [Electoral] Alliance) [10]

[1] After Nixon announced that he would not contest the 1960 election, the New York Republicans - driven by New York mayor John Lindsay - convinced former-Governor Thomas Dewey to return to politics and run for the presidency. Dewey clinched the nomination, and promised to improve both levels of employment and standards of living. Lyndon Johnson - the Democratic candidate - took a conservative approach to civil rights and called for a tougher line against the Soviet Union. To balance his ticket, he appointed John F. Kennedy as his running mate. Due to a controversial faithless elector in Arizona (who decided not to vote in the Electoral College) the election was a draw. Repelling Johnsonian conservatism, the House elected Dewey (223-212) whilst Kennedy stole the Senate (52-48).
[2] As the East and West reached one of the heights of the Cold War during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Dewey suffered a massive heart attack. Kennedy was swept into office at a time of national crisis.
[3] Perhaps appropriately in the wake of such an international crisis, the 1964 election was anarchy. Just as the Republican factions fought bitterly as Goldwater sought to fracture the party, the battle between the Kennedian and Johnsonian groups within the Democrats hit crisis point in the early stages of the campaign. Despite surviving the Cuban Crisis, Kennedy was unpopular for his accords with the USSR regarding missiles in Eastern Europe (Greece and Turkey) and his liberal approach to civil rights. When the Democrats deadlocked over the nomination between JFK and LBJ, Kennedy walked out with his half of the party and - in a tight election - narrowly clinched the electoral vote.

[4]The full Kennedy term was horrible; as crucial youth voters protested about the war in Vietnam, he survived a number of assassination attempts. With the United States struggling in the Tet Offensive, Kennedy announced he would not seek a second term. With the Democratic Party on the verge of collapse, Hubert Humphrey was the only logical choice. On election day, Ronal Reagan took the White House for the Republicans by a healthy margin.

[5] Reagan began his presidency strongly, with the Nantes Accord in July 1969 setting the stage for the beginning of American withdrawal from Vietnam. However, following the revelations that Senator Richard Nixon had deliberately sabotaged peace negotiations in 1966 Reagan was lucky to avoid impeachment. Challenged by Rockefeller, Reagan became the first since Rutherford Hayes to concede the Republican nomination. Nevertheless, the Progressive Alliance (created in 1970) managed to captivate an electorate eager for persistent change with over 50% of the popular vote.

[6] With such a strong turn in public opinion, the Progressive Alliance was unlikely to be shifted from office in a hurry; as McCarthy made huge dents into civil rights, the post-Rockefeller Republicans desperately sought to modernize and moderate the party. The Democratic Party had completely collapsed by 1978, and most of the remainder joined the Progressive Alliance - the 1980 election held a record number of candidates elected under "Independent" tickets.

[7] With the Republicans still rather disorganized and a plethora of even more disorganized Independent tickets to siphon off support from the Republicans, the Progressive Alliance rolled the dice and put forth the increasingly popular MLK Jr. as the party's new head. Although it was a risk, it certainly paid off - though the Republicans began to gain back some power due to King's more left-leaning stances.

[8] The commitment of the Alliance to significant social spending and welfare engagements hit hard times at the beginning of the economic slump of the 1980s. Whilst King retained a semi-fanatical following, across the latter-half of his tenure middle voters were lured by the Republicans once more. Kemp won the election by a single state in a very close contest; American military spending was to increase and international prestige regained at the cost of the USSR and PRC.

[9] An empowered Kemp won re election easily over the limping Progressive Alliance in 1988. In 1990, he enacted his wide ranging 'Economic Plan' - a national sales tax of 10% would be introduced, most subsidies on housing would be replaced with credits, tax rates would be slashed by at least 10%, and the tax code would be simplified. However, he targeted the vital centre on some issues. On housing, he acted wit a surprisingly liberal agenda with the "fair housing" program of rent controls and enterprise zones. On gay marriage, he decided not to take action following a Supreme Court ruling in Shaw v Haltson (where discrimination based on sexual orientation was officially banned). However, Democrats took Congress in 1990 and forced Kemp to moderate on economics too. Bored with this, he turned to the global sphere - intervening in the Pakistani Civil War, which had begun to spin into Afghanistan and India. Elsewhere, he oversaw the reunification of Germany and further détente with the Soviets.
[10] 1992 was a redefining election, and the most significant since the collapse of the Democratic Party in the 1964 debacle. With the number of American troops in Pakistan continuing to rise (and public opinion of the Republicans beginning to drop accordingly), many on the centre-left were concerned with the declining influence of the PA. The re-emerging Democrats had taken control of Congress for the first time in many years in 1990, and several prominent endorsements pushed their over the PA in national polling. As such, the Democratic Party and the PA formed a semi-official electoral alliance; Brown (who had campaigned for the nomination for several elections) was a prominent compromise choice for the PA, whilst their nomination of Ronald Daniels was a tolerable option for the Democrats. Campaigning to begin a rapid withdrawal from Pakistan, Brown narrowly won the Presidency.

johngalt · May 7, 2015

Mind if I cut in?

Dewey '60

1960: Thomas Dewey / John F. Kennedy (Republican / Democratic) [1]
1962: John F. Kennedy (Democratic) [2]
1964: John F. Kennedy / Stuart Symington (National Democratic) [3]

1968: Ronald Reagan / David Cargo (Republican) [4]
1972: Eugene McCarthy / Martin Luther King, Jr. (Progressive Alliance) [5]

1976: Eugene McCarthy / Martin Luther King, Jr. (Progressive Alliance) [6]

1980: Martin Luther King, Jr. / Walter Mondale (Progressive Alliance) [7]

1984: Jack Kemp / Raymond P. Shafer (Republican) [8]
1988: Jack Kemp / Raymond P. Shafer (Republican) [9]

1992: Jerry Brown / Ronald Daniels (Democratic/Progressive [Electoral] Alliance) [10]
1996: Jerry Brown / Ronald Daniels (Democratic/Progressive Alliance) [11]

[1] After Nixon announced that he would not contest the 1960 election, the New York Republicans - driven by New York mayor John Lindsay - convinced former-Governor Thomas Dewey to return to politics and run for the presidency. Dewey clinched the nomination, and promised to improve both levels of employment and standards of living. Lyndon Johnson - the Democratic candidate - took a conservative approach to civil rights and called for a tougher line against the Soviet Union. To balance his ticket, he appointed John F. Kennedy as his running mate. Due to a controversial faithless elector in Arizona (who decided not to vote in the Electoral College) the election was a draw. Repelling Johnsonian conservatism, the House elected Dewey (223-212) whilst Kennedy stole the Senate (52-48).
[2] As the East and West reached one of the heights of the Cold War during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Dewey suffered a massive heart attack. Kennedy was swept into office at a time of national crisis.
[3] Perhaps appropriately in the wake of such an international crisis, the 1964 election was anarchy. Just as the Republican factions fought bitterly as Goldwater sought to fracture the party, the battle between the Kennedian and Johnsonian groups within the Democrats hit crisis point in the early stages of the campaign. Despite surviving the Cuban Crisis, Kennedy was unpopular for his accords with the USSR regarding missiles in Eastern Europe (Greece and Turkey) and his liberal approach to civil rights. When the Democrats deadlocked over the nomination between JFK and LBJ, Kennedy walked out with his half of the party and - in a tight election - narrowly clinched the electoral vote.

[4]The full Kennedy term was horrible; as crucial youth voters protested about the war in Vietnam, he survived a number of assassination attempts. With the United States struggling in the Tet Offensive, Kennedy announced he would not seek a second term. With the Democratic Party on the verge of collapse, Hubert Humphrey was the only logical choice. On election day, Ronal Reagan took the White House for the Republicans by a healthy margin.

[5] Reagan began his presidency strongly, with the Nantes Accord in July 1969 setting the stage for the beginning of American withdrawal from Vietnam. However, following the revelations that Senator Richard Nixon had deliberately sabotaged peace negotiations in 1966 Reagan was lucky to avoid impeachment. Challenged by Rockefeller, Reagan became the first since Rutherford Hayes to concede the Republican nomination. Nevertheless, the Progressive Alliance (created in 1970) managed to captivate an electorate eager for persistent change with over 50% of the popular vote.

[6] With such a strong turn in public opinion, the Progressive Alliance was unlikely to be shifted from office in a hurry; as McCarthy made huge dents into civil rights, the post-Rockefeller Republicans desperately sought to modernize and moderate the party. The Democratic Party had completely collapsed by 1978, and most of the remainder joined the Progressive Alliance - the 1980 election held a record number of candidates elected under "Independent" tickets.

[7] With the Republicans still rather disorganized and a plethora of even more disorganized Independent tickets to siphon off support from the Republicans, the Progressive Alliance rolled the dice and put forth the increasingly popular MLK Jr. as the party's new head. Although it was a risk, it certainly paid off - though the Republicans began to gain back some power due to King's more left-leaning stances.

[8] The commitment of the Alliance to significant social spending and welfare engagements hit hard times at the beginning of the economic slump of the 1980s. Whilst King retained a semi-fanatical following, across the latter-half of his tenure middle voters were lured by the Republicans once more. Kemp won the election by a single state in a very close contest; American military spending was to increase and international prestige regained at the cost of the USSR and PRC.

[9] An empowered Kemp won re election easily over the limping Progressive Alliance in 1988. In 1990, he enacted his wide ranging 'Economic Plan' - a national sales tax of 10% would be introduced, most subsidies on housing would be replaced with credits, tax rates would be slashed by at least 10%, and the tax code would be simplified. However, he targeted the vital centre on some issues. On housing, he acted wit a surprisingly liberal agenda with the "fair housing" program of rent controls and enterprise zones. On gay marriage, he decided not to take action following a Supreme Court ruling in Shaw v Haltson (where discrimination based on sexual orientation was officially banned). However, Democrats took Congress in 1990 and forced Kemp to moderate on economics too. Bored with this, he turned to the global sphere - intervening in the Pakistani Civil War, which had begun to spin into Afghanistan and India. Elsewhere, he oversaw the reunification of Germany and further détente with the Soviets.
[10] 1992 was a redefining election, and the most significant since the collapse of the Democratic Party in the 1964 debacle. With the number of American troops in Pakistan continuing to rise (and public opinion of the Republicans beginning to drop accordingly), many on the centre-left were concerned with the declining influence of the PA. The re-emerging Democrats had taken control of Congress for the first time in many years in 1990, and several prominent endorsements pushed their over the PA in national polling. As such, the Democratic Party and the PA formed a semi-official electoral alliance; Brown (who had campaigned for the nomination for several elections) was a prominent compromise choice for the PA, whilst their nomination of Ronald Daniels was a tolerable option for the Democrats. Campaigning to begin a rapid withdrawal from Pakistan, Brown narrowly won the Presidency.
[11] Though both the withdrawal from Pakistan and the recovery of the economy from it's slowdown back in 91' were slower than the American people would have liked, Jerry Brown remained the popular candidate with the support of a massive left-and-centre coalition. No pundit hypothesized that Brown could be defeated, but few predicted the landslide victory he would achieve over the Republican candidate Steve Forbes, who ran the most conservative campaign since the doomed Goldwater campaign of 64'. Still, it served as a complete realignment for the country as the solid South returned as a Republican bastion with not a single state voting for Brown.

Premier Taylerov · May 10, 2015

johngalt said:
Mind if I cut in?

Please do!

