Wendell Willkie is elected president in 1940

IIRC Wilkie was in line with the rest of the GOP to only provide the British a single $5 Billion credit to buy whatever they needed so they didn't lose, but was against an open ended commitment or repealing Cash and Carry that would come with FDR's Lend-Lease program.

There is a question as to whether Pearl Harbor would even happen without FDR's embargo policies toward Japan that hit in 1941. He might even be less hard line in negotiating with the Japanese so that they feel satisfied that they won't lose face for cutting a deal to back off somewhat on China in return for a loosening of sanctions.

Sorry for the late reply but, as David T said in https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...ected-president-in-1940.470923/#post-19408553, after his defeat, Willkie came out in favour of lend lease.
 
IMO his record before the autumn of 1940 and after his defeat offer a better indication of what he would do as president than his last-minute "peace" campaign.
But... If Willkie had somehow won, he would probably bring in a narrow Republican majority in the House (there was no chance of winning the Senate). That majority would be mostly Midwestern isolationists (including the "Progressives" from Wisconsin).

Thus Willkie would be hostage to the isolationists; at the very least, he couldn't afford to antagonize them with measures like Lend-Lease.
 
But... If Willkie had somehow won, he would probably bring in a narrow Republican majority in the House (there was no chance of winning the Senate). That majority would be mostly Midwestern isolationists (including the "Progressives" from Wisconsin).

Thus Willkie would be hostage to the isolationists; at the very least, he couldn't afford to antagonize them with measures like Lend-Lease.

Lend-Lease passed the House by 260-165 so there is room for it to lose votes and still get passed. Besides, a lot of the Republicans who voted against it were not necessarily isolationists, but may have been motivated by suspicion of FDR. They might be more open to supporting the same legislation if proposed by Willkie.

In any event, even if we assume that most Republicans will still oppose Lend-Lease and it will be passed primarily through Democratic votes, it is not unknown for presidents to rely largely on the opposition party for some votes in Congress., especially on foreign policy--e.g., Clinton and NAFTA in 1993: https://www.citizen.org/article/final-house-vote-on-nafta/ Or consider Ike using Democrats to defeat the Bricker Amendment in 1954. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bricker_Amendment#Eisenhower_aided_by_Democrats

Also, remember that most opponents of Lend-Lease in OTL did profess to favor alternate means of helping the British. https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/alternatives-to-lend-lease.411213/ So the gap between "internationalists" and "isolationists" was not necessarily as unbridgeable a chasm as is often believed.
 
Top