What if Taft declined to run for reelection in 1912?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 26, 2024, 03:23:47 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  History
  Alternative History (Moderator: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee)
  What if Taft declined to run for reelection in 1912?		 « previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: What if Taft declined to run for reelection in 1912?  (Read 1500 times)
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: December 21, 2009, 03:21:54 PM »
Go.
Logged
Psychic Octopus
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,948
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2009, 02:48:53 PM »
Roosevelt wins the Republican nomination and the presidency.
Logged
President Mitt
Giovanni
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,347
Samoa


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2010, 09:50:42 PM »
We are spared of Woodrow Wilson, only to be met with four, if not eight more years of Roosevelt.
Logged
k-onmmunist
Winston Disraeli
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,753
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: January 15, 2010, 07:28:28 AM »
Quote from: Mike Gravel on January 14, 2010, 09:50:42 PM
We are spared of Woodrow Wilson, only to be met with four, if not eight more years of Roosevelt.

Yuck. What a crappy choice.
Logged
President Mitt
Giovanni
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,347
Samoa


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: January 15, 2010, 04:33:56 PM »
Quote from: Winberry on January 15, 2010, 07:28:28 AM
Quote from: Mike Gravel on January 14, 2010, 09:50:42 PM
We are spared of Woodrow Wilson, only to be met with four, if not eight more years of Roosevelt.

Yuck. What a crappy choice.

Yeah, 1912 was probably the worst election in US history, it featured three crappy choices. Debs was probably the best choice if you look at the other three.
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: January 15, 2010, 09:27:07 PM »
Quote from: Mike Gravel on January 15, 2010, 04:33:56 PM
Quote from: Winberry on January 15, 2010, 07:28:28 AM
Quote from: Mike Gravel on January 14, 2010, 09:50:42 PM
We are spared of Woodrow Wilson, only to be met with four, if not eight more years of Roosevelt.

Yuck. What a crappy choice.

Yeah, 1912 was probably the worst election in US history, it featured three crappy choices. Debs was probably the best choice if you look at the other three.

lol. In my opinion, TR was the best choice, followed by Taft, followed by Debs, followed by Wilson.
Logged
Bo
Rochambeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,986
Israel


Political Matrix
E: -5.23, S: -2.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: January 17, 2010, 09:18:48 PM »
Quote from: GPORTER on January 17, 2010, 04:49:34 PM
A good thing about 1912 for the republicans was that if the GOP had not been split, either Taft or Roosevelt would have won a one on one election with Woodrow Wilson.

Roosevelt would have definitely defeated Wilson. Taft probably had about a 60% of doing so.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 12 queries.