Dewey '60
1960: Thomas Dewey / John F. Kennedy (Republican / Democratic) [1]
1962: John F. Kennedy (Democratic) [2]
1964: John F. Kennedy / Stuart Symington (National Democratic) [3]
1968: Ronald Reagan / David Cargo (Republican) [4]
1972: Eugene McCarthy / Martin Luther King, Jr. (Progressive Alliance) [5]

1976: Eugene McCarthy / Martin Luther King, Jr. (Progressive Alliance) [6]

1980: Martin Luther King, Jr. / Walter Mondale (Progressive Alliance) [7]

1984: Jack Kemp / Raymond P. Shafer (Republican) [8]
1988: Jack Kemp / Raymond P. Shafer (Republican) [9]

1992: Jerry Brown / Ronald Daniels (Democratic/Progressive Alliance) [10]
1996: Jerry Brown / Ronald Daniels (Democratic/Progressive Alliance) [11]

2000: Paul Wellstone / Al Gore (Democratic/Progressive Alliance) [20]

[1] After Nixon announced that he would not contest the 1960 election, the New York Republicans - driven by New York mayor John Lindsay - convinced former-Governor Thomas Dewey to return to politics and run for the presidency. Dewey clinched the nomination, and promised to improve both levels of employment and standards of living. Lyndon Johnson - the Democratic candidate - took a conservative approach to civil rights and called for a tougher line against the Soviet Union. To balance his ticket, he appointed John F. Kennedy as his running mate. Due to a controversial faithless elector in Arizona (who decided not to vote in the Electoral College) the election was a draw. Repelling Johnsonian conservatism, the House elected Dewey (223-212) whilst Kennedy stole the Senate (52-48).
[2] As the East and West reached one of the heights of the Cold War during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Dewey suffered a massive heart attack. Kennedy was swept into office at a time of national crisis.
[3] Perhaps appropriately in the wake of such an international crisis, the 1964 election was anarchy. Just as the Republican factions fought bitterly as Goldwater sought to fracture the party, the battle between the Kennedian and Johnsonian groups within the Democrats hit crisis point in the early stages of the campaign. Despite surviving the Cuban Crisis, Kennedy was unpopular for his accords with the USSR regarding missiles in Eastern Europe (Greece and Turkey) and his liberal approach to civil rights. When the Democrats deadlocked over the nomination between JFK and LBJ, Kennedy walked out with his half of the party and - in a tight election - narrowly clinched the electoral vote.

[4]The full Kennedy term was horrible; as crucial youth voters protested about the war in Vietnam, he survived a number of assassination attempts. With the United States struggling in the Tet Offensive, Kennedy announced he would not seek a second term. With the Democratic Party on the verge of collapse, Hubert Humphrey was the only logical choice. On election day, Ronal Reagan took the White House for the Republicans by a healthy margin.

[5] Reagan began his presidency strongly, with the Nantes Accord in July 1969 setting the stage for the beginning of American withdrawal from Vietnam. However, following the revelations that Senator Richard Nixon had deliberately sabotaged peace negotiations in 1966 Reagan was lucky to avoid impeachment. Challenged by Rockefeller, Reagan became the first since Rutherford Hayes to concede the Republican nomination. Nevertheless, the Progressive Alliance (created in 1970) managed to captivate an electorate eager for persistent change with over 50% of the popular vote.

[6] With such a strong turn in public opinion, the Progressive Alliance was unlikely to be shifted from office in a hurry; as McCarthy made huge dents into civil rights, the post-Rockefeller Republicans desperately sought to modernize and moderate the party. The Democratic Party had completely collapsed by 1978, and most of the remainder joined the Progressive Alliance - the 1980 election held a record number of candidates elected under "Independent" tickets.

[7] With the Republicans still rather disorganized and a plethora of even more disorganized Independent tickets to siphon off support from the Republicans, the Progressive Alliance rolled the dice and put forth the increasingly popular MLK Jr. as the party's new head. Although it was a risk, it certainly paid off - though the Republicans began to gain back some power due to King's more left-leaning stances.

[8] The commitment of the Alliance to significant social spending and welfare engagements hit hard times at the beginning of the economic slump of the 1980s. Whilst King retained a semi-fanatical following, across the latter-half of his tenure middle voters were lured by the Republicans once more. Kemp won the election by a single state in a very close contest; American military spending was to increase and international prestige regained at the cost of the USSR and PRC.

[9] An empowered Kemp won re election easily over the limping Progressive Alliance in 1988. In 1990, he enacted his wide ranging 'Economic Plan' - a national sales tax of 10% would be introduced, most subsidies on housing would be replaced with credits, tax rates would be slashed by at least 10%, and the tax code would be simplified. However, he targeted the vital centre on some issues. On housing, he acted wit a surprisingly liberal agenda with the "fair housing" program of rent controls and enterprise zones. On gay marriage, he decided not to take action following a Supreme Court ruling in Shaw v Haltson (where discrimination based on sexual orientation was officially banned). However, Democrats took Congress in 1990 and forced Kemp to moderate on economics too. Bored with this, he turned to the global sphere - intervening in the Pakistani Civil War, which had begun to spin into Afghanistan and India. Elsewhere, he oversaw the reunification of Germany and further détente with the Soviets.
[10] 1992 was a redefining election, and the most significant since the collapse of the Democratic Party in the 1964 debacle. With the number of American troops in Pakistan continuing to rise (and public opinion of the Republicans beginning to drop accordingly), many on the centre-left were concerned with the declining influence of the PA. The re-emerging Democrats had taken control of Congress for the first time in many years in 1990, and several prominent endorsements pushed their over the PA in national polling. As such, the Democratic Party and the PA formed a semi-official electoral alliance; Brown (who had campaigned for the nomination for several elections) was a prominent compromise choice for the PA, whilst their nomination of Ronald Daniels was a tolerable option for the Democrats. Campaigning to begin a rapid withdrawal from Pakistan, Brown narrowly won the Presidency.
[11] Both the withdrawal from Pakistan and the recovery of the economy from slowdown back in 91' were slower than the American people would have liked; Jerry Brown remained the popular candidate with the support of a massive left-and-centre coalition. No pundit hypothesized that Brown could be defeated, but few predicted the landslide victory he would achieve over the Republican candidate Steve Forbes (who ran the most conservative campaign since the doomed Goldwater campaign of 64'). Still, it served as a complete realignment for the country as the solid South returned as a Republican bastion with not a single state voting for Brown.
[20] 2000 was a close election, as the resurgent Republicans fought hard in swing states and centrist DPA states flirted with the idea. Paul Wellstone had taken the DPA nomination with little problem after Brown stood down, and his progressive policies appealed to many within the larger cities. Nevertheless, Wellstone and Gore only won by a narrow margin - the Republican contender (Alan Keyes) performed well and seemed to return the Republicans to an empowered electoral force.

Premier Taylerov · May 24, 2015

Bump.

Dewey '60

1960: Thomas Dewey / John F. Kennedy (Republican / Democratic) [1]
1962: John F. Kennedy (Democratic) [2]
1964: John F. Kennedy / Stuart Symington (National Democratic) [3]
1968: Ronald Reagan / David Cargo (Republican) [4]
1972: Eugene McCarthy / Martin Luther King, Jr. (Progressive Alliance) [5]

1976: Eugene McCarthy / Martin Luther King, Jr. (Progressive Alliance) [6]

1980: Martin Luther King, Jr. / Walter Mondale (Progressive Alliance) [7]

1984: Jack Kemp / Raymond P. Shafer (Republican) [8]
1988: Jack Kemp / Raymond P. Shafer (Republican) [9]

1992: Jerry Brown / Ronald Daniels (Democratic/Progressive Alliance) [10]
1996: Jerry Brown / Ronald Daniels (Democratic/Progressive Alliance) [11]

2000: Paul Wellstone / Al Gore (Democratic/Progressive Alliance) [20]

2004: Neil Bush / Herman Cain (Republican) [21]

[1] After Nixon announced that he would not contest the 1960 election, the New York Republicans - driven by New York mayor John Lindsay - convinced former-Governor Thomas Dewey to return to politics and run for the presidency. Dewey clinched the nomination, and promised to improve both levels of employment and standards of living. Lyndon Johnson - the Democratic candidate - took a conservative approach to civil rights and called for a tougher line against the Soviet Union. To balance his ticket, he appointed John F. Kennedy as his running mate. Due to a controversial faithless elector in Arizona (who decided not to vote in the Electoral College) the election was a draw. Repelling Johnsonian conservatism, the House elected Dewey (223-212) whilst Kennedy stole the Senate (52-48).
[2] As the East and West reached one of the heights of the Cold War during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Dewey suffered a massive heart attack. Kennedy was swept into office at a time of national crisis.
[3] Perhaps appropriately in the wake of such an international crisis, the 1964 election was anarchy. Just as the Republican factions fought bitterly as Goldwater sought to fracture the party, the battle between the Kennedian and Johnsonian groups within the Democrats hit crisis point in the early stages of the campaign. Despite surviving the Cuban Crisis, Kennedy was unpopular for his accords with the USSR regarding missiles in Eastern Europe (Greece and Turkey) and his liberal approach to civil rights. When the Democrats deadlocked over the nomination between JFK and LBJ, Kennedy walked out with his half of the party and - in a tight election - narrowly clinched the electoral vote.

[4]The full Kennedy term was horrible; as crucial youth voters protested about the war in Vietnam, he survived a number of assassination attempts. With the United States struggling in the Tet Offensive, Kennedy announced he would not seek a second term. With the Democratic Party on the verge of collapse, Hubert Humphrey was the only logical choice. On election day, Ronal Reagan took the White House for the Republicans by a healthy margin.

[5] Reagan began his presidency strongly, with the Nantes Accord in July 1969 setting the stage for the beginning of American withdrawal from Vietnam. However, following the revelations that Senator Richard Nixon had deliberately sabotaged peace negotiations in 1966 Reagan was lucky to avoid impeachment. Challenged by Rockefeller, Reagan became the first since Rutherford Hayes to concede the Republican nomination. Nevertheless, the Progressive Alliance (created in 1970) managed to captivate an electorate eager for persistent change with over 50% of the popular vote.

[6] With such a strong turn in public opinion, the Progressive Alliance was unlikely to be shifted from office in a hurry; as McCarthy made huge dents into civil rights, the post-Rockefeller Republicans desperately sought to modernize and moderate the party. The Democratic Party had completely collapsed by 1978, and most of the remainder joined the Progressive Alliance - the 1980 election held a record number of candidates elected under "Independent" tickets.

[7] With the Republicans still rather disorganized and a plethora of even more disorganized Independent tickets to siphon off support from the Republicans, the Progressive Alliance rolled the dice and put forth the increasingly popular MLK Jr. as the party's new head. Although it was a risk, it certainly paid off - though the Republicans began to gain back some power due to King's more left-leaning stances.

[8] The commitment of the Alliance to significant social spending and welfare engagements hit hard times at the beginning of the economic slump of the 1980s. Whilst King retained a semi-fanatical following, across the latter-half of his tenure middle voters were lured by the Republicans once more. Kemp won the election by a single state in a very close contest; American military spending was to increase and international prestige regained at the cost of the USSR and PRC.

