Roosevelt finishes his 4th term, what does the 1948 election look like?

[Mechadogzilla]

Let's say FDR is healthier in this timeline, and lives to finish out his term. This means Truman doesn't becomes president, and the duty of handling peace time demobilization and the large amount of labor strikes that dominated Truman's first term fall to the Roosevelt administration. How does he handle them? And can he avoid Truman's fall in popularity, or was that inevitable? I feel it's likely he would be able to stop the Taft-Hartley Act. But I'm not sure how much it would changes things, as during the Cold War a bill limiting the power of unions seems unavoidable.

Going into 1948, who would secure the Democratic and Republican tickets? Would Southern Democrats still split away? I feel like if FDR gives the next candidate his blessing, his massive popularity could prevent the party split. But if he doesn't they could easily act as a spoiler to give the race to the Republicans. It's also popular that if Roosevelt's popularity plummets like Truman's did OTL, the voters would prefer a change to the Republicans either way.

 

[Thomas Jefferson]

There would be some drop in popularity but nowhere near as bad as Truman. If FDR lives to 1948, he can probably pretty much handpick his successor, potentially Henry Wallace.

 

[The Byronic Hero]

There would be some drop in popularity but nowhere near as bad as Truman. If FDR lives to 1948, he can probably pretty much handpick his successor, potentially Henry Wallace.

Wallace isn't getting the nomination (his quirks, enemies in the party, and perceived softness for the Soviets during the Cold War will taint him) and with FDR surviving to '48, I see voters deciding to switch. 16 years of the Dems and no sympathy for Truman is going to make it an uphill battle (and FDR is going to be exhausted from his health and the stress of office, so it's unlikely he campaigns for anyone).

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

Does he dare try for a fifth term?

His Excellency Franklin Roosevelt, President for Life, Lord Protector of Democracy, Defender of Liberty, Grand Pooh Bar ect, ect, ect.

 

[Zheng He]

Does he dare try for a fifth term?

His Excellency Franklin Roosevelt, President for Life, Lord Protector of Democracy, Defender of Liberty, Grand Pooh Bar ect, ect, ect.

For his sake I hope not.

 

[49ersFootball]

Big question is whether desegregation of the United States Military still happens in this TL ?

 

[redjirachi]

Does he dare try for a fifth term?

His Excellency Franklin Roosevelt, President for Life, Lord Protector of Democracy, Defender of Liberty, Grand Pooh Bar ect, ect, ect.

I think he'd be too exhausted at that point to run. He probably would've retired in 1944 had the Allies won in '43

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

Big question is whether desegregation of the United States Military still happens in this TL ?

While US social history is not something I'm greatly familiar with I know that his time in office was not one where great strides were made in racial equality, in fact I can't think of any being made.

 

[49ersFootball]

While US social history is not something I'm greatly familiar with I know that his time in office was not one where great strides were made in racial equality, in fact I can't think of any being made.

The US Military was desgregated on Truman's watch in real life.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

Roosevelt however did nothing, even with the opportunity wartime gave to shake things up. Why then would he change things in the remainder of his fourth term without the excuse of wartime need?

 

[Mechadogzilla]

Roosevelt however did nothing, even with the opportunity wartime gave to shake things up. Why then would he change things in the remainder of his fourth term without the excuse of wartime need?

Could the same argument of a lack of wartime need be made against OTL Truman? For what reason would Truman desegregate but not Roosevelt? And wouldn’t peacetime be more preferable to shake up military organization than during a war?

 

[Seafort]

There would be some drop in popularity but nowhere near as bad as Truman. If FDR lives to 1948, he can probably pretty much handpick his successor, potentially Henry Wallace.

But would a much healthier FDR consider running for a fifth term? He would have ascended to absurd levels of popularity having won World War 2 and "solved" the Great Depression. There certainly would be the temptation to have another go at it.

 

[redjirachi]

Republicans: It's free real estate

 

[Seafort]

Does he dare try for a fifth term?

His Excellency Franklin Roosevelt, President for Life, Lord Protector of Democracy, Defender of Liberty, Grand Pooh Bar ect, ect, ect.

