Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-1932)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 01:33:23 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Election What-ifs? (Moderator: Dereich)
  Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-1932)
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11
Poll
Question: Should this timeline continue?
#1
Yes
#2
No
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results


Author Topic: Paint it Red: The Rise of the American Left (1908-1932)  (Read 34825 times)
Türkisblau
H_Wallace
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,402
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #175 on: January 21, 2016, 07:30:28 AM »

Great updates! Whenever I think the Left will rise it seems to fall on its face Tongue I'm sure this is all preamble for a Glorious Revolution.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #176 on: January 21, 2016, 05:20:40 PM »


United States Capitol, March 1925

  President McAdoo's stern policy of a hands-off style of government would be a dramatic change from past administrations. America had been used to proactive leaders in the past two decades, and this was quite the change. While the Progressives and Socialists demanded the federal government play a greater role an establishing protections for workers and raising revenue with new taxes, the Democrats, as led by McAdoo, looked the other way.

  Most of what McAdoo had promised in his inauguration speech came to fruition within six months of his new term. The Democrats in Congress quickly allied with the moderate-conservative Republicans to form a majority. Carter Glass' coalition in the Senate was composed of 43 Democrats, 2 Independents, and 5 Farmer-Laborers. When the Independent Republicans agreed to vote with McAdoo on some legislation, this coalition became 54 strong. In the House, Wilson put together a coalition of over 220 congressmen. These numbers beat out the Opposition, which amounted to 42 in the Senate and 215 in the House.

  Therefore, before 1926 rang in, the president signed off on a handful of legislative measures. First were two minor pieces of legislation, those being the Mount Rushmore National Memorial Act and the Judicial Adjunct Act. Then came the Revenue Act, passed in mid-1925, which substantially lowered taxes on those with high incomes. The Revenue Act tackled the income tax for the first time since its inception. The income tax was first created as a means to increase revenue without adjusting the tariff, and this huge intake of tax dollars assisted in the funding of many of the programs brought about by President Roosevelt. It squeaked by Congress and was enacted into law in late-1925.

  The nation, for some time now, had been moving steadily towards the economic left. First symbolized through the re-election of Theodore Roosevelt on a reformist ticket and then with the election of populist Fitzgerald, the United States populous desired, in the very least, a somewhat active government. Perhaps La Follette was too much for them, but McAdoo was elected for moderate continuation of Fitzgerald's lineage, not for a conservative realignment. As the Socialist Party's "Daily Worker" printed, "How does President McAdoo plan to pay for the Health Board, veteran pensions, and Roosevelt's Square Deal programs with such limited funding?" Their answer came with McAdoo's next piece of legislation.

  The Ford-Keyes Budgeting Bill of 1926 came about as an inevitable response to the Revenue Act. The latter had reduced the federal tax rate by an amount which deliberately did not take into full consideration new expenses from the Roosevelt and Johnson programs set to take full effect by 1927. Therefore, Senator Henry W. Keyes (N-NH), in a bipartisan effort, worked on a new bill in order to cut and balance the federal budget and avoid any major deficit. President McAdoo would conduct a brief radio address where he stated that, along with lowering taxes and reducing the crime rate, the "greatest achievement of my administration shall be the necessary slimming of the federal government."

  Once more, there had been hesitation from the American public. The budgeting bill would cut over 20% of future funding to the Health Board, limiting the crucial program's abilities to function. Why should their public programs be slashed while the wealthy pay so little? The Progressives called the president's move an "outrage", and demanded Congress reject the Budget Act. As the increasingly proactive Senator Borah would proclaim, "McAdoo must understand the cost of depleting the income tax. The people should not pay for this mistake." The Socialists also gained some press attention when Minority Leader Sinclair threatened to filibuster the bill. However, it mattered little in this fight.

  In an apparent sign of things to come, Speaker Wilson waited until Sinclair was absent from the House before starting the voting call for the Budgeting Bill. Other Socialists demanded the floor but Wilson did not allow them the courtesy. The bill was then passed, 230 to 205. The Senate would be quite a bit tougher on the legislation. The Progressives and Socialists demanded the budget cuts come from the bloated military sector instead of the small social-welfare portion. Senator David Walsh (D-MA) announced that he would not support the bill unless such an amendment was pursued.

  One of the bill's authors and champions, industrious Senator Henry Ford (D-MI), fought vehemently against this amendment, stating that America's employers ought to provide adequate health services, not the federal government. Regardless of the opposition to it, the Weber Amendment, named for Senator Frank Weber (S-IW), was added in another tight vote. Now the bill would only reduce the Health Board's funding by 5%, instead allocating additional cuts to the military. The Senate would approve the revised bill 49 to 47. House Democrats would try to remove this amendment in committee, but it was pushed for a vote and subsequently passed with 225 in approval. The Ford-Keyes Budget Act was now law.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #177 on: January 21, 2016, 05:23:11 PM »

Great updates! Whenever I think the Left will rise it seems to fall on its face Tongue I'm sure this is all preamble for a Glorious Revolution.