[9] An empowered Kemp won re election easily over the limping Progressive Alliance in 1988. In 1990, he enacted his wide ranging 'Economic Plan' - a national sales tax of 10% would be introduced, most subsidies on housing would be replaced with credits, tax rates would be slashed by at least 10%, and the tax code would be simplified. However, he targeted the vital centre on some issues. On housing, he acted wit a surprisingly liberal agenda with the "fair housing" program of rent controls and enterprise zones. On gay marriage, he decided not to take action following a Supreme Court ruling in Shaw v Haltson (where discrimination based on sexual orientation was officially banned). However, Democrats took Congress in 1990 and forced Kemp to moderate on economics too. Bored with this, he turned to the global sphere - intervening in the Pakistani Civil War, which had begun to spin into Afghanistan and India. Elsewhere, he oversaw the reunification of Germany and further détente with the Soviets.
[10] 1992 was a redefining election, and the most significant since the collapse of the Democratic Party in the 1964 debacle. With the number of American troops in Pakistan continuing to rise (and public opinion of the Republicans beginning to drop accordingly), many on the centre-left were concerned with the declining influence of the PA. The re-emerging Democrats had taken control of Congress for the first time in many years in 1990, and several prominent endorsements pushed their over the PA in national polling. As such, the Democratic Party and the PA formed a semi-official electoral alliance; Brown (who had campaigned for the nomination for several elections) was a prominent compromise choice for the PA, whilst their nomination of Ronald Daniels was a tolerable option for the Democrats. Campaigning to begin a rapid withdrawal from Pakistan, Brown narrowly won the Presidency.
[11] Both the withdrawal from Pakistan and the recovery of the economy from slowdown back in 91' were slower than the American people would have liked; Jerry Brown remained the popular candidate with the support of a massive left-and-centre coalition. No pundit hypothesized that Brown could be defeated, but few predicted the landslide victory he would achieve over the Republican candidate Steve Forbes (who ran the most conservative campaign since the doomed Goldwater campaign of 64'). Still, it served as a complete realignment for the country as the solid South returned as a Republican bastion with not a single state voting for Brown.
[20] 2000 was a close election, as the resurgent Republicans fought hard in swing states and centrist DPA states flirted with the idea. Paul Wellstone had taken the DPA nomination with little problem after Brown stood down, and his progressive policies appealed to many within the larger cities. Nevertheless, Wellstone and Gore only won by a narrow margin - the Republican contender (Alan Keyes) performed well and seemed to return the Republicans to an empowered electoral force. [21] Wellstone struggled his term, as the economy slumped and unemployment began to soar. In the midst of the Great Recession, the striking of Hurricane Bill across the Yucatán and Louisiana in 2003 caused serious damage and loss of life; public opinion in response to the lacklustre governmental efforts significantly contributed to the end of the Wellstone government, and the return of the Republicans to office under Neil Bush.

Baconheimer · Jun 10, 2015

Dewey '60

1960: Thomas Dewey / John F. Kennedy (Republican / Democratic) [1]
1962: John F. Kennedy (Democratic) [2]
1964: John F. Kennedy / Stuart Symington (National Democratic) [3]
1968: Ronald Reagan / David Cargo (Republican) [4]
1972: Eugene McCarthy / Martin Luther King, Jr. (Progressive Alliance) [5]

1976: Eugene McCarthy / Martin Luther King, Jr. (Progressive Alliance) [6]

1980: Martin Luther King, Jr. / Walter Mondale (Progressive Alliance) [7]

1984: Jack Kemp / Raymond P. Shafer (Republican) [8]
1988: Jack Kemp / Raymond P. Shafer (Republican) [9]

1992: Jerry Brown / Ronald Daniels (Democratic/Progressive Alliance) [10]
1996: Jerry Brown / Ronald Daniels (Democratic/Progressive Alliance) [11]

2000: Paul Wellstone / Al Gore (Democratic/Progressive Alliance) [20]

2004: Neil Bush / Herman Cain (Republican) [21]

2008: Neil Bush / Herman Cain (Republican)
[1] After Nixon announced that he would not contest the 1960 election, the New York Republicans - driven by New York mayor John Lindsay - convinced former-Governor Thomas Dewey to return to politics and run for the presidency. Dewey clinched the nomination, and promised to improve both levels of employment and standards of living. Lyndon Johnson - the Democratic candidate - took a conservative approach to civil rights and called for a tougher line against the Soviet Union. To balance his ticket, he appointed John F. Kennedy as his running mate. Due to a controversial faithless elector in Arizona (who decided not to vote in the Electoral College) the election was a draw. Repelling Johnsonian conservatism, the House elected Dewey (223-212) whilst Kennedy stole the Senate (52-48).
[2] As the East and West reached one of the heights of the Cold War during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Dewey suffered a massive heart attack. Kennedy was swept into office at a time of national crisis.
[3] Perhaps appropriately in the wake of such an international crisis, the 1964 election was anarchy. Just as the Republican factions fought bitterly as Goldwater sought to fracture the party, the battle between the Kennedian and Johnsonian groups within the Democrats hit crisis point in the early stages of the campaign. Despite surviving the Cuban Crisis, Kennedy was unpopular for his accords with the USSR regarding missiles in Eastern Europe (Greece and Turkey) and his liberal approach to civil rights. When the Democrats deadlocked over the nomination between JFK and LBJ, Kennedy walked out with his half of the party and - in a tight election - narrowly clinched the electoral vote.

[4]The full Kennedy term was horrible; as crucial youth voters protested about the war in Vietnam, he survived a number of assassination attempts. With the United States struggling in the Tet Offensive, Kennedy announced he would not seek a second term. With the Democratic Party on the verge of collapse, Hubert Humphrey was the only logical choice. On election day, Ronal Reagan took the White House for the Republicans by a healthy margin.

[5] Reagan began his presidency strongly, with the Nantes Accord in July 1969 setting the stage for the beginning of American withdrawal from Vietnam. However, following the revelations that Senator Richard Nixon had deliberately sabotaged peace negotiations in 1966 Reagan was lucky to avoid impeachment. Challenged by Rockefeller, Reagan became the first since Rutherford Hayes to concede the Republican nomination. Nevertheless, the Progressive Alliance (created in 1970) managed to captivate an electorate eager for persistent change with over 50% of the popular vote.

[6] With such a strong turn in public opinion, the Progressive Alliance was unlikely to be shifted from office in a hurry; as McCarthy made huge dents into civil rights, the post-Rockefeller Republicans desperately sought to modernize and moderate the party. The Democratic Party had completely collapsed by 1978, and most of the remainder joined the Progressive Alliance - the 1980 election held a record number of candidates elected under "Independent" tickets.

[7] With the Republicans still rather disorganized and a plethora of even more disorganized Independent tickets to siphon off support from the Republicans, the Progressive Alliance rolled the dice and put forth the increasingly popular MLK Jr. as the party's new head. Although it was a risk, it certainly paid off - though the Republicans began to gain back some power due to King's more left-leaning stances.

[8] The commitment of the Alliance to significant social spending and welfare engagements hit hard times at the beginning of the economic slump of the 1980s. Whilst King retained a semi-fanatical following, across the latter-half of his tenure middle voters were lured by the Republicans once more. Kemp won the election by a single state in a very close contest; American military spending was to increase and international prestige regained at the cost of the USSR and PRC.

[9] An empowered Kemp won re election easily over the limping Progressive Alliance in 1988. In 1990, he enacted his wide ranging 'Economic Plan' - a national sales tax of 10% would be introduced, most subsidies on housing would be replaced with credits, tax rates would be slashed by at least 10%, and the tax code would be simplified. However, he targeted the vital centre on some issues. On housing, he acted wit a surprisingly liberal agenda with the "fair housing" program of rent controls and enterprise zones. On gay marriage, he decided not to take action following a Supreme Court ruling in Shaw v Haltson (where discrimination based on sexual orientation was officially banned). However, Democrats took Congress in 1990 and forced Kemp to moderate on economics too. Bored with this, he turned to the global sphere - intervening in the Pakistani Civil War, which had begun to spin into Afghanistan and India. Elsewhere, he oversaw the reunification of Germany and further détente with the Soviets.
[10] 1992 was a redefining election, and the most significant since the collapse of the Democratic Party in the 1964 debacle. With the number of American troops in Pakistan continuing to rise (and public opinion of the Republicans beginning to drop accordingly), many on the centre-left were concerned with the declining influence of the PA. The re-emerging Democrats had taken control of Congress for the first time in many years in 1990, and several prominent endorsements pushed their over the PA in national polling. As such, the Democratic Party and the PA formed a semi-official electoral alliance; Brown (who had campaigned for the nomination for several elections) was a prominent compromise choice for the PA, whilst their nomination of Ronald Daniels was a tolerable option for the Democrats. Campaigning to begin a rapid withdrawal from Pakistan, Brown narrowly won the Presidency.
[11] Both the withdrawal from Pakistan and the recovery of the economy from slowdown back in 91' were slower than the American people would have liked; Jerry Brown remained the popular candidate with the support of a massive left-and-centre coalition. No pundit hypothesized that Brown could be defeated, but few predicted the landslide victory he would achieve over the Republican candidate Steve Forbes (who ran the most conservative campaign since the doomed Goldwater campaign of 64'). Still, it served as a complete realignment for the country as the solid South returned as a Republican bastion with not a single state voting for Brown.
[20] 2000 was a close election, as the resurgent Republicans fought hard in swing states and centrist DPA states flirted with the idea. Paul Wellstone had taken the DPA nomination with little problem after Brown stood down, and his progressive policies appealed to many within the larger cities. Nevertheless, Wellstone and Gore only won by a narrow margin - the Republican contender (Alan Keyes) performed well and seemed to return the Republicans to an empowered electoral force. [21] Wellstone struggled his term, as the economy slumped and unemployment began to soar. In the midst of the Great Recession, the striking of Hurricane Bill across the Yucatán and Louisiana in 2003 caused serious damage and loss of life; public opinion in response to the lacklustre governmental efforts significantly contributed to the end of the Wellstone government, and the return of the Republicans to office under Neil Bush.
22. Despite a relatively uneventful presidency, Neil Bush managed to remain indecisive. His charisma helped him win a narrow reelection in 2008.

Premier Taylerov · Jun 25, 2015

Bump.

"A Republican Schism Avoided"
What if Theodore Roosevelt had secured the Republican nomination in 1912?

1912: Theodore Roosevelt / James S. Sherman (Republican) [1]

[1] The 1912 Republican nomination was one of the first to be decided via presidential preference primaries, and despite early victories by Robert M. La Follette, former President Theodore Roosevelt narrowly secured his candidacy having side-lined the traditional Republican wing of Robert Taft. The outbreak of the Great War in 1914 pitted the hawkish Roosevelt against the anti-war wings of both his own party and the Democrats.

Upton_Sinclair · Jun 25, 2015

"A Republican Schism Avoided"
What if Theodore Roosevelt had secured the Republican nomination in 1912?

1912: Theodore Roosevelt / James S. Sherman (Republican) [1]
1916: Robert M. La Follete / William Jennings Bryan (Progressive) [2]

[1] The 1912 Republican nomination was one of the first to be decided via presidential preference primaries, and despite early victories by Robert M. La Follette, former President Theodore Roosevelt narrowly secured his candidacy having side-lined the traditional Republican wing of William Taft. The outbreak of the Great War in 1914 pitted the hawkish Roosevelt against the anti-war wings of both his own party and the Democrats.
[2] The controversy surrounding American intervention in the Great ultimately proved to be the downfall of President Roosevelt. Senator La Follette challenged President Roosevelt in 1916 on an Anti-War campaign the same way he challenged President Taft in 1912. Unsuccessful in his attempts to gain the Republican nomination, Senator La Follete ran a third party anti-war campaign, as both the Democratic nominee Oscar Underwood and President Roosevelt supported the war. He chose the famous Democratic presidential nominee in 1896, 1900 and 1908 William Jennings Bryan as his running mate, in order to attract anti-war Democrats in addition to anti-war Republicans. The Socialist Party also endorsed the LaFollete/Bryan ticket instead of running their own candidate. LaFollete was then elected in an upset on the backs of anti-war voters, in what would prove to be a crucial realignment election for years to come. Following his election, LaFollete took the US out of World War I and enacting numerous landmark reforms, including a minimum wage, the first workers' compensation system, the banning of 'yellow-dog' contracts, the banning of child labor and government ownership of electric utilities and railroads.

Upton_Sinclair · Jun 27, 2015

Bumping. I also thought we could potentially have two TLs working at the same time.

"A Republican Schism Avoided"
What if Theodore Roosevelt had secured the Republican nomination in 1912?

