No third term for FDR

Hopkins' health would not support a full term in office, and he wasn't so stupid as to willfully ignore it like Woodrow Verwoerd did.

Will, Ickes is out for being too leftward and Jewish (IIRC), Farley is out for being Catholic. Wallace is a non-starter given that the convention was reluctant to allow him to be the VP nominee. Who does that leave?
 
Will, Ickes is out for being too leftward and Jewish (IIRC), Farley is out for being Catholic. Wallace is a non-starter given that the convention was reluctant to allow him to be the VP nominee. Who does that leave?

It keeps coming back to Hull, seemingly. I'm unaware of any moderately liberal northern Protestant internationalists with a national profile other than McNutt. Hull hits all the marks but one. Lucas is too unseasoned, Jones too young, Rayburn too much of a Southern wheeler-dealer (who probably wants to be Speaker more than he wants to be President anyway).

He's no more charismatic than his own wax figure, but in the pre-TV era* that might not matter.

How about McCormack, Barkley or Earle?

*Yes, I know that TV existed.
 
Last edited:
It keeps coming back to Hull, seemingly. I'm unaware of any moderately liberal northern Protestant internationalists with a national profile other than McNutt. Hull hits all the marks but one. He's no more charismatic than his own wax figure, but in the pre-TV era* that might not matter.

*Yes, I know that TV existed.

Hull is an interesting choice, particularly given that he was from the South. Even so, wasn't his health declining by 1940 too?
 
Hull is an interesting choice, particularly given that he was from the South. Even so, wasn't his health declining by 1940 too?

I don't know, actually. I know he resigned before the was over due to health reasons, but keep in mind that he'd been at State for 12 years by then. He'd be unlikely to seek a second term if he wins.

Then again, wiki says he lived until 1955, a decade or so longer than I had thought. He was 69 years old in 1940 - too old perhaps?
 
I don't know, actually. I know he resigned before the was over due to health reasons, but keep in mind that he'd been at State for 12 years by then. He'd be unlikely to seek a second term if he wins.

Then again, wiki says he lived until 1955, a decade or so longer than I had thought. He was 69 years old in 1940 - too old perhaps?

Age is a number, especially if the press in one's back pocket. Who better to lead the nation during a time of worldwide instability than a seasoned statesman?

Who's the running mate, if we go with Hull, who I feel would seek a second term were he the president and World War II had not yet come to a close?
 
Age is a number, especially if the press in one's back pocket. Who better to lead the nation during a time of worldwide instability than a seasoned statesman?

Who's the running mate, if we go with Hull, who I feel would seek a second term were he the president and World War II had not yet come to a close?

I think age and southernness dictate a relatively young northerner. Maybe that's where McCormack comes in. Or Farley's consolation prize.
 
Peter Gerry then is too old I suppose.

Maybe; he's almost a decade younger than Hull though.

Hull v. Dewey would be interesting, probably the greatest age difference in any two nominees. How would that play out? Probably to Hull's advantage in France falls, Dewey's if the Nazis are checked somehow.
 
Maybe; he's almost a decade younger than Hull though.

Hull v. Dewey would be interesting, probably the greatest age difference in any two nominees. How would that play out? Probably to Hull's advantage in France falls, Dewey's if the Nazis are checked somehow.

I do think the war is what would decide the election in that situation, since it kinda reveals whose policy is right. So in the case that the Nazi's aren't checked, how does a President Hull change WWII?
 
I do think the war is what would decide the election in that situation, since it kinda reveals whose policy is right. So in the case that the Nazi's aren't checked, how does a President Hull change WWII?

Since Hull was SecState, I think it's reasonable to assume that his conduct of the war would be broadly similar to FDR's.
 
If I remember right, aside from pre-Pearl Harbor Japan, FDR tended to bypass Hull in favor of unofficial foreign policy advisors - Ickes, Welles, Hopkins, Marshall, Byrnes etc. So I'm not exactly sure what his preferred policy towards the war would be. I assume he'd be Europe first.
 
Last edited:
If I remember right, aside from pre-Pearl Harbor Japan, FDR tended to bypass Hull in favor of unofficial foreign policy advisors - Ickes, Hopkins, Marshall, Byrnes etc. So I'm not exactly sure what his preferred policy towards the war would be. I assume he'd be Europe first.

I guess I meant in regard to the Soviets--would he be more like FDR or side with Churchill?
 
If I remember right, aside from pre-Pearl Harbor Japan, FDR tended to bypass Hull in favor of unofficial foreign policy advisors - Ickes, Welles, Hopkins, Marshall, Byrnes etc. So I'm not exactly sure what his preferred policy towards the war would be. I assume he'd be Europe first.

A fair point. Nonetheless, no one who's being ignored remains in a cabinet for 12 years.
 
Who ever gets the Democratic party nomination in 1940 will win the general election. The GOP is still not trusted because of the Great Depression. Look how Truman beat Dewey in 48. He was still able to use the Great Depression to beat a moderate republican. I still think Farley would get the nomination. One major reason he wanted to be President. He took on FDR. No FDR in this situation. So who really wanted to be President? Garner would have made a play for it. Those two were the strongest. But Farley was a New Dealer. Garner was not. The south was still a democratic party strong hold. They voted for Hoover in 28 over a catholic democrat and many democrats said "see that error helped cause the depression". The convention would have been something else. Depending on who FDR might want. That would be big. FDR would want Farley over Garner who back stabbed him in the Court packing situation. The thing is some one with flaws would get it. You just can't keep saying no on everyone. The Democrats won't have a darkhorse like the Republicans. Since they have a bigger bench since most the countries leaders were Democrats than. The question in The GOP would America First have a bigger role? Would a liberal like Wilkie even have a chance? I don't think a conservative like Taft or Hoover would get it. So The GOP gives the young DA a chance . Farley vs Dewey. Very close race. But Farley wins with FDR backing him and the majority of the country still believing the New Deal is better than the Republicans plans.
 
Top