Thank you! Well as we have seen, the labor movement exists in a constant ebb and flow. In the 1920s there is certainly some stagnation with the economy doing well and the centrist Democrats enjoying a popular run, but this can only last for so long.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #178 on: January 22, 2016, 10:18:53 PM »


Governor Theodore Roosevelt, Jr. of New York

  With this new era of politics fast approaching, it came down to a number of fresh, key players which would come to direct the actions of their parties. These players, many of them fairly new to the game, came to supplant their predecessors in time. Men like John W. Smith (D-MA), once game-changers in Congress, had been overshadowed by those more recently elected.

  The Democrats had gradually become a national party instead of a strictly Southern party as it had been historically. Although men like hardliner Texas Senator John Garner were in no short supply, the influx of Midwestern Democrats shifted this paradigm. Senator Henry Ford of Michigan, well-known for his motor-car company, championed consumerism and business-oriented government. This was a new brand of Democrats, due in part to the "Massachusetts Democrat" stylings of the late President Fitzgerald. Others prominent figures in this line included Senators Peter Gerry (D-RI), John Eagan (D-NJ), Woodbridge N. Ferris (D-MI), Representatives Oscar Auf der Heide (D-NJ) and Samuel Dickstein (D-NY).

  After the Weber Amendment passed, Senator Walsh of Massachusetts also won national prominence. When the national press described him as a "Fitzgerald Democrat", Walsh released a statement condemning this description. "With the utmost respect to our late president, I am a Walsh Democrat." He stated that unlike the former president, Walsh did not believe in the "definitive rights of businesses" and was firm in his belief in "legislation fair to the American worker". Walsh's call for a progressive government eventually led to his forming of the Left Democrat coalition. Shortly before his death on July 26th, W. J. Bryan commended Walsh's coalition, exclaiming, "It's about damn time."

  The Progressive Party had been forced to shuffle its organization when, on June 18th, Robert La Follette died of cardiovascular disease at age 70. The more centrist Senator Cummins (P-IA) temporarily took on the role of PNC Chairman and led most of the party discussion on its direction. La Follette had symbolized the party's left-wing, and there were few to fill his shoes. Senators James Garfield and Joseph France (P-MD) who had been active under President Roosevelt steadily faded into the background while La Follette-inspired politicians became the new party establishment.

  The newly elected Governor of New York, Theodore Roosevelt, Jr., began building new state programs to expand workers' compensation and establish a system of social insurance for the elderly and unemployed. Roosevelt became known chiefly for his energetic speech at the Progressive Convention, and his campaign promise to bring the government of New York back to a place of "progressive activity" won him the governorship against former Governor Al Smith.

  Though less radical than La Follette, Roosevelt did extend an olive branch to the party's left-wing when he agreed to pass a measure formally legalizing labor unions. On March 3rd, 1926, Governor Roosevelt signed off on the New York Labor Standards Act which established state protections for unions. On the NYLSA and its motivations, the governor would claim, "I support fairness and arbitration." Inspired by Roosevelt's move, senators and representatives in Congress began work immediately on a national version of the NYLSA.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #179 on: January 23, 2016, 06:14:13 PM »


German Chancellor Wilhelm Marx

  In the global arena, a handful of European countries were stumbling through the 1920s with leading centrist political parties meeting their downfall. Especially in Germany and Austria, new political movements were clashing with the Old-Guard, resulting in the formation of radical organizations and coalitions both on the far-left and the far-right.

  The German Empire had been in the midst of a massive underground democratic movement. Only a few short years ago, when 30,000 took to the streets demanding a constitutional government, the movement for classical liberalism had reached its height. Since then, two political coalitions, the center-left Social Democratic Party (SDP) and the monarchist German National People's Party (DNVP), became prominent groups in Germany.

  It had previously been the SDP, with one Hermann Muller at its helm, which led the reformed Reichstag as Chancellor from 1921 to 1924. Muller had served as the party's official leader, but it was common knowledge that Friedrich Ebert, the hero of the 1920 Uprising, led the SDP into national prominence. Oskar Hergt and the DNVP commanded the minority seating during this time, and Hergt revealed just how willing he was to fold into every request by Kaiser Wilhelm and Chancellor Muller to curb new reforms. By 1924, the more laid-back Hergt would be replaced by fiscal conservative Wilhelm Marx as party leader.