1912: Theodore Roosevelt / James S. Sherman (Republican) [1]
1916: Robert M. La Follete / William Jennings Bryan (Progressive) [2]

[1] The 1912 Republican nomination was one of the first to be decided via presidential preference primaries, and despite early victories by Robert M. La Follette, former President Theodore Roosevelt narrowly secured his candidacy having side-lined the traditional Republican wing of William Taft. The outbreak of the Great War in 1914 pitted the hawkish Roosevelt against the anti-war wings of both his own party and the Democrats.
[2] The controversy surrounding American intervention in the Great ultimately proved to be the downfall of President Roosevelt. Senator La Follette challenged President Roosevelt in 1916 on an Anti-War campaign the same way he challenged President Taft in 1912. Unsuccessful in his attempts to gain the Republican nomination, Senator La Follete ran a third party anti-war campaign, as both the Democratic nominee Oscar Underwood and President Roosevelt supported the war. He chose the famous Democratic presidential nominee in 1896, 1900 and 1908 William Jennings Bryan as his running mate, in order to attract anti-war Democrats in addition to anti-war Republicans. The Socialist Party also endorsed the LaFollete/Bryan ticket instead of running their own candidate. LaFollete was then elected in an upset on the backs of anti-war voters, in what would prove to be a crucial realignment election for years to come. Following his election, LaFollete took the US out of World War I and enacting numerous landmark reforms, including a minimum wage, the first workers' compensation system, the banning of 'yellow-dog' contracts, the banning of child labor and government ownership of electric utilities and railroads.

---

"A Rematch of 1928"
What if Herbert Hoover was reelected in 1932 as the Democratic Party renominated Al Smith?

Herbert Hoover / Charles Curtis (Republican) [1]
Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [2]

[1] With the nomination of Al Smith by the Democratic Party, Hoover was elected in a massive upset, as Smith's Catholicism would be a source of objection by my voters, just as it was in 1928. The Great Depression continued to drag on throughout Hoover's Presidency. By 1935, unemployment had reached 35% in the United States and the American people were increasingly being radicalised.
[2] With the economy continuing to get worse and worse, the American people turned to radicalism, and Governor Floyd B. Olson of Minnesota (who does not get stomach cancer) was elected on the "Progressive-Farmer-Labor" ticket in a landslide, a fusion of the Progressives, Farmer-Laborites, and "Old Guard" Socialists, with the popular Governor of California Upton Sinclair becoming his running mate. Olson soon implemented a Social Security-like program, passed many pro-labor bills guaranteeing the right to collective bargaining and mandated employer recognition of labor unions, introduced a system of unemployment insurance, passed a minimum wage, created TVA-like programs for every area in the Union (and nationalized electric utilities as a result), implemented a massive economic recovery and jobs program, regulated banking (although he originally intended to nationalize the financial system), nationalized the railroad system, and built up America's military as result of the far-right irredentist and revanchist nation of Nazi Germany, which had come in to existence as a result

Premier Taylerov · Jun 27, 2015

"A Republican Schism Avoided"
What if Theodore Roosevelt had secured the Republican nomination in 1912?

1912: Theodore Roosevelt / James S. Sherman (Republican) [1]
1916: Robert M. La Follette / William Jennings Bryan (Progressive) [2]
1920: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [3]

[1] The 1912 Republican nomination was one of the first to be decided via presidential preference primaries, and despite early victories by Robert M. La Follette, former President Theodore Roosevelt narrowly secured his candidacy having side-lined the traditional Republican wing of William Taft. The outbreak of the Great War in 1914 pitted the hawkish Roosevelt against the anti-war wings of both his own party and the Democrats.
[2] The controversy surrounding the American intervention in the Great War ultimately proved to be the downfall of Roosevelt. Just as he had challenged Taft in 1912, La Follette challenged the presidency on a strong anti-war campaign. Unsuccessful in his attempts to gain the Republican nomination, La Follette ran a third party campaign - as both the Democratic nominee Oscar Underwood and President Roosevelt supported the war. He chose the famous multi-election-contesting Democratic William Jennings Bryan as his running mate, whilst the Socialist Party also endorsed the LaFollette/Bryan ticket instead of running their own candidate. LaFollette was then elected in an upset on the backs of anti-war voters in what would prove to be a crucial realignment election for years to come. Following his election, the United States withdrew from the conflict and introduced a radical social programme - including a minimum wage, a workers' compensation system, the prohibition of 'yellow-dog' contracts, the prohibition of child labour and government ownership of electricity and railroads.
[3] The good intentions of the first Progressive government presented some unexpected problems for the United States. American withdrawal from the war and the strong anti-conflict feelings of the government struck the national economy hard, and soon the budget was struggling under the demands of the new social system. The First Red Scare began in 1919 - partly fuelled by nervous industrial conservatives and attacks upon Wall Street and other financial institutions. Whilst labour opinion remained in the favour of the Progressives, the centre ground fell to the strong-arming Republicans (who nominated hardliner Thaddeus Sweet) who returned to government with a narrow majority in the Electoral College. It would prove a difficult administration for the United States, as economic unrest fuelled union discontent; revolution remained a farcical idea, but by 1922 strikes were common.

"A Rematch of 1928"
What if Herbert Hoover was re-elected in 1932 as the Democratic Party re-nominated Al Smith?

1928: Herbert Hoover / Charles Curtis (Republican)
1932: Herbert Hoover / Charles Curtis (Republican)
1936: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [1]
1940: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [2]

[1] In a repeat of the contest in 1928, the re-election of Hoover was a shock result and hit the Democratic Party hard. However, the Great Depression continued to devastate the United States and by 1935 national unemployment had reached 35%. The radicalization of the electorate sponsored the creation of the combined Progressive-Farmer-Labor Party (a combination from across the entire left) with Olson and Sinclair elected in a landslide. With his strong mandate, Olson implemented a "social security programme" with a strong pro-labour bias with sweeping nationalization. He also initiated a large military-industrial commitment as a result of the far-right revanchist rise in Europe.
[2] The PFL government remained popular, and after the outbreak of the Second World War Olson was returned for a second term. Whilst at first the United States remained outside of the conflict, the sinking of the SS Robin Moor in 1941 brought the issue to a head. The Western powers would continue to slog through the Axis powers, and by 1944 Germany was choking under the weight of Soviet repercussions. The fate of Japan remained a major issue for the electoral competition.

Constantinople · Jun 27, 2015

I think we're gonna have to assume his stomach cancer was avoided...

"A Rematch of 1928"
What if Herbert Hoover was re-elected in 1932 as the Democratic Party re-nominated Al Smith?

1928: Herbert Hoover / Charles Curtis (Republican)
1932: Herbert Hoover / Charles Curtis (Republican)
1936: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [1]
1940: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [2]
1944: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [3]

[1] In a repeat of the contest in 1928, the re-election of Hoover was a shock result and hit the Democratic Party hard. However, the Great Depression continued to devastate the United States and by 1935 national unemployment had reached 35%. The radicalization of the electorate sponsored the creation of the combined Progressive-Farmer-Labor Party (a combination from across the entire left) with Olson and Sinclair elected in a landslide. With his strong mandate, Olson implemented a "social security programme" with a strong pro-labour bias with sweeping nationalization. He also initiated a large military-industrial commitment as a result of the far-right revanchist rise in Europe.
[2] The PFL government remained popular, and after the outbreak of the Second World War Olson was returned for a second term. Whilst at first the United States remained outside of the conflict, the sinking of the SS Robin Moor in 1941 brought the issue to a head. The Western powers would continue to slog through the Axis powers, and by 1944 Germany was choking under the weight of Soviet repercussions. The fate of Japan remained a major issue for the electoral competition.
[3] Breaking with convention, Olson wins a third term, in another landslide. The ongoing successes in the war along their Soviet (and also Western Allies

) as well as the booming economy and recovery, made the election an easy affair. With the war wrapping up in early 1945, with Franco-British forces shaking hands with Soviet-American forces on bridges over the Rhine and American soldiers storming the beaches of a starving Japan, Olson and Sinclair return to their long held domestic policy goals: the full implementation of a cradle to grave welfare state and universe healthcare system. The great sacrifices made in the Second World War (some 950,000 American dead) boosted support for the programs, which which forced through Congress over fanatical (but futile) Republican opposition.

Premier Taylerov · Jun 28, 2015

"A Republican Schism Avoided"
What if Theodore Roosevelt had secured the Republican nomination in 1912?

1912: Theodore Roosevelt / James S. Sherman (Republican) [1]
1916: Robert M. La Follette / William Jennings Bryan (Progressive) [2]
1920: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [3]

[1] The 1912 Republican nomination was one of the first to be decided via presidential preference primaries, and despite early victories by Robert M. La Follette, former President Theodore Roosevelt narrowly secured his candidacy having side-lined the traditional Republican wing of William Taft. The outbreak of the Great War in 1914 pitted the hawkish Roosevelt against the anti-war wings of both his own party and the Democrats.
[2] The controversy surrounding the American intervention in the Great War ultimately proved to be the downfall of Roosevelt. Just as he had challenged Taft in 1912, La Follette challenged the presidency on a strong anti-war campaign. Unsuccessful in his attempts to gain the Republican nomination, La Follette ran a third party campaign - as both the Democratic nominee Oscar Underwood and President Roosevelt supported the war. He chose the famous multi-election-contesting Democratic William Jennings Bryan as his running mate, whilst the Socialist Party also endorsed the LaFollette/Bryan ticket instead of running their own candidate. LaFollette was then elected in an upset on the backs of anti-war voters in what would prove to be a crucial realignment election for years to come. Following his election, the United States withdrew from the conflict and introduced a radical social programme - including a minimum wage, a workers' compensation system, the prohibition of 'yellow-dog' contracts, the prohibition of child labour and government ownership of electricity and railroads.
[3] The good intentions of the first Progressive government presented some unexpected problems for the United States. American withdrawal from the war and the strong anti-conflict feelings of the government struck the national economy hard, and soon the budget was struggling under the demands of the new social system. The First Red Scare began in 1919 - partly fuelled by nervous industrial conservatives and attacks upon Wall Street and other financial institutions. Whilst labour opinion remained in the favour of the Progressives, the centre ground fell to the strong-arming Republicans (who nominated hardliner Thaddeus Sweet) who returned to government with a narrow majority in the Electoral College. It would prove a difficult administration for the United States, as economic unrest fuelled union discontent; revolution remained a farcical idea, but by 1922 strikes were common.

"A Rematch of 1928"
What if Herbert Hoover was re-elected in 1932 as the Democratic Party re-nominated Al Smith?

1928: Herbert Hoover / Charles Curtis (Republican)
1932: Herbert Hoover / Charles Curtis (Republican)
1936: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [1]
1940: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [2]
1944: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [3]
1948: Lee Pressman / Rexford Tugwell (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [4]

[1] In a repeat of the contest in 1928, the re-election of Hoover was a shock result and hit the Democratic Party hard. However, the Great Depression continued to devastate the United States and by 1935 national unemployment had reached 35%. The radicalization of the electorate sponsored the creation of the combined Progressive-Farmer-Labor Party (a combination from across the entire left) with Olson and Sinclair elected in a landslide. With his strong mandate, Olson implemented a "social security programme" with a strong pro-labour bias with sweeping nationalization. He also initiated a large military-industrial commitment as a result of the far-right revanchist rise in Europe.
[2] The PFL government remained popular, and after the outbreak of the Second World War Olson was returned for a second term. Whilst at first the United States remained outside of the conflict, the sinking of the SS Robin Moor in 1941 brought the issue to a head. The Western powers would continue to slog through the Axis powers, and by 1944 Germany was choking under the weight of Soviet repercussions. The fate of Japan remained a major issue for the electoral competition.
[3] Breaking the undeclared tradition to not run for a third term, Olson won another landslide in 1944. The success in the War (as well as the booming economy) resulted in the defeat of Germany by 1945 and the beginning of the invasion of Japan, and Olson returned to domestic policy.The great sacrifices made in the War (some 950,000 American dead) boosted support for the welfare system and universal healthcare, which was forced through Congress over fanatical (but futile) Republican opposition.
[4] The rise of the PFL had created a complete political monopoly in the United States, and consequently when Olson announced he would not stand in 1948 the party fell victim to factional infighting. This division would eventually be won by the hardliner-left, and Press and Tugwell rode the PFL name into office against minor opposition. Whilst the Republicans carried a few states, the near-fanatical States' Right Party overtook them in the South. The American abandonment of capitalism began.

