What Would A Huey Long presidency look like?

[Gog (♀)]

Hello it occurred to me when I was planning my time line ( link in sig) that Huey long, who I am having become bpresident after a fdr assassination in 1933 was a bit of a political chamilion and had very few permentent stances so maybe some one can help me with this?

My opinion is that he would use new deal esque polices to win the "masses" then consolidate his power and get rid of rivals (eg MacArthur j Edgar Hoover)
Then ride out four terms or more till he gets assinated or dies of natural causes

 

[AdmiralBlake]

the closest I can think of would probably be someone like Hugo Chavez, shameless populism

 

[oreocruncher]

Not fascist...I don't like that cliche...

 

[Gog (♀)]

the closest I can think of would probably be someone like Hugo Chavez, shameless populism

Not fascist...I don't like that cliche...

Yeah in the few TLs that have Heuy long he is racist nazi analogue and I have never seen one where he does become president so that's what's this TL is about and I think he would be a mash of Chavez and Putin but more dictator like and definintly had more of a brain than the two

 

[vl100butch]

the size of his "deduct box" would be huge....

I don't know if he could have been elected though...

 

[Emperor Norton I]

Long was very populist, was actually racially progressive, and was about the common man. Which is where that populism becomes dangerous; Long wanted to help the little man and punish or steam-roller over the greedy and selfish rich in doing so. But he would take on the powers of a king in order to see it through. It's something that doesn't jive with the due process inherent in national government.

 

[Gog (♀)]

the size of his "deduct box" would be huge....

I don't know if he could have been elected though...

It's a big task but a few key events can launch him to the presidency like FDR being killed, a worse Great Depression If someone can make another civil war, then heuy long can certinly get elected

 

[Gog (♀)]

Long was very populist, was actually racially progressive, and was about the common man. Which is where that populism becomes dangerous; Long wanted to help the little man and punish or steam-roller over the greedy and selfish rich in doing so. But he would take on the powers of a king in order to see it through. It's something that doesn't jive with the due process inherent in national government.

Which is why he was very dangerous and any TL with him in it likely becomes a dystopia plus since he was isolationist a either nazi victory or Stalin in the bay of biscayne could make this a close contender for a vlad tepes

 

[Emperor Norton I]

Who wasn't an isolationist in 1935?

 

[Kung Fucious]

A mess. It's hard to pin down exactly what Long's politics were, since he would say basically anything if he thought it would get him a few extra votes. His Share Our Wealth program was hilariously unworkable, but it's hard to say whether that was something he seriously considered or was just advocating as a means of elevating his national profile.

 

[oreocruncher]

A mess. It's hard to pin down exactly what Long's politics were, since he would say basically anything if he thought it would get him a few extra votes. His Share Our Wealth program was hilariously unworkable, but it's hard to say whether that was something he seriously considered or was just advocating as a means of elevating his national profile.

At the least, Long wouldn't go with racist stuff much, as he was one of the few Southern Populace who never engaged in race baiting stuff (the textbooks were available to both blacks and whites, and he kicked out a major KKK guy out of Louisiana).

 

[vl100butch]

At the least, Long wouldn't go with racist stuff much, as he was one of the few Southern Populace who never engaged in race baiting stuff (the textbooks were available to both blacks and whites, and he kicked out a major KKK guy out of Louisiana).

neither Huey or his brother Earl were racist...by the standards of the 1930's they were downright progressive...

the biggest screwup in my somehwat predjudiced opinion (having grown up in Plaquemines Parish) was to give Leander Perez a free hand in Plaquemines and St. Bernard Parishes...no one really knows how much money was stolen...

 

[Gog (♀)]

the closest I can think of would probably be someone like Hugo Chavez, shameless populism

Long was very populist, was actually racially progressive, and was about the common man. Which is where that populism becomes dangerous; Long wanted to help the little man and punish or steam-roller over the greedy and selfish rich in doing so. But he would take on the powers of a king in order to see it through. It's something that doesn't jive with the due process inherent in national government.

Who wasn't an isolationist in 1935?

A mess. It's hard to pin down exactly what Long's politics were, since he would say basically anything if he thought it would get him a few extra votes. His Share Our Wealth program was hilariously unworkable, but it's hard to say whether that was something he seriously considered or was just advocating as a means of elevating his national profile.

At the least, Long wouldn't go with racist stuff much, as he was one of the few Southern Populace who never engaged in race baiting stuff (the textbooks were available to both blacks and whites, and he kicked out a major KKK guy out of Louisiana).

Really I agree with all you guys about how long had a few principles but those were mainly geared towards getting power so long in power here is my take

Long wins 1936 election with FDR dead and garner unwilling to enact the new deal, he establishes a near copy of the new deal with some caveats that give him the power he wants, this makes him even more popular than FDR becuas of an longer and worse depression.

He eliminates rivals like J Edgar Hoover and MacArthur through "suicide" and "mental breakdowns" and has a secure hold on power by 1940 where he gets a landslide, eventually the Japanese attack because they always wanted to and this would not butterfly this away and long joins the war and WWII goes pretty much OTL except that maybe long wouldn't move Patton and, due better health only time and age and possibly a staircase can stop long form turning america into an athourtarian illiberal democracy.