  The underground Spartacus League and the parliamentary Communist Party, both operated by the same leadership apparatus, allied themselves with the Comintern's original goal to attain global communist revolution. Unlike Lenin, the KDP leaders, most significantly Rosa Luxemburg, argued against the idea of a Leninist Vanguard and for greater direct worker involvement in radical activity. Those men and women who led the charge for workers' democracy, such as Karl Liebknecht, Paul Levi and Hugo Eberlein, would become leading figures in the KDP and the Spartacus League.

  When Friedrich Ebert died in February 1925, his party would lose a great deal of steam. Ebert had locked in a safe majority through years of balancing his party as a "democratic coalition" made up of both liberals and conservatives. When he passed, the far less agile Hermann Muller took his place. 1925 to 1927 saw a sharp decrease in SDP membership and a subsequent rise in KDP and DNVP.

  National reports revealed that, by 1927, less of the population supported the SDP's belief in social liberalism and republicanism. Over 60% of the population now sided with the adamantly pro-Kaiser DNVP, compared with 45% in 1924. Simultaneously, nearly 25% of those polled described themselves "strongly in favor" of Rose Luxemburg's Communist Party. The following federal election would reflect these numbers: thus handing the Reichstag majority to a DNVP-Centrist Coalition (266 seats) and the first-minority to the KDP (85 seats). The SDP would only win about 70 seats.

  As a direct result of a Soviet coup in Estonia in 1924, an attempted Lithuanian coup in 1926, and Stalin's move to execute a handful of captured British spies, a growing anti-left sentiment was on the rise in Austria. As a matter of fact, excluding Poland, all European states bordering on Russia experienced a notable growth in the far-right. The majority government in the Grand Austrian Parliament, made up of center-right Christian Social parties, throughout the 1920s passed a series of legislation outlawing Communist parties and any literature ("propaganda") printed in the Soviet Union. Emperor Karl I overwhelmingly approved of these laws.

  The second-largest coalition in Greater Austria was the far-right. Including the National Socialist Bloc, the Austrian Small Business Party, the Hungarian People's Party and the Party of the Carinthian Solvenes, this group worked to pass harsher anti-communist and anti-Semitic laws than what had already existed. Repeatedly, these offered legislative measures would be set aside without explanation. Tension in parliament rose to unprecedented levels when, in 1927, supporters of these opposing groups clashed in Schattendorf.

  In a deliberate goal to bring down the Christian Social Party of Austria, massive, violent protests and a brief general strike broke out in Vienna. After hours of conflict, over eighty-nine individuals had died in the riots, in addition to dozens of police. Karl I ordered troops to shut down the riots, and they did so expediently. In the end, even after subsequent elections, the leading coalition remained in power, although those who perished in the riots would be remembered by some of the population as anti-monarchical martyrs.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #180 on: January 24, 2016, 02:26:19 PM »


Early Issue of "The Daily Worker" Newspaper.

  Just as it had between Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, tension was rippling across the West. Josef Stalin steadily accumulated more influence and power for himself as his supporters in the Politburo reached an all-time high. His main opponent, Trotsky, defamed and put under suspicion for his opposing of the Chinese Communists, had his Politburo seat revoked in the fall of 1926. The following year, he would be expelled from the Central Committee and, shortly after, the country. Trotsky would end up exiled to Alma-Ata, his opposition completely annihilated.

  Stalin had near-absolute power by the end of the decade. In December of 1927, the leading Communist regime would condemn all deviation from the party line. The same sentiment echoed into the Comintern, and any group publicly housing suspicion of Stalin's command would be promptly removed. Therefore, socialist and communist parties across Europe were confronted with the choice to either stand by Russia or be rejected and humiliated by the only international agency on their side. One of the few parties to reject affiliations with the Soviet Union after Trotsky's exile was the Luxemburg's KDP.

  Since Lenin's death, the Socialist Party in the United States came to be divided between those who continued to stand with Stalin's Russia and those who had solidarity with Trotsky's opposition. On April 20th, 1926, journalist and SP leader John Reed would print an article in the Daily Worker in which he stated, "socialism is a global affair of the proletariat. Revolution cannot be confined to one country less it risk horrific counter-revolutionary measures, thereby finding itself soaked in the tar of nationalism."

  Reed went on to criticize Stalin from the Left, exclaiming that the centralization of the state and abandonment of Lenin's worker-centric programs was a "crime against the October Revolution". For his anti-Soviet statement, Reed would later be forced to resign from the Comintern. The American journalist would become one of the first ardent proponents for Trotsky within the Socialist Party and the labor movement as a whole. He would later be joined by Senator Schneiderman, Minority Leader Sinclair, and Wobbly leader Bill Haywood before '26 ended. Those left-communists and Luxemburgists within the Socialist Party stood with Reed and the Internationalists.