Historia Crux · Jun 28, 2015

"A Republican Schism Avoided"
What if Theodore Roosevelt had secured the Republican nomination in 1912?

1912: Theodore Roosevelt / James S. Sherman (Republican) [1]
1916: Robert M. La Follette / William Jennings Bryan (Progressive) [2]
1920: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [3]
1924: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [4]

[1] The 1912 Republican nomination was one of the first to be decided via presidential preference primaries, and despite early victories by Robert M. La Follette, former President Theodore Roosevelt narrowly secured his candidacy having side-lined the traditional Republican wing of William Taft. The outbreak of the Great War in 1914 pitted the hawkish Roosevelt against the anti-war wings of both his own party and the Democrats.
[2] The controversy surrounding the American intervention in the Great War ultimately proved to be the downfall of Roosevelt. Just as he had challenged Taft in 1912, La Follette challenged the presidency on a strong anti-war campaign. Unsuccessful in his attempts to gain the Republican nomination, La Follette ran a third party campaign - as both the Democratic nominee Oscar Underwood and President Roosevelt supported the war. He chose the famous multi-election-contesting Democratic William Jennings Bryan as his running mate, whilst the Socialist Party also endorsed the LaFollette/Bryan ticket instead of running their own candidate. LaFollette was then elected in an upset on the backs of anti-war voters in what would prove to be a crucial realignment election for years to come. Following his election, the United States withdrew from the conflict and introduced a radical social programme - including a minimum wage, a workers' compensation system, the prohibition of 'yellow-dog' contracts, the prohibition of child labour and government ownership of electricity and railroads.
[3] The good intentions of the first Progressive government presented some unexpected problems for the United States. American withdrawal from the war and the strong anti-conflict feelings of the government struck the national economy hard, and soon the budget was struggling under the demands of the new social system. The First Red Scare began in 1919 - partly fuelled by nervous industrial conservatives and attacks upon Wall Street and other financial institutions. Whilst labour opinion remained in the favour of the Progressives, the centre ground fell to the strong-arming Republicans (who nominated hardliner Thaddeus Sweet) who returned to government with a narrow majority in the Electoral College. It would prove a difficult administration for the United States, as economic unrest fuelled union discontent; revolution remained a farcical idea, but by 1922 strikes were common.
[4] Sweet won a narrow victory against the Progressive nominee Roscoe Pound, reflecting a growing polarization in the electorate. Labor unrest continued to swell in the nation and the Administration's heavy handed approach seemed to only create more and bloodier unrest. By 1928 the economy had begun to recover, albeit slowly, and the evident political divisions had begun to grate with the American people. With this, a demand for a transitional figure was higher than ever.

"A Rematch of 1928"
What if Herbert Hoover was re-elected in 1932 as the Democratic Party re-nominated Al Smith?

1928: Herbert Hoover / Charles Curtis (Republican)
1932: Herbert Hoover / Charles Curtis (Republican)
1936: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [1]
1940: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [2]
1944: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [3]
1948: Lee Pressman / Rexford Tugwell (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [4]

[1] In a repeat of the contest in 1928, the re-election of Hoover was a shock result and hit the Democratic Party hard. However, the Great Depression continued to devastate the United States and by 1935 national unemployment had reached 35%. The radicalization of the electorate sponsored the creation of the combined Progressive-Farmer-Labor Party (a combination from across the entire left) with Olson and Sinclair elected in a landslide. With his strong mandate, Olson implemented a "social security programme" with a strong pro-labour bias with sweeping nationalization. He also initiated a large military-industrial commitment as a result of the far-right revanchist rise in Europe.
[2] The PFL government remained popular, and after the outbreak of the Second World War Olson was returned for a second term. Whilst at first the United States remained outside of the conflict, the sinking of the SS Robin Moor in 1941 brought the issue to a head. The Western powers would continue to slog through the Axis powers, and by 1944 Germany was choking under the weight of Soviet repercussions. The fate of Japan remained a major issue for the electoral competition.
[3] Breaking the undeclared tradition to not run for a third term, Olson won another landslide in 1944. The success in the War (as well as the booming economy) resulted in the defeat of Germany by 1945 and the beginning of the invasion of Japan, and Olson returned to domestic policy.The great sacrifices made in the War (some 950,000 American dead) boosted support for the welfare system and universal healthcare, which was forced through Congress over fanatical (but futile) Republican opposition.
[4] The rise of the PFL had created a complete political monopoly in the United States, and consequently when Olson announced he would not stand in 1948 the party fell victim to factional infighting. This division would eventually be won by the hardliner-left, and Press and Tugwell rode the PFL name into office against minor opposition. Whilst the Republicans carried a few states, the near-fanatical States' Right Party overtook them in the South. The American abandonment of capitalism began.

Premier Taylerov · Jul 4, 2015

"A Republican Schism Avoided"
What if Theodore Roosevelt had secured the Republican nomination in 1912?

1912: Theodore Roosevelt / James S. Sherman (Republican) [1]
1916: Robert M. La Follette / William Jennings Bryan (Progressive) [2]
1920: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [3]
1924: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [4]
1928: Robert L. Owen / Edward Keating (Progressive) [5]

[1] The 1912 Republican nomination was one of the first to be decided via presidential preference primaries, and despite early victories by Robert M. La Follette, former President Theodore Roosevelt narrowly secured his candidacy having side-lined the traditional Republican wing of William Taft. The outbreak of the Great War in 1914 pitted the hawkish Roosevelt against the anti-war wings of both his own party and the Democrats.
[2] The controversy surrounding the American intervention in the Great War ultimately proved to be the downfall of Roosevelt. Just as he had challenged Taft in 1912, La Follette challenged the presidency on a strong anti-war campaign. Unsuccessful in his attempts to gain the Republican nomination, La Follette ran a third party campaign - as both the Democratic nominee Oscar Underwood and President Roosevelt supported the war. He chose the famous multi-election-contesting Democratic William Jennings Bryan as his running mate, whilst the Socialist Party also endorsed the LaFollette/Bryan ticket instead of running their own candidate. LaFollette was then elected in an upset on the backs of anti-war voters in what would prove to be a crucial realignment election for years to come. Following his election, the United States withdrew from the conflict and introduced a radical social programme - including a minimum wage, a workers' compensation system, the prohibition of 'yellow-dog' contracts, the prohibition of child labour and government ownership of electricity and railroads.
[3] The good intentions of the first Progressive government presented some unexpected problems for the United States. American withdrawal from the war and the strong anti-conflict feelings of the government struck the national economy hard, and soon the budget was struggling under the demands of the new social system. The First Red Scare began in 1919 - partly fuelled by nervous industrial conservatives and attacks upon Wall Street and other financial institutions. Whilst labour opinion remained in the favour of the Progressives, the centre ground fell to the strong-arming Republicans (who nominated hardliner Thaddeus Sweet) who returned to government with a narrow majority in the Electoral College. It would prove a difficult administration for the United States, as economic unrest fuelled union discontent; revolution remained a farcical idea, but by 1922 strikes were common.
[4] Sweet won a narrow victory against the Progressive nominee Roscoe Pound in an election that reflected the growing polarization within the electorate. Labour unrest continued to swell,and the heavy-handed approach from the Sweet administration seemed to only exacerbate further tensions. By 1928 the economy had begun to recover - albeit slowly - and the evident political divisions had begun to grate with the American people. With this, a demand for a transitional figure was higher than ever.
[5] The Progressive duo of Owen and Keating would provide the release that the nation needed from the economic insecurity; entering into office with a large majority in both Houses, Owen continued the Progressive push for limited reform and took the attention firmly away from the quarrelling unions. A moderate government, Owen faced a Republican resurgence in the mid-term elections but his International Currency Conference in 1930 was a popular move to help integrate the reviving American economy with the sluggish gold-standard-dominated systems of Europe.

Fleetlord · Jul 13, 2015

Ba-dump

"A Republican Schism Avoided"
What if Theodore Roosevelt had secured the Republican nomination in 1912?

1912: Theodore Roosevelt / James S. Sherman (Republican) [1]
1916: Robert M. La Follette / William Jennings Bryan (Progressive) [2]
1920: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [3]
1924: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [4]
1928: Robert L. Owen / Edward Keating (Progressive) [5]
1932: Robert L. Owen / Edward Keating (Progressive) [6]

[1] The 1912 Republican nomination was one of the first to be decided via presidential preference primaries, and despite early victories by Robert M. La Follette, former President Theodore Roosevelt narrowly secured his candidacy having side-lined the traditional Republican wing of William Taft. The outbreak of the Great War in 1914 pitted the hawkish Roosevelt against the anti-war wings of both his own party and the Democrats.
[2] The controversy surrounding the American intervention in the Great War ultimately proved to be the downfall of Roosevelt. Just as he had challenged Taft in 1912, La Follette challenged the presidency on a strong anti-war campaign. Unsuccessful in his attempts to gain the Republican nomination, La Follette ran a third party campaign - as both the Democratic nominee Oscar Underwood and President Roosevelt supported the war. He chose the famous multi-election-contesting Democratic William Jennings Bryan as his running mate, whilst the Socialist Party also endorsed the LaFollette/Bryan ticket instead of running their own candidate. LaFollette was then elected in an upset on the backs of anti-war voters in what would prove to be a crucial realignment election for years to come. Following his election, the United States withdrew from the conflict and introduced a radical social programme - including a minimum wage, a workers' compensation system, the prohibition of 'yellow-dog' contracts, the prohibition of child labour and government ownership of electricity and railroads.
[3] The good intentions of the first Progressive government presented some unexpected problems for the United States. American withdrawal from the war and the strong anti-conflict feelings of the government struck the national economy hard, and soon the budget was struggling under the demands of the new social system. The First Red Scare began in 1919 - partly fuelled by nervous industrial conservatives and attacks upon Wall Street and other financial institutions. Whilst labour opinion remained in the favour of the Progressives, the centre ground fell to the strong-arming Republicans (who nominated hardliner Thaddeus Sweet) who returned to government with a narrow majority in the Electoral College. It would prove a difficult administration for the United States, as economic unrest fuelled union discontent; revolution remained a farcical idea, but by 1922 strikes were common.
[4] Sweet won a narrow victory against the Progressive nominee Roscoe Pound in an election that reflected the growing polarization within the electorate. Labour unrest continued to swell,and the heavy-handed approach from the Sweet administration seemed to only exacerbate further tensions. By 1928 the economy had begun to recover - albeit slowly - and the evident political divisions had begun to grate with the American people. With this, a demand for a transitional figure was higher than ever.
[5] The Progressive duo of Owen and Keating would provide the release that the nation needed from the economic insecurity; entering into office with a large majority in both Houses, Owen continued the Progressive push for limited reform and took the attention firmly away from the quarrelling unions. A moderate government, Owen faced a Republican resurgence in the mid-term elections but his International Currency Conference in 1930 was a popular move to help integrate the reviving American economy with the sluggish gold-standard-dominated systems of Europe.
[6] Owen was easily re-elected over the Republicans in 1932. (The Democratic label still exists in the Old South, but the party no longer runs its own ticket and is increasingly a branch of the Progressives.) Economic recovery continues apace, and aside from the Progressive dream of Social Security, no major domestic legislation is passed. Owen finds the last two years of his term increasingly consumed by foreign affairs, as Prime Minister Newman renews the London-Tokyo Pact in what is widely seen as an aggressive move.

"A Rematch of 1928"
What if Herbert Hoover was re-elected in 1932 as the Democratic Party re-nominated Al Smith?

