WI: President Winston Churchill in 1932

What if Jennie Jerome had convinced Lord Randolph to relocate to America, and they gave Winston an American upbringing?

What if a New York born Winston had been elected to serve as President in place of FDR in the 1930s? How would an American Churchill govern the United States?
 

Pangur

Donor
What if Jennie Jerome had convinced Lord Randolph to relocate to America, and they gave Winston an American upbringing?

What if a New York born Winston had been elected to serve as President in place of FDR in the 1930s? How would an American Churchill govern the United States?
Most likely he would be as right wing in the US as he was in the UK which makes his election in 1932 somewhat unlikely
 
Most likely he would be as right wing in the US as he was in the UK which makes his election in 1932 somewhat unlikely

So, would he still be the name unabashed imperialist and white supremacist he always was, except under the Red, White, and Blue banner.
 
Yes, Leopards & spots

I don't think life is that simple.

Sure people may not change their core traits, but their beliefs and outlooks on life can be changed by events. Good alternate history can explore not only how small actions shift the course of history, but how people are affected by those shifts.

Gandhi for a long time was a pro-British lawyer, until some racist threw him off of that train. Spiro Agnew was a moderate Republican, until riots devastated Baltimore. Hitler dreamed of being an artist, until he couldn't get into the one in Vienna.

I've read one TL where Dan Quayle is a far-left political dissident, one where Bill Clinton became a Republican, and one where J. Edgar Hoover hunts fascists instead of "commies."

Sure Churchill might have remained aristocratic, but growing in America, not in the more insular British high society might have greatly changed his outlook immensely.
 
Last edited:

Pangur

Donor
Fair comment, so what would have changed him? OTL he did not give a fig about ordinary working people
 
Most likely he would be as right wing in the US as he was in the UK which makes his election in 1932 somewhat unlikely

Unless butterflies lead to Hughes winning in 1916, causing the 1920s to be a Democratic decade, allowing for the election of a Republican Winston Churchill in 1932. (Not terribly likely, but it's probably an American Churchill's best chance to become POTUS in 1932).
 
That's absurd. Churchill was a conservative? Yes. An imperialist? Yes. A racist? Yes. But you cannot compare him to Iosif Stalin, a totalitarian dictator who caused millions of deaths. Churchill was a human being, with his defects, but he was a supporter of democracy and freedom, Stalin was a monster.
Winston Churchill held strong imperialist ideas and held some racism too, as the majority of his time's people, but his nationalism was deeply rooted in his affection to British Empire, so living in United States could change that.
So a interventionist President who loves free trade, leads US against authoritarianism and is pretty racist? That seems more Woodrow Wilson then Stalin, in fact Wilson was widely more an unabashed racist then Churchill as Wilson allied himself with KKK and other suprematist organizations while Churchill hated Nazis.

So Churchill grows in America and enters in politics as Democrat because he disagrees with Teddy Roosevelt's economic policies, although his support for "Big Stick" doctrine. Then he leaves the party for protest against Wilson's neutralist line and his strong campaigning is enough to narrowly swing California, giving Charles Evans Hughes the Presidency in 1916.
Wilson makes a comeback in 1920 and is elected due Hughes's unpopularity for the war, the he dies in office and is succeeded by his Veep (for example James Cox), who stay until 1933. The Twenties are a Democratic decade.
Then the 1929 Crash changes the situation and in 1932 a Republican, possibly progressive, is elected, maybe Borah. He gives the Vicepresidency to Churchill to balance the ticket with right wing of the party. Borah supports the Appeasement with Hitler, for great disappointment of Churchill, but dies in 1940, allowing Winnie to take the power. He leads US to victory during Second World War, after British surrender. He is defeated for a third term in 1948, while he plans to start a preventive attack to Soviet Union, but makes a comeback in 1952 before retiring four years later, as the lone President to serve more then two terms.

28 Thomas Woodrow Wilson (D-New Jersey)/ Thomas Reilly Marshall (D-Indiana) 1913-1917
29 Charles Evans Hughes (R-New York)/ Charles Warren Fairbanks (R-Indiana) 1917-1918
Charles Evans Hughes (R-New York)/ Vacant 1918-1921

30 Thomas Woodrow Wilson (D-New Jersey)/ James Middleton Cox (D-Ohio) 1921-1924 [Died in Office]
31 James Middleton Cox (D-Ohio)/ Vacant 1924-1925
James Middleton Cox (D-Ohio)/ John William Davis (D-West Virginia) 1925-1933

32 William Edgar Borah (R-Idaho)/ Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill (R-New York) 1933-1940 [Died in Office]
33 Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill (R-New York)/ Vacant 1940-1941
Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill (R-New York)/
Wendell Lewis Wilkie (D-Indiana) [National Union Ticket] 1941-1944
Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill (R-New York)/ Vacant 1944-1945
Winston Leonard Spender Churchill (R-New York)/ Earl Warren (R-California) 1945-1949

34 Scott Lucas (D-Illinois)/ Harry Truman (D-Missouri) 1949-1953
35 Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill (R-New York)/ Richard Milhous Nixon (R-California) 1953-1957
 
That's absurd. Churchill was a conservative? Yes. An imperialist? Yes. A racist? Yes. But you cannot compare him to Iosif Stalin, a totalitarian dictator who caused millions of deaths. Churchill was a human being, with his defects, but he was a supporter of democracy and freedom, Stalin was a monster.
Winston Churchill held strong imperialist ideas and held some racism too, as the majority of his time's people, but his nationalism was deeply rooted in his affection to British Empire, so living in United States could change that.

Yes, but let us not forget that as a colonialist, Churchill caused his own bit of suffering in India.
 

Driftless

Donor
If Churchill grew up in the US, he may have been more influenced by his maternal grandfather, Leonard Jerome. While never a rags-to-riches story, Jerome was a very successful mostly self-made speculator and sportsman. A young Winston would have circulated in very different social and economic circles than he historically did.
 
If Churchill grew up in the US, he may have been more influenced by his maternal grandfather, Leonard Jerome. While never a rags-to-riches story, Jerome was a very successful mostly self-made speculator and sportsman. A young Winston would have circulated in very different social and economic circles than he historically did.

So would Churchill believe in the myth of the self-made man, and be a Smithian invisible hand type politician?
 
Top