Retrospective US Presidential Election: 1908
- Thread starter Nerdlinger
- Start date
Yes, but there's a chance we can change that. We'll have a devil of a time convincing the socialists to drop the bit about nationalizing things left right and center. Taft it shall be, then.
This will probably end up in the House, though, and I'm wondering on what Bryan would tell his supporters to do in such a scenario.
I went with Debs (Essentially, he'd be a good counterbalance for the industry-run politicians of the time), but I was tempted to vote Prohibition to see if anyone would notice.
I think you've made my point form the 1900 thread for me. Everyone was all "socialists were just social democrats back then" and I was all "Debs was a revolutionary, wtf is wrong with you?! REVISIONIST!" But no, no one wanted to listen to me!
I think you've made my point form the 1900 thread for me. Everyone was all "socialists were just social democrats back then" and I was all "Debs was a revolutionary, wtf is wrong with you?! REVISIONIST!" But no, no one wanted to listen to me!
Seems that no one else has noticed it, though.
I think you've made my point form the 1900 thread for me. Everyone was all "socialists were just social democrats back then" and I was all "Debs was a revolutionary, wtf is wrong with you?! REVISIONIST!" But no, no one wanted to listen to me!
Yeah I agree with you. (and I like Debs!)
Well, it ain't over yet. This one may come down to the wire between Debs and Taft.
Had I lived in 1908 with similar political ideals as I hold today, I would have self-identified as a Bourbon Democrat of the Tilden and Cleveland kind. As such, I'd be very reluctant to give my support to William Jennings Bryan, yet still, I'd be skeptical about the Republicans with their imperialism and their protectionism, yet they do wish to keep the gold standard, and they're not running a candidate that's keen to outlaw liquor. Debs would be out of the question, as I detest nationalizations. So, all three candidates would have trouble winning favor with me, unlike 1904 when I enthusiastically would have voted Democrat.
...in the end, I think that Taft would get my vote, just because the Dems are running WBJ. Gold and booze, boys, gold and booze.
On vote for Republican William Howard Taft!
...in the end, I think that Taft would get my vote, just because the Dems are running WBJ. Gold and booze, boys, gold and booze.
On vote for Republican William Howard Taft!
There are two ways to approach these elections -- voting as if you were living at the time and didn't necessarily know what would happen in the future, or voting from the present with knowledge of what has happen since the election. I deliberately left it open to voters so that they could decide which perspective they would like to vote from.
More votes, please! Debs and Taft are neck and neck! (Or at least neck and jowl.) Also, provide some comments so this thread doesn't keeping falling off the first page of the forum.
I naturally voted for Chafin because nobody else did...and because it could be a double entendre, with a little bit of work...