1928: Herbert Hoover / Charles Curtis (Republican)
1932: Herbert Hoover / Charles Curtis (Republican)
1936: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [1]
1940: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [2]
1944: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [3]
1948: Lee Pressman / Rexford Tugwell (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [4]
1952: Robert LaFollette, Jr. / Maxwell A. Lerner (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [5]

[1] In a repeat of the contest in 1928, the re-election of Hoover was a shock result and hit the Democratic Party hard. However, the Great Depression continued to devastate the United States and by 1935 national unemployment had reached 35%. The radicalization of the electorate sponsored the creation of the combined Progressive-Farmer-Labor Party (a combination from across the entire left) with Olson and Sinclair elected in a landslide. With his strong mandate, Olson implemented a "social security programme" with a strong pro-labour bias with sweeping nationalization. He also initiated a large military-industrial commitment as a result of the far-right revanchist rise in Europe.
[2] The PFL government remained popular, and after the outbreak of the Second World War Olson was returned for a second term. Whilst at first the United States remained outside of the conflict, the sinking of the SS Robin Moor in 1941 brought the issue to a head. The Western powers would continue to slog through the Axis powers, and by 1944 Germany was choking under the weight of Soviet repercussions. The fate of Japan remained a major issue for the electoral competition.
[3] Breaking the undeclared tradition to not run for a third term, Olson won another landslide in 1944. The success in the War (as well as the booming economy) resulted in the defeat of Germany by 1945 and the beginning of the invasion of Japan, and Olson returned to domestic policy.The great sacrifices made in the War (some 950,000 American dead) boosted support for the welfare system and universal healthcare, which was forced through Congress over fanatical (but futile) Republican opposition.
[4] The rise of the PFL had created a complete political monopoly in the United States, and consequently when Olson announced he would not stand in 1948 the party fell victim to factional infighting. This division would eventually be won by the hardliner-left, and Pressman and Tugwell rode the PFL name into office against minor opposition. Whilst the Republicans carried a few states, the near-fanatical States' Right Party overtook them in the South. The American abandonment of capitalism began.
[5] While the PFL was consolidating as the dominant party, the Pressman administration was quickly hobbled by a post-war economic slump, which seemed to prove that his aggressive nationalizations were moving too far, too fast. The moderate wing of the PFL would ascend at the convention, and LaFollette would win the election against the usual scattered opposition.

Unfortunately, the growing strain in the Soviet-American alliance, combined with the Gaullist coup in France, proved too much for LaFollette's unstable personality, and he committed suicide in 1954.

Premier Taylerov · Jul 22, 2015

I'd like to bump with a new idea to see if other people are tempted - I'd like to suggest we remove (or at least postpone) the PFL timeline in favour of a different period/theme as these two are pretty similar in many ways.

"A Republican Schism Avoided"
What if Theodore Roosevelt had secured the Republican nomination in 1912?

1912: Theodore Roosevelt / James S. Sherman (Republican) [1]
1916: Robert M. La Follette / William Jennings Bryan (Progressive) [2]
1920: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [3]
1924: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [4]
1928: Robert L. Owen / Edward Keating (Progressive) [5]
1932: Robert L. Owen / Edward Keating (Progressive) [6]
1936: Robert A. Taft / Hamilton Fish III (Republican) [7]

[1] The 1912 Republican nomination was one of the first to be decided via presidential preference primaries, and despite early victories by Robert M. La Follette, former President Theodore Roosevelt narrowly secured his candidacy having side-lined the traditional Republican wing of William Taft. The outbreak of the Great War in 1914 pitted the hawkish Roosevelt against the anti-war wings of both his own party and the Democrats.
[2] The controversy surrounding the American intervention in the Great War ultimately proved to be the downfall of Roosevelt. Just as he had challenged Taft in 1912, La Follette challenged the presidency on a strong anti-war campaign. Unsuccessful in his attempts to gain the Republican nomination, La Follette ran a third party campaign - as both the Democratic nominee Oscar Underwood and President Roosevelt supported the war. He chose the famous multi-election-contesting Democratic William Jennings Bryan as his running mate, whilst the Socialist Party also endorsed the LaFollette/Bryan ticket instead of running their own candidate. LaFollette was then elected in an upset on the backs of anti-war voters in what would prove to be a crucial realignment election for years to come. Following his election, the United States withdrew from the conflict and introduced a radical social programme - including a minimum wage, a workers' compensation system, the prohibition of 'yellow-dog' contracts, the prohibition of child labour and government ownership of electricity and railroads.
[3] The good intentions of the first Progressive government presented some unexpected problems for the United States. American withdrawal from the war and the strong anti-conflict feelings of the government struck the national economy hard, and soon the budget was struggling under the demands of the new social system. The First Red Scare began in 1919 - partly fuelled by nervous industrial conservatives and attacks upon Wall Street and other financial institutions. Whilst labour opinion remained in the favour of the Progressives, the centre ground fell to the strong-arming Republicans (who nominated hardliner Thaddeus Sweet) who returned to government with a narrow majority in the Electoral College. It would prove a difficult administration for the United States, as economic unrest fuelled union discontent; revolution remained a farcical idea, but by 1922 strikes were common.
[4] Sweet won a narrow victory against the Progressive nominee Roscoe Pound in an election that reflected the growing polarization within the electorate. Labour unrest continued to swell, and the heavy-handed approach from the Sweet administration seemed to only exacerbate further tensions. By 1928 the economy had begun to recover - albeit slowly - and the evident political divisions had begun to grate with the American people. With this, a demand for a transitional figure was higher than ever.
[5] The Progressive duo of Owen and Keating would provide the release that the nation needed from the economic insecurity; entering into office with a large majority in both Houses, Owen continued the Progressive push for limited reform and took the attention firmly away from the quarrelling unions. A moderate government, Owen faced a Republican resurgence in the mid-term elections but his International Currency Conference in 1930 was a popular move to help integrate the reviving American economy with the sluggish gold-standard-dominated systems of Europe.
[6] Owen was easily re-elected over the Republicans in 1932. (The Democratic label still existed within the Old South, but the party no longer ran an independent ticket and was increasingly a branch of the Progressives). Economic recovery continued, and aside from the Progressive dream of Social Security no major domestic legislation was passed. Owen found the last two years of his term increasingly consumed by foreign affairs - as Britain renewed the London-Tokyo Pact as an all-encompassing strategic alliance in the years after the Middle Class Union coup led by John Pretyman Newman.
[7] Foreign affairs remained the dominant agenda into the 1936 election, and despite the moderate domestic achievements of the Progressives the party was badly defeated. The Republican ticket of Taft and Fish sought American isolationism from the growing pains of the Imperial Co-Operative* in Eurasia; all-in-all, Taft was a moderate who understood the need for minor regulation within industry and was keen to modernize his party in the age of the Progressives. Nevertheless, whilst his stance of foreign issues was generally popular across the political spectrum he faced resistance from traditional conservatives within the "old order" of the Republicans and those to favoured further concessions to the moderates (led by Dewey).

* The Imperial Co-Operative was formed by the British Empire (and the Commonwealth) and the Empire of Japan; it also includes the French Empire (very much a second rate power), the Netherlands, Belgium and the British-financed League of Arab States. It is traditionally but unofficially opposed by the unaffiliated United States, the German Empire (with Alsace-Lorraine), the Russian Republic, Indian separatists and most of the Chinese remnants. Canada is notable amongst the Commonwealth for being rather against the whole plan, although the concept of Middle Class Unionism within the other Commonwealth states is quite popular.

"A Rematch of 1928"
What if Herbert Hoover was re-elected in 1932 as the Democratic Party re-nominated Al Smith?

1928: Herbert Hoover / Charles Curtis (Republican)
1932: Herbert Hoover / Charles Curtis (Republican)
1936: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [1]
1940: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [2]
1944: Floyd B. Olson / Upton Sinclair (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [3]
1948: Lee Pressman / Rexford Tugwell (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [4]
1952: Robert LaFollette, Jr. / Maxwell A. Lerner (Progressive-Farmer-Labor) [5]

[1] In a repeat of the contest in 1928, the re-election of Hoover was a shock result and hit the Democratic Party hard. However, the Great Depression continued to devastate the United States and by 1935 national unemployment had reached 35%. The radicalization of the electorate sponsored the creation of the combined Progressive-Farmer-Labor Party (a combination from across the entire left) with Olson and Sinclair elected in a landslide. With his strong mandate, Olson implemented a "social security programme" with a strong pro-labour bias with sweeping nationalization. He also initiated a large military-industrial commitment as a result of the far-right revanchist rise in Europe.
[2] The PFL government remained popular, and after the outbreak of the Second World War Olson was returned for a second term. Whilst at first the United States remained outside of the conflict, the sinking of the SS Robin Moor in 1941 brought the issue to a head. The Western powers would continue to slog through the Axis powers, and by 1944 Germany was choking under the weight of Soviet repercussions. The fate of Japan remained a major issue for the electoral competition.
[3] Breaking the undeclared tradition to not run for a third term, Olson won another landslide in 1944. The success in the War (as well as the booming economy) resulted in the defeat of Germany by 1945 and the beginning of the invasion of Japan, and Olson returned to domestic policy.The great sacrifices made in the War (some 950,000 American dead) boosted support for the welfare system and universal healthcare, which was forced through Congress over fanatical (but futile) Republican opposition.
[4] The rise of the PFL had created a complete political monopoly in the United States, and consequently when Olson announced he would not stand in 1948 the party fell victim to factional infighting. This division would eventually be won by the hardliner-left, and Pressman and Tugwell rode the PFL name into office against minor opposition. Whilst the Republicans carried a few states, the near-fanatical States' Right Party overtook them in the South. The American abandonment of capitalism began.
[5] While the PFL had now been consolidated as a virtual political monopoly, the Pressman administration was quickly hobbled by a post-war economic slump which seemed to indicate that the sweepingly-aggressive nationalizations were moving too fast. The moderate wing of the PFL would ascend at the convention, and LaFollette would win the election against the usual scattered opposition. Unfortunately, the growing strain in the Soviet-American alliance (combined with the Gaullist coup in France), proved too much - and he committed suicide in 1954.

Gaius Julius Magnus · Jul 24, 2015

"A Republican Schism Avoided"
What if Theodore Roosevelt had secured the Republican nomination in 1912?