"Our greatest President. A leader who tamed the ruin of the Great Depression and brought this nation from tatters to healing. A driving force who was a light to a world that had been cast into the darkness of Hitler, and whose wisdom brought forth the greatest victory that the brotherhood of mankind has ever seen. A conqueror who has won the war, and now seeks to secure the peace. I present to you, and am proud to nominate for President of these United States, Franklin Delano Roosevelt!"

- Senator Richard Russell at the 1948 Democratic National Convention

 

[cra0422]

Does he dare try for a fifth term?

His Excellency Franklin Roosevelt, President for Life, Lord Protector of Democracy, Defender of Liberty, Grand Pooh Bar ect, ect, ect.

I've said it on other threads, but I heard somewhere that he was actually considering resigning once the war ended.

 

[David T]

But would a much healthier FDR consider running for a fifth term? He would have ascended to absurd levels of popularity having won World War 2 and "solved" the Great Depression. There certainly would be the temptation to have another go at it.

As I posted last month:

I don't think FDR would even run in1948 and if he did--even if his health miraculously improved between 1945 and 1948--he would be likely to lose. (It's weird how so many people think that because "he won the war" he would be a sure thing in 1948. Churchill lost in 1945 and Wilson would have lost overwhelmingly in 1920.) To quote (with very slight changes) an old post of mine:

***

First of all, let's not forget that FDR's 1944 victory was his narrowest ever, despite the fact that the War was going well. Significantly, polls indicated that "If the war was still going on, 55 percent of voters said they preferred Roosevelt, but if it ended, only 42 percent of the electorate was ready to give him a fourth term. Roosevelt's support declined to 51 percent if the war seemed likely to be over in weeks or a few months after the election.

"There were also underlying doubts about allowing anyone to hold the presidency for more than eight years. When asked if they favored an amendment to the Constitution barring future officeholders from more than two terms, 57 percent of a survey endorsed the idea..." Robert Dallek, Franklin D. Roosevelt: A Political Life, p. 547. https://books.google.com/books?id=KSxyDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA547

The fact that FDR won third and fourth terms in wartime is hardly proof that Americans would have no objection to his winning a fifth term in peacetime. FDR explicitly made the war the justification for both the third and fourth terms, especially the fourth. And polls showed that a lot of people were willing to make exceptions to the no-third-term tradition on that basis and only on that basis.

Some people seem to think that if Truman could win in 1948, surely FDR could have. But that ignores two things. First, Truman had only served in the White House for three years, and was hardly vulnerable to charges that he was trying to make himself president-for-life. Second, even apart from the fifth term issue, Truman had some advantages over FDR--above all the fact that as Samuel Lubell noted, Truman was able to win a considerable number of Catholic voters who had defected from the Democrats in 1940 and especially 1944. (Lubell argues that Truman even did well among Coughlinites who had voted for Lemke in 1936!)

 

[dw93]

I think the Dems would be scrambling to find a candidate. Roosevelt obviously isn't running and I doubt, given how little they interacted in FDR's Final days, that he'd want Truman as a hand picked successor and the party bosses aren't going to back Wallace. This I think, along with everything else that gave them the edge until Dewey pissed it away OTL, would give the GOP the election.

 

[49ersFootball]

Let's be honest. People were getting sick & tired of FDR.

 

[David T]

To people who say it's a sure thing that the GOP will win, remember that there will almost certainly still be a Republican 80th Congress (1946 is going to see a backlash against strikes, rising prices, etc. whether FDR or Truman is in the White House) and it is still likely to do some unpopular things. So I wouldn't rule out, say, a Barkley-Truman defeats Dewey-Warren scenario. (I think Truman would actually be happier continuing to preside over the Senate than seeking the presidency. As for Barkley, FDR might not like the idea of him getting the nomination, bur I don't think that by 1948 he would have the power to dictate the nomination any more. )

 

[Thomas Jefferson]

Roosevelt however did nothing, even with the opportunity wartime gave to shake things up. Why then would he change things in the remainder of his fourth term without the excuse of wartime need?

The argument in Roosevelt's favor is that he had to subordinate civil rights to fighting first the Depression, and then the Axis Powers. He did sign an executive order prohibiting employment discrimination within the Federal government, and had promised African American leaders that he would integrate the military, so he might be more willing to expend political capital on civil rights in the later 1940s, when the country is at peace and the economy is strong, assuming that he doesn't resign on VJ Day and that his health remains strong enough for him to exercise effective control of the government (which I think is a pretty big assumption).