Republicans win in 1916

The 1916 election was very close. Less then a million popular votes seperated Wilson and Hughes. What can Hughes and the Republicans do to win the election? How might this effect America? Would the United States still get involved in the Great War? If we did, what might happen? If we didn't, what would it result in?
 
This is one of the closest elections in us history and often overlooked. Just 3,000 votes in Cal gave Wilson the election.
I think Hughes would have to get into the war anyway but the League nations mess, no way!!!!
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Well, without the League of Nations we wouldn't have the United Nations today. All in all the League wasn't that bad. It was able to influence governments to step up the work against slavery in Africa and did much for refugees.

Enough about the League, US would enter WW1 without Wilson. Hughes wasn't a pacifist.
 
Well, without the League of Nations we wouldn't have the United Nations today. All in all the League wasn't that bad. It was able to influence governments to step up the work against slavery in Africa and did much for refugees.

Enough about the League, US would enter WW1 without Wilson. Hughes wasn't a pacifist.


I wonder if he would let the truth about the Lusitania being full of war materials be allowed into the mainstream (would lessen the calls for war considerably... Wilson supressed the truth brutally)
 
This topic has come up before. Everyone seems to want to find a big difference in foreign policy between Hughes and Wilson and as I can discern what differences there were were quite small. So America enters the war at roughly the same time. One interesting difference is that the Republicans wanted Leonard Wood not Pershing to lead the AEF and this would likely result in Wood presidency postwar (unless of course he screws up)

As for the peace Hughes as sympathetic to Wilson's principles but I would see him as being more flexible and pragmatic in their application. It is possible that he could've tweaked the concept of the League of Nations enough that Hydrochloric Acid would not be so adamantly opposed.

There were actually bigger domestic policy differences that often get overlooked. For one he would likely have ended Wilson's segregation of civil service and taken a strong hand against the resurgence of the KKK
 
This topic has come up before. Everyone seems to want to find a big difference in foreign policy between Hughes and Wilson and as I can discern what differences there were were quite small.

I think it was TR who said that the only difference between Hughes and Wilson was a beard.
 
There were actually bigger domestic policy differences that often get overlooked. For one he would likely have ended Wilson's segregation of civil service and taken a strong hand against the resurgence of the KKK
Yes, that, I would say, seems to be the problem with most discussions of this topic on this Board- Hughes winning, often coming up. The differences that would cause in domestic politics? Less discussed.
Which is a pity, for me, as I would have far more use of domestic stuff than foreign stuff for my TL.:eek:
 
Definite improvement in US civil rights a lot sooner. Perhaps even an attempt at desegregation of the Army. How successful that'd be, on the other hand...
 
Top