1912: Theodore Roosevelt / James S. Sherman (Republican) [1]
1916: Robert M. La Follette / William Jennings Bryan (Progressive) [2]
1920: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [3]
1924: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [4]
1928: Robert L. Owen / Edward Keating (Progressive) [5]
1932: Robert L. Owen / Edward Keating (Progressive) [6]
1936: Robert A. Taft / Hamilton Fish III (Republican)[7]
1940: Robert A. Taft /Cordell Hull (Republican/Democratic)

[1] The 1912 Republican nomination was one of the first to be decided via presidential preference primaries, and despite early victories by Robert M. La Follette, former President Theodore Roosevelt narrowly secured his candidacy having side-lined the traditional Republican wing of William Taft. The outbreak of the Great War in 1914 pitted the hawkish Roosevelt against the anti-war wings of both his own party and the Democrats.
[2] The controversy surrounding the American intervention in the Great War ultimately proved to be the downfall of Roosevelt. Just as he had challenged Taft in 1912, La Follette challenged the presidency on a strong anti-war campaign. Unsuccessful in his attempts to gain the Republican nomination, La Follette ran a third party campaign - as both the Democratic nominee Oscar Underwood and President Roosevelt supported the war. He chose the famous multi-election-contesting Democratic William Jennings Bryan as his running mate, whilst the Socialist Party also endorsed the LaFollette/Bryan ticket instead of running their own candidate. LaFollette was then elected in an upset on the backs of anti-war voters in what would prove to be a crucial realignment election for years to come. Following his election, the United States withdrew from the conflict and introduced a radical social programme - including a minimum wage, a workers' compensation system, the prohibition of 'yellow-dog' contracts, the prohibition of child labour and government ownership of electricity and railroads.
[3] The good intentions of the first Progressive government presented some unexpected problems for the United States. American withdrawal from the war and the strong anti-conflict feelings of the government struck the national economy hard, and soon the budget was struggling under the demands of the new social system. The First Red Scare began in 1919 - partly fueled by nervous industrial conservatives and attacks upon Wall Street and other financial institutions. Whilst labour opinion remained in the favor of the Progressives, the centre ground fell to the strong-arming Republicans (who nominated hardliner Thaddeus Sweet) who returned to government with a narrow majority in the Electoral College. It would prove a difficult administration for the United States, as economic unrest fuelled union discontent; revolution remained a farcical idea, but by 1922 strikes were common.
[4] Sweet won a narrow victory against the Progressive nominee Roscoe Pound in an election that reflected the growing polarization within the electorate. Labour unrest continued to swell, and the heavy-handed approach from the Sweet administration seemed to only exacerbate further tensions. By 1928 the economy had begun to recover - albeit slowly - and the evident political divisions had begun to grate with the American people. With this, a demand for a transitional figure was higher than ever.
[5] The Progressive duo of Owen and Keating would provide the release that the nation needed from the economic insecurity; entering into office with a large majority in both Houses, Owen continued the Progressive push for limited reform and took the attention firmly away from the quarrelling unions. A moderate government, Owen faced a Republican resurgence in the mid-term elections but his International Currency Conference in 1930 was a popular move to help integrate the reviving American economy with the sluggish gold-standard-dominated systems of Europe.
[6] Owen was easily re-elected over the Republicans in 1932. (The Democratic label still existed within the Old South, but the party no longer ran an independent ticket and was increasingly a branch of the Progressives). Economic recovery continued, and aside from the Progressive dream of Social Security no major domestic legislation was passed. Owen found the last two years of his term increasingly consumed by foreign affairs - as Britain renewed the London-Tokyo Pact as an all-encompassing strategic alliance in the years after the Middle Class Union coup led by John Pretyman Newman.
[7] Foreign affairs remained the dominant agenda into the 1936 election, and despite the moderate domestic achievements of the Progressives the party was badly defeated. The Republican ticket of Taft and Fish sought American isolationism from the growing pains of the Imperial Co-Operative* in Eurasia; all-in-all, Taft was a moderate who understood the need for minor regulation within industry and was keen to modernize his party in the age of the Progressives. Nevertheless, whilst his stance of foreign issues was generally popular across the political spectrum he faced resistance from traditional conservatives within the "old order" of the Republicans and those to favoured further concessions to the moderates (led by Dewey).
[8] The election of 1940 was one of the closest in U.S. history, with neither party no candidate gaining a majority in the electoral college and the election being thrown to the House of Representatives. As Taft won the popular vote and plurality of the popular vote it was widely accepted that he would remain as President. In order to obtain that he made a deal with the resurgent Democratic Party that they their members in the House would vote for Taft as President and vote for Cordell Hull (the Democratic VP nominee) as the Vice-President in the Senate as well as some Democrats as Cabinet members and certain pushing of legislation. It was the first time since Adams and Jefferson in 1797 that two different candidates from an election would serve as President and Vice-President together. As well as the first time a Democrat had been in the executive branch since Cleveland.

* The Imperial Co-Operative was formed by the British Empire (and the Commonwealth) and the Empire of Japan; it also includes the French Empire (very much a second rate power), the Netherlands, Belgium and the British-financed League of Arab States. It is traditionally but unofficially opposed by the unaffiliated United States, the German Empire (with Alsace-Lorraine), the Russian Republic, Indian separatists and most of the Chinese remnants. Canada is notable amongst the Commonwealth for being rather against the whole plan, although the concept of Middle Class Unionism within the other Commonwealth states is quite popular.

Premier Taylerov · Jul 25, 2015

"A Republican Schism Avoided"
What if Theodore Roosevelt had secured the Republican nomination in 1912?

1912: Theodore Roosevelt / James S. Sherman (Republican) [1]
1916: Robert M. La Follette / William Jennings Bryan (Progressive) [2]
1920: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [3]
1924: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [4]
1928: Robert L. Owen / Edward Keating (Progressive) [5]
1932: Robert L. Owen / Edward Keating (Progressive) [6]
1936: Robert A. Taft / Hamilton Fish III (Republican) [7]
1940: Robert A. Taft / Cordell Hull (Republican / Democratic) [8]
1944: John W. Bricker / Cordell Hull (Republican / Democratic) [9]

[1] The 1912 Republican nomination was one of the first to be decided via presidential preference primaries, and despite early victories by Robert M. La Follette, former President Theodore Roosevelt narrowly secured his candidacy having side-lined the traditional Republican wing of William Taft. The outbreak of the Great War in 1914 pitted the hawkish Roosevelt against the anti-war wings of both his own party and the Democrats.
[2] The controversy surrounding the American intervention in the Great War ultimately proved to be the downfall of Roosevelt. Just as he had challenged Taft in 1912, La Follette challenged the presidency on a strong anti-war campaign. Unsuccessful in his attempts to gain the Republican nomination, La Follette ran a third party campaign - as both the Democratic nominee Oscar Underwood and President Roosevelt supported the war. He chose the famous multi-election-contesting Democratic William Jennings Bryan as his running mate, whilst the Socialist Party also endorsed the LaFollette/Bryan ticket instead of running their own candidate. LaFollette was then elected in an upset on the backs of anti-war voters in what would prove to be a crucial realignment election for years to come. Following his election, the United States withdrew from the conflict and introduced a radical social programme - including a minimum wage, a workers' compensation system, the prohibition of 'yellow-dog' contracts, the prohibition of child labour and government ownership of electricity and railroads.
[3] The good intentions of the first Progressive government presented some unexpected problems for the United States. American withdrawal from the war and the strong anti-conflict feelings of the government struck the national economy hard, and soon the budget was struggling under the demands of the new social system. The First Red Scare began in 1919 - partly fueled by nervous industrial conservatives and attacks upon Wall Street and other financial institutions. Whilst labour opinion remained in the favor of the Progressives, the centre ground fell to the strong-arming Republicans (who nominated hardliner Thaddeus Sweet) who returned to government with a narrow majority in the Electoral College. It would prove a difficult administration for the United States, as economic unrest fuelled union discontent; revolution remained a farcical idea, but by 1922 strikes were common.
[4] Sweet won a narrow victory against the Progressive nominee Roscoe Pound in an election that reflected the growing polarization within the electorate. Labour unrest continued to swell, and the heavy-handed approach from the Sweet administration seemed to only exacerbate further tensions. By 1928 the economy had begun to recover - albeit slowly - and the evident political divisions had begun to grate with the American people. With this, a demand for a transitional figure was higher than ever.
[5] The Progressive duo of Owen and Keating would provide the release that the nation needed from the economic insecurity; entering into office with a large majority in both Houses, Owen continued the Progressive push for limited reform and took the attention firmly away from the quarrelling unions. A moderate government, Owen faced a Republican resurgence in the mid-term elections but his International Currency Conference in 1930 was a popular move to help integrate the reviving American economy with the sluggish gold-standard-dominated systems of Europe.
[6] Owen was easily re-elected over the Republicans in 1932. (The Democratic label still existed within the Old South, but the party no longer ran an independent ticket and was increasingly a branch of the Progressives). Economic recovery continued, and aside from the Progressive dream of Social Security no major domestic legislation was passed. Owen found the last two years of his term increasingly consumed by foreign affairs - as Britain renewed the London-Tokyo Pact as an all-encompassing strategic alliance in the years after the Middle Class Union coup led by John Pretyman Newman.
[7] Foreign affairs remained the dominant agenda into the 1936 election, and despite the moderate domestic achievements of the Progressives the party was badly defeated. The Republican ticket of Taft and Fish sought American isolationism from the growing pains of the Imperial Co-Operative in Eurasia; all-in-all, Taft was a moderate who understood the need for minor regulation within industry and was keen to modernize his party in the age of the Progressives. Nevertheless, whilst his stance of foreign issues was generally popular across the political spectrum he faced resistance from traditional conservatives within the "old order" of the Republicans and those to favoured further concessions to the moderates (led by Dewey).
[8] The election of 1940 was one of the closest in American history; neither party nor candidate gained a majority in the Electoral College, and the election was thrown to the House of Representatives. As Taft won the popular vote it was widely accepted that he would remain President. In order to cement his position, the Republicans agreed with the resurgent Democratic Party that they would endorse Cordell Hull (the Democratic Vice President nominee) for the Vice in the Senate. It was the first time since Adams and Jefferson in 1797 that two different candidates would serve in the same administration, and the first time a Democrat was involved since Cleveland.
[9] The joint administration was a notable success, with the two parties unifying to cut back on the government commitment to Social Security and further armament. Japan would invade Korea and Manchuria in 1941, and whilst the United States remained political unaffiliated under the Taft administration the Canadian division from the Commonwealth was a welcome economic partner in the Northern Hemisphere. However, despite the relative security of the 1940 government the 1944 election was another nightmare. Taft stood down, and was surprisingly replaced with Bricker. This time, the Progressives captured the majority of the popular vote but failed to break through into the Electoral College. Continuing the same "corrupt deal" that had placed Hull into office, Bricker formed a third consecutive Republican government with further Democratic help. From this election, the Progressives officially endorsed their commitment to abolish the Electoral College.

* The Imperial Co-Operative was formed by the British Empire (and the Commonwealth) and the Empire of Japan; it also includes the French Empire (very much a second rate power), the Netherlands, Belgium and the British-financed League of Arab States. It is traditionally but unofficially opposed by the unaffiliated United States, the German Empire (with Alsace-Lorraine), the Russian Republic, Indian separatists and most of the Chinese remnants. Canada is notable amongst the Commonwealth for being rather against the whole plan, although the concept of Middle Class Unionism within the other Commonwealth states is quite popular. Indeed, it left the IC-O in 1943 following the British-sanctioned Japanese invasion of Northeast China.

Gaius Julius Magnus · Jul 25, 2015

"A Republican Schism Avoided"
What if Theodore Roosevelt had secured the Republican nomination in 1912?

1912: Theodore Roosevelt / James S. Sherman (Republican) [1]
1916: Robert M. La Follette / William Jennings Bryan (Progressive) [2]
1920: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [3]
1924: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [4]
1928: Robert L. Owen / Edward Keating (Progressive) [5]
1932: Robert L. Owen / Edward Keating (Progressive) [6]
1936: Robert A. Taft / Hamilton Fish III (Republican) [7]
1940: Robert A. Taft / Cordell Hull (Republican / Democratic) [8]
1944: John W. Bricker / Cordell Hull (Republican / Democratic) [9]
1948: Adlai Stevenson/ William O. Douglas (Progressive)

