Most dystopian post 1900 presidents possible

Typo

Banned
Got other people to add to the list, or that you'd rather vote for, RB?

Also, does anyone else? It still is rather thin and the idea of just throwing out serial killers because we can use butterflies is a bit lame, although fair for the bounds of the question.
I lifted it out of For All Time

But with Jones I can plausibly see him reaching the high position without even that many butterflies.
 
Regarding Daley: none of us are offended- everyone has a learning curve in USPol.

I must admit I was rather surprised at the amount of vitriol at my comments regarding Daley vs Lindsay (although I am not offended). Of course I realised that Daley was far more competent than Lindsay (which is why I contrasted rather than compared them).

I am though rather surprised at how favourably Daley is viewed. Let me make a comparison between two Australian premiers (our equivalents of State Governors): Joh Bjelke-Petersen and John Bannon.

Bjelke-Petersen, a right-wing Queensland Premier was the far more competent of the two; basiclly turning his state from an economic backwater into the economic powerhouse it now is. Bjelke-Petersen was also massively corrupt.

Bannon, the left-wing South Australian Premier (the state I live in), basically bankrupted the state when he bailed out the collapsing State Bank, leaving SA with the highest government debt-to-GDP of any Australian state. Whilst the debt has now been paid off, it has been suggested by many that the state never recovered from the severe recession of the early 1990's, that he played a role in creating. Bannon however, was not corrupt (or at least there was never any evidence of it).

Nonetheless, Bannon is remembered in the public mind far more favourably than Bjelke-Petersen.

Even among right-wing circles, outside QLD, Bjelke-Petersen is viewed as someone best forgotten, perhaps with just a 'I suppose he handled the economy well', if people are feeling particularly generous towards him.

I just find the comparison interesting.

BTW, what do you think was the reason Lindsay was so incompetent; not that I'm doubting it, I just wonder if there were any particularly personality flaws that caused this. From what I've read about him he seemed a relatively 'nice', well-intentioned person. Was it this 'niceness' that was the problem?
 
My thoughts on the above list as presented.

-Palmer is basically pro-police state, Harding is just a wimp who can't keep his friends in line. Palmer.
-Hall is one of Harding's Friends in OTL, and the master of the Teapot Dome scandal. Stephenson is KKK and an omnious direction for the United States. Stephenson.
-Al Capone is the notorious Chicago crime boss. He's definitely nastier than Hall.
-We've got a crooked populist (Long), a real racist asshole (Bilbo), and a Nazi (Pelley). Got to go with the Nazi.
-Long/Smith/Garner. Smith is a demagogue, Garner just likely to be ineffective. Definitely Smith.
-Ford/Wallace/Butler/Lindbergh. Hard call. I reject Avalon's silly video game reasoning, so Butler's out. Wallace is likely to screw up WWII, but Ford and Lindbergh are likely to take different courses of action. Lindbergh, though, is ultimately going to have WWII forced on him and will accept that responsibility. Ford is probably going to try to support Hitler.
-Wallace/Taft. Lean towards Taft, who is likely to screw things worse than Wallace. Wallace will lead to a bad start with the Cold War, but Taft would probably be worse.
-MacArthur/Hiss/Browder. MacArthur means WWIII breaks out. Better Red than Dead, I'm afraid. Giving in to the Soviets on the fringes is nowhere near as bad as having Europe glow in the dark.
-Goldwater/Cohn. Goldwater was a man of principle and while I disagree with what he stands for, Cohn is, on the other hand, a walking contradiction. A self hating gay, a self hating Jew. Cohn is crooked, he was willing to go the grave with the claim that he was dying of liver cancer and he's a McCarthyite. Cohn isn't as dystopic as others on this list, but he'll work for now.
Jones/Manson/Agnew/LeMay. Agnew is extremely crooked, LeMay is extremely hawkish--but the Soviet Union is dead now, so neither of these are the end of the world. Jones is somewhat more insane than Manson, but I'm most concerned by their intentions. Jones was a sexual deviant who was coming apart under the use of drugs. Manson was a mesmerizing guru who built a murder cult to start a massive racial war. I'd have to say Manson, as Jones is probably more benign as PRESIDENT than he would be as a cult leader.
Jones/Albert/Eastland. Jones against a drunk and a racist? Jones Wins.
Haig/Quayle. Neither of these characters is particularly dystopic. I tend towards Quayle as a male Sarah Palin over another a saner MacArthur type.
Kaczynski /Kevorkian. One wants to end technology, the other wants to allow people to end their lives? Not even close.
Bush/Liddy. A White Collar Criminal against a Blue Collar Criminal. Which won does more damage? Probably the White Collar one.
Blago/Duke/RFK Ultimately, causing massive social and racial unrest trumps massive corruption or akward reasonings.
Blago/WF's Ex How can she do such a thing? NO!!!:(
 