And when he dies his yes man vice president likely goes the Maudoro route and screws everything up and by the sixties we get a even bigger right wing back lash than we did in the 70s and 80s



That's my plan anyways

 

[Francisco Cojuanco]

neither Huey or his brother Earl were racist...by the standards of the 1930's they were downright progressive...

the biggest screwup in my somehwat predjudiced opinion (having grown up in Plaquemines Parish) was to give Leander Perez a free hand in Plaquemines and St. Bernard Parishes...no one really knows how much money was stolen...

Ah, yes, Leander Perez, so racist that he was literally willing to go to Hell to keep black people out of Catholic schools.

 

[vl100butch]

Ah, yes, Leander Perez, so racist that he was literally willing to go to Hell to keep black people out of Catholic schools.

i'd really like to know how much money was exchanged between the Perez's and the Catholic Church in New Orleans so an excommunicated Catholic could receive a funeral mass?

i'm convinced his racism was a cover for all the money he was stealing...

 

[Emperor Julian]

Chavez is a good example, I feel If you want to diversify, Fujimori of Peru maybe, or maybe even Peron of Argentina. Essentially, the US going to drop down on the democracy index.

At the same time, Long will do his best to break big business and wall street, and will probably dramatically redistribute the wealth of the country. He will probably at least try to make the "equal" part of "separate but equal" a reality, even if he can't get rid of the "separate". He'll probably try to unite poor black people with poor white people against the rich.

 

[vl100butch]

At the same time, Long will do his best to break big business and wall street, and will probably dramatically redistribute the wealth of the country. He will probably at least try to make the "equal" part of "separate but equal" a reality, even if he can't get rid of the "separate". He'll probably try to unite poor black people with poor white people against the rich.

The intriguing part of "Share the Wealth" to me would be the economic and spending impact of that distribution...I've read about some interesting experiments of setting a floor income...

how much would economic equality help speed along the civil rights process?

how much would local and state governments pick up in taxes due to increased economic activity?

 

[FasterThanRaito]

Really I agree with all you guys about how long had a few principles but those were mainly geared towards getting power so long in power here is my take

Long wins 1936 election with FDR dead and garner unwilling to enact the new deal, he establishes a near copy of the new deal with some caveats that give him the power he wants, this makes him even more popular than FDR becuas of an longer and worse depression.

He eliminates rivals like J Edgar Hoover and MacArthur through "suicide" and "mental breakdowns" and has a secure hold on power by 1940 where he gets a landslide, eventually the Japanese attack because they always wanted to and this would not butterfly this away and long joins the war and WWII goes pretty much OTL except that maybe long wouldn't move Patton and, due better health only time and age and possibly a staircase can stop long form turning america into an athourtarian illiberal democracy.

And when he dies his yes man vice president likely goes the Maudoro route and screws everything up and by the sixties we get a even bigger right wing back lash than we did in the 70s and 80s


That's my plan anyways

I have several problems with that analysis.

How is a longer depression going to be more popular instead of less?
The Japanese never wanted to attack but were forced into it by Roosevelt's policies because he wanted war. A true isolationist would have embargoed non-direct military resources like oil and steel, thus avoiding PH.

And once the depression and possible war are over, he and his associates get voted out of office and cannot take too much power. There is too much democratic tradition and public guns to allow otherwise.

 

[Gog (♀)]

I have several problems with that analysis.

How is a longer depression going to be more popular instead of less?
The Japanese never wanted to attack but were forced into it by Roosevelt's policies because he wanted war. A true isolationist would have embargoed non-direct military resources like oil and steel, thus avoiding PH.

And once the depression and possible war are over, he and his associates get voted out of office and cannot take too much power. There is too much democratic tradition and public guns to allow otherwise.

because people are more desperate for any hope and a new deal with liberties limited is more appealing than starving to death or revolution

also the japaneeese would at one point try to "crush the usa navy with one blow" as i dont think that doctirine will change

 

[dehantp]

The Japanese never wanted to attack but were forced into it by Roosevelt's policies because he wanted war. A true isolationist would have embargoed non-direct military resources like oil and steel, thus avoiding PH.

Just wanted to comment on the "Japan always wanted to attack the US" quib, but you beat me to it. That one sounded criminally uninformed.

But neither would I go as far and phrase it as "the Japanese were forced into it". It is more of a case of "bringing it onto themselves" I think. Their aggression (to use an euphemistic term) against China did not fly with the US, who in OTL eventually put in place the oil and scrap metal embargo. To make Japan leave the Chinese market be ... err, I mean ... Out of the good of their American hearts of course.

But they did not really force the Japanese to attack.

That's only what the US got instead when Japan decided not to withdraw from China.

But you are right: "The Japanese always wanted to attack the US anyways" sounds like something Donald Rumsfeld would say. You remember? The guy who said the insurgency in Iraq was something like the Werewolves in nazi Germany?