[1] The 1912 Republican nomination was one of the first to be decided via presidential preference primaries, and despite early victories by Robert M. La Follette, former President Theodore Roosevelt narrowly secured his candidacy having side-lined the traditional Republican wing of William Taft. The outbreak of the Great War in 1914 pitted the hawkish Roosevelt against the anti-war wings of both his own party and the Democrats.
[2] The controversy surrounding the American intervention in the Great War ultimately proved to be the downfall of Roosevelt. Just as he had challenged Taft in 1912, La Follette challenged the presidency on a strong anti-war campaign. Unsuccessful in his attempts to gain the Republican nomination, La Follette ran a third party campaign - as both the Democratic nominee Oscar Underwood and President Roosevelt supported the war. He chose the famous multi-election-contesting Democratic William Jennings Bryan as his running mate, whilst the Socialist Party also endorsed the LaFollette/Bryan ticket instead of running their own candidate. LaFollette was then elected in an upset on the backs of anti-war voters in what would prove to be a crucial realignment election for years to come. Following his election, the United States withdrew from the conflict and introduced a radical social programme - including a minimum wage, a workers' compensation system, the prohibition of 'yellow-dog' contracts, the prohibition of child labour and government ownership of electricity and railroads.
[3] The good intentions of the first Progressive government presented some unexpected problems for the United States. American withdrawal from the war and the strong anti-conflict feelings of the government struck the national economy hard, and soon the budget was struggling under the demands of the new social system. The First Red Scare began in 1919 - partly fueled by nervous industrial conservatives and attacks upon Wall Street and other financial institutions. Whilst labour opinion remained in the favor of the Progressives, the centre ground fell to the strong-arming Republicans (who nominated hardliner Thaddeus Sweet) who returned to government with a narrow majority in the Electoral College. It would prove a difficult administration for the United States, as economic unrest fuelled union discontent; revolution remained a farcical idea, but by 1922 strikes were common.
[4] Sweet won a narrow victory against the Progressive nominee Roscoe Pound in an election that reflected the growing polarization within the electorate. Labour unrest continued to swell, and the heavy-handed approach from the Sweet administration seemed to only exacerbate further tensions. By 1928 the economy had begun to recover - albeit slowly - and the evident political divisions had begun to grate with the American people. With this, a demand for a transitional figure was higher than ever.
[5] The Progressive duo of Owen and Keating would provide the release that the nation needed from the economic insecurity; entering into office with a large majority in both Houses, Owen continued the Progressive push for limited reform and took the attention firmly away from the quarrelling unions. A moderate government, Owen faced a Republican resurgence in the mid-term elections but his International Currency Conference in 1930 was a popular move to help integrate the reviving American economy with the sluggish gold-standard-dominated systems of Europe.
[6] Owen was easily re-elected over the Republicans in 1932. (The Democratic label still existed within the Old South, but the party no longer ran an independent ticket and was increasingly a branch of the Progressives). Economic recovery continued, and aside from the Progressive dream of Social Security no major domestic legislation was passed. Owen found the last two years of his term increasingly consumed by foreign affairs - as Britain renewed the London-Tokyo Pact as an all-encompassing strategic alliance in the years after the Middle Class Union coup led by John Pretyman Newman.
[7] Foreign affairs remained the dominant agenda into the 1936 election, and despite the moderate domestic achievements of the Progressives the party was badly defeated. The Republican ticket of Taft and Fish sought American isolationism from the growing pains of the Imperial Co-Operative in Eurasia; all-in-all, Taft was a moderate who understood the need for minor regulation within industry and was keen to modernize his party in the age of the Progressives. Nevertheless, whilst his stance of foreign issues was generally popular across the political spectrum he faced resistance from traditional conservatives within the "old order" of the Republicans and those to favoured further concessions to the moderates (led by Dewey).
[8] The election of 1940 was one of the closest in American history; neither party nor candidate gained a majority in the Electoral College, and the election was thrown to the House of Representatives. As Taft won the popular vote it was widely accepted that he would remain President. In order to cement his position, the Republicans agreed with the resurgent Democratic Party that they would endorse Cordell Hull (the Democratic Vice President nominee) for the Vice in the Senate. It was the first time since Adams and Jefferson in 1797 that two different candidates would serve in the same administration, and the first time a Democrat was involved since Cleveland.
[9] The joint administration was a notable success, with the two parties unifying to cut back on the government commitment to Social Security and further armament. Japan would invade Korea and Manchuria in 1941, and whilst the United States remained political unaffiliated under the Taft administration the Canadian division from the Commonwealth was a welcome economic partner in the Northern Hemisphere. However, despite the relative security of the 1940 government the 1944 election was another nightmare. Taft stood down, and was surprisingly replaced with Bricker. This time, the Progressives captured the majority of the popular vote but failed to break through into the Electoral College. Continuing the same "corrupt deal" that had placed Hull into office, Bricker formed a third consecutive Republican government with further Democratic help. From this election, the Progressives officially endorsed their commitment to abolish the Electoral College.
[10] The Progressive Party was able to finally break the Republican-Democratic hold on the Electoral College with a strong majority in both the popular vote and EC. Mainly attributed to the unpopularity of the pact made by Rep-Dem Pact made in the last two elections and the lack of a response by the President towards the growing Imperial Co-Op expansion in the Pacific.

* The Imperial Co-Operative was formed by the British Empire (and the Commonwealth) and the Empire of Japan; it also includes the French Empire (very much a second rate power), the Netherlands, Belgium and the British-financed League of Arab States. It is traditionally but unofficially opposed by the unaffiliated United States, the German Empire (with Alsace-Lorraine), the Russian Republic, Indian separatists and most of the Chinese remnants. Canada is notable amongst the Commonwealth for being rather against the whole plan, although the concept of Middle Class Unionism within the other Commonwealth states is quite popular. Indeed, it left the IC-O in 1943 following the British-sanctioned Japanese invasion of Northeast China.

Premier Taylerov · Jul 25, 2015

"A Republican Schism Avoided"
What if Theodore Roosevelt had secured the Republican nomination in 1912?

1912: Theodore Roosevelt / James S. Sherman (Republican) [1]
1916: Robert M. La Follette / William Jennings Bryan (Progressive) [2]
1920: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [3]
1924: Thaddeus C. Sweet / Alexander M. Palmer (Republican) [4]
1928: Robert L. Owen / Edward Keating (Progressive) [5]
1932: Robert L. Owen / Edward Keating (Progressive) [6]
1936: Robert A. Taft / Hamilton Fish III (Republican) [7]
1940: Robert A. Taft / Cordell Hull (Republican / Democratic) [8]
1944: John W. Bricker / Cordell Hull (Republican / Democratic) [9]
1948: Adlai Stevenson II / William O. Douglas (Progressive) [10]
1952: William O. Douglas / William W. Wirtz (Progressive) [11]

[1] The 1912 Republican nomination was one of the first to be decided via presidential preference primaries, and despite early victories by Robert M. La Follette, former President Theodore Roosevelt narrowly secured his candidacy having side-lined the traditional Republican wing of William Taft. The outbreak of the Great War in 1914 pitted the hawkish Roosevelt against the anti-war wings of both his own party and the Democrats.
[2] The controversy surrounding the American intervention in the Great War ultimately proved to be the downfall of Roosevelt. Just as he had challenged Taft in 1912, La Follette challenged the presidency on a strong anti-war campaign. Unsuccessful in his attempts to gain the Republican nomination, La Follette ran a third party campaign - as both the Democratic nominee Oscar Underwood and President Roosevelt supported the war. He chose the famous multi-election-contesting Democratic William Jennings Bryan as his running mate, whilst the Socialist Party also endorsed the LaFollette/Bryan ticket instead of running their own candidate. LaFollette was then elected in an upset on the backs of anti-war voters in what would prove to be a crucial realignment election for years to come. Following his election, the United States withdrew from the conflict and introduced a radical social programme - including a minimum wage, a workers' compensation system, the prohibition of 'yellow-dog' contracts, the prohibition of child labour and government ownership of electricity and railroads.
[3] The good intentions of the first Progressive government presented some unexpected problems for the United States. American withdrawal from the war and the strong anti-conflict feelings of the government struck the national economy hard, and soon the budget was struggling under the demands of the new social system. The First Red Scare began in 1919 - partly fueled by nervous industrial conservatives and attacks upon Wall Street and other financial institutions. Whilst labour opinion remained in the favor of the Progressives, the centre ground fell to the strong-arming Republicans (who nominated hardliner Thaddeus Sweet) who returned to government with a narrow majority in the Electoral College. It would prove a difficult administration for the United States, as economic unrest fuelled union discontent; revolution remained a farcical idea, but by 1922 strikes were common.
[4] Sweet won a narrow victory against the Progressive nominee Roscoe Pound in an election that reflected the growing polarization within the electorate. Labour unrest continued to swell, and the heavy-handed approach from the Sweet administration seemed to only exacerbate further tensions. By 1928 the economy had begun to recover - albeit slowly - and the evident political divisions had begun to grate with the American people. With this, a demand for a transitional figure was higher than ever.
[5] The Progressive duo of Owen and Keating would provide the release that the nation needed from the economic insecurity; entering into office with a large majority in both Houses, Owen continued the Progressive push for limited reform and took the attention firmly away from the quarrelling unions. A moderate government, Owen faced a Republican resurgence in the mid-term elections but his International Currency Conference in 1930 was a popular move to help integrate the reviving American economy with the sluggish gold-standard-dominated systems of Europe.
[6] Owen was easily re-elected over the Republicans in 1932. (The Democratic label still existed within the Old South, but the party no longer ran an independent ticket and was increasingly a branch of the Progressives). Economic recovery continued, and aside from the Progressive dream of Social Security no major domestic legislation was passed. Owen found the last two years of his term increasingly consumed by foreign affairs - as Britain renewed the London-Tokyo Pact as an all-encompassing strategic alliance in the years after the Middle Class Union coup led by John Pretyman Newman.
[7] Foreign affairs remained the dominant agenda into the 1936 election, and despite the moderate domestic achievements of the Progressives the party was badly defeated. The Republican ticket of Taft and Fish sought American isolationism from the growing pains of the Imperial Co-Operative in Eurasia; all-in-all, Taft was a moderate who understood the need for minor regulation within industry and was keen to modernize his party in the age of the Progressives. Nevertheless, whilst his stance of foreign issues was generally popular across the political spectrum he faced resistance from traditional conservatives within the "old order" of the Republicans and those to favoured further concessions to the moderates (led by Dewey).
[8] The election of 1940 was one of the closest in American history; neither party nor candidate gained a majority in the Electoral College, and the election was thrown to the House of Representatives. As Taft won the popular vote it was widely accepted that he would remain President. In order to cement his position, the Republicans agreed with the resurgent Democratic Party that they would endorse Cordell Hull (the Democratic Vice President nominee) for the Vice in the Senate. It was the first time since Adams and Jefferson in 1797 that two different candidates would serve in the same administration, and the first time a Democrat was involved since Cleveland.
[9] The joint administration was a notable success, with the two parties unifying to cut back on the government commitment to Social Security and further armament. Japan would invade Korea and Manchuria in 1941, and whilst the United States remained political unaffiliated under the Taft administration the Canadian division from the Commonwealth was a welcome economic partner in the Northern Hemisphere. However, despite the relative security of the 1940 government the 1944 election was another nightmare. Taft stood down, and was surprisingly replaced with Bricker. This time, the Progressives captured the majority of the popular vote but failed to break through into the Electoral College. Continuing the same "corrupt deal" that had placed Hull into office, Bricker formed a third consecutive Republican government with further Democratic help. From this election, the Progressives officially endorsed their commitment to abolish the Electoral College.
[10] The Progressive Party was able to finally break the Republican-Democratic hold on the Electoral College with a strong majority in both the popular vote and EC. This was mainly attributed to the unpopularity of the pact made by Rep-Dem Pact made in the last two elections and the lack of a response by the President towards the growing Imperial Co-Op expansion in the Pacific.
[11] Stevenson would preside over a highly radical administration; the long-anticipated abolishment of the Electoral College came in an excruciatingly close vote in 1950 (just after the Progressive sweep in the midterms), and the United States placed strict economic sanctions upon Japan. As such, the Progressives went into the 1952 election in a very strong position. Stevenson, however, wanted to set a powerful precedent - he did not run for a second term. Instead, Douglas took over the nomination and together with Wirtz entered into the Second World War as Russia launched a surprise attack on northern Japanese bases from Sakhalin.

* The Imperial Co-Operative was formed by the British Empire (and the Commonwealth) and the Empire of Japan; it also includes the French Empire (very much a second rate power), the Netherlands, Belgium and the British-financed League of Arab States. It is traditionally but unofficially opposed by the unaffiliated United States, the German Empire (with Alsace-Lorraine), the Russian Republic, Indian separatists and most of the Chinese remnants. Canada is notable amongst the Commonwealth for being rather against the whole plan, although the concept of Middle Class Unionism within the other Commonwealth states is quite popular. Indeed, it left the IC-O in 1943 following the British-sanctioned Japanese invasion of Northeast China.