Sorry to nitpick, but how does Palmer (or indeed any Democrat) manage to win in 1920?

Voting fraud, good sir. When you've got the power to throw the G-Men anywhere you need to, you can suggest more favorable outcomes for elections. Of course, it doesn't work that well in the long run.
 
Lindsay was "nice"- that was the problem. In 1967, a garbage strike occurred. Lindsay caved to all their demands like a wet noodle. The reason there were no race riots is because when scuffles started between Jews, blacks and Italians, he got the local Mafia godfather to broker a truce. I think that sums it up. His "freshness; "he is fresh and everyone else is tired" is why many voted for Lindsay in 1966, because since LaGuardia's retirement they'd been run by the Tammany hacks (Beame) and ineffectual reformers (Bob Wagner Jr.). He was actually a liberal Democrat- in 1972 he ran for the Democratic presidential nomination. He won a second term in 1969 by a wafer-thin plurality on the Liberal ticket, having been primaried in both the Democratic and GOP primaries. Rockefeller ran New York as his personal fiefdom in the 1960s- RFK was the only statewide elected Democrat. Lindsay had no influence outside his city. Bobby Kennedy, like his successor Hillary (both held the Class 1 seat), was a Democratic frontbencher who was the second-most prominent Democrat (behind LBJ) and paid little attention to state affairs and despised the state hierarchy.
 
Voting fraud, good sir. When you've got the power to throw the G-Men anywhere you need to, you can suggest more favorable outcomes for elections. Of course, it doesn't work that well in the long run.


Nor, I suspect, even in the short run in this case.

In 1920, the Democratic Party wasn't just defeated, but (outside the Solid South) virtually annihilated. It won only about 35 Congressional races outside the Old Confederacy, 13 of which were in the Border States of Kentucky, Missouri and Maryland. 25 out of 48 states did not return a single Democratic Congressman. There was a whole slew of states where Harding's plurality reached three or even four to one.

Even the most monumental voting fraud isn't going to stop that. You can't argue with an earthquake. Even a majority of the G-men themselves will probably vote Republican. Of course, I suppose Palmer could change parties - - -.
 
Imprisoning political dissidents?

Taking control of most of the economy for military purposes?

At the very least, allowing anti-German witch-hunts?

A lot of racist stuff that probably wouldn't bother people from that time period too much?

The worst stuff Wilson did was during the war, so him getting impeached would have to be pretty late in the game.

I meant what would Hearst do that was so bad, I am very familiar with Wilson's despotism/racism/douchebaggery
 
Not to post too much but any of the industrialists

John D Rockefeller sr
Andrew Carnegie
Cornelius Vanderbilt


I only say these people because if they somehow anyone of them became president than they would not see any reason to give away their money. If you are president why give away your money and power, and this is early in the 20th century or lare 19th century so if you are a departing president and your legacy isnt so good well you can join the club of bad presidents ( Andrew Johnson,James Buchannan)
 
Top