  This faction, which began printing an abundance of anti-Stalin pieces in the Daily Worker, became vocally supported by activist Emma Goldman, therefore drawing in the attention of anarchists who had been deterred by the pro-Soviet stance of the SP in 1920. However, nearly two-thirds of the Socialist Party leadership continued to stand with Stalin's administration after Trotsky's expulsion. Senator Ashley Miller would write on April 30th that Reed's "unnecessary belligerence to the Comintern" would set back global revolution "fifty years."

  Miller's written statement would, in the weeks following its release, find the endorsements of journalist Walter Lippman and popular party organizer C.E. Ruthenberg. These individuals, called "Loyalists" by Upton Sinclair, would command party dialogue on the matter. Prominent socialists Benjamin Gitlow and Alfred Wagenknecht, men who had been among of the first to see the Palmer Schemes through, would also support the Loyalist faction of the party.

  Tenseness on this matter would only grow worse as Stalin became more and more controversial in his actions throughout the late 20s. His bolstering of Soviet intelligence agencies, increasingly eerie "cult of personality", and the announcement of incredibly rigid "Five-Year-Plans" to rapidly industrialize Russian society entrenched the Socialist Party deeper into these divisions. The newest member of the Socialist National Committee, Kansas activist Earl Browder, would write in late-1927 that, "the rift is now on-par with that between that of the Mensheviks and the Bolsheviks. The one unifying factor keeping us together now is the memory and spirit of Eugene Debs and ongoing scorn for his proto-murder. Division would mean surrender, and we cannot afford surrender."
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #181 on: January 25, 2016, 05:34:42 PM »


Insignia of the Whig Party of Iowa in 1926

  Another major development in 1926 had been the progress of the Independent Republicans. Newsprint pundits had initially expected this faction to go the way of the 1912 Liberals and capitulate to their original party's leadership. When Frederick Gillett declared that he would refuse to serve as Minority Leader for the GOP, it became evident that the IRs were not planning to capitulate. The catalyst for Gillett's next move came in the summer of 1926.

  Populist Lieutenant Governor Smith W. Brookhart (R-IA) was preparing to make his announcement that he would be running to fill Governor Kenyon's seat in November. Kenyon, somewhat of a moderate, was well-respected in the Iowan Republican Party and his expected endorsement of Brookhart would have nearly guaranteed the latter's electoral victory. However, in early April, Kenyon chose to instead endorse 78 year-old former Senator Lafayette Young for the governorship.

  This caused a stir in the Iowan press, and conspiracies arose that Brookhart had been denied his endorsement due to his differing policies with the governor on Prohibition while others speculated that a fistfight may have occurred. Regardless of the circumstances, the lieutenant governor announced his decision to run on a separate ticket. Not twenty-four hours later, the chairman of the Iowan RNC endorsed Senator Young and condemned Brookhart's independent candidacy as an "embarrassment". Brookhart resigned on April 17th.

  In order to gain some notoriety and boost the legitimacy of his actions, Smith Brookhart, along with a handful of other independent politicians, declared that they would be hosting the founding convention for the new political party on July 2nd, where "we will relinquish ties with the Republican Party and establish a new party presence." Brookhart called back to the anti-tyranny angle of the old Whig Party, and utilized this theme in his stressing of the "necessity" of a "new Whig Party." This announcement caught the eye of Minority Leader Frederick Gillett, who traveled to Iowa for this party convention and met with the aspiring independent.

  Although the "convention" was relatively small and only truly served as a means to get Brookhart on state ballots, Gillett left inspired. He would go on to submit an article to the Washington Post entitled, "the Whig Proclamation", in which he laid down the groundwork for a national adaptation of Brookhart's Whig Party. This article opened with reflections on the situation in Iowa and then compared it with the disastrous '24 RNC. It stated that the Republican Party had become unsustainable as a national presence and another force was necessary to pick up the pieces.

  Therefore, as Gillett put it, "We must organize a modern Whig Party," to, "thwart [Republican and Democratic] corruptibility and found the basis for genuine conservatism." This article became a sensation among politicos and won almost as much attention as Lowden's "The Rise and Fall of the Grand Old Party." The article was eventually reprinted in the New York Times where it became the subject of much controversy. After receiving prompt endorsements from Smith Brookhart, Leonard Wood, and the four elected Independent Republican Senators, Gillett released a follow-up address proclaiming that he would lead a founding convention in August to solidify party guidelines.

  If what brought down the Republican National Convention was pessimism and division, then the founding convention for the new Whig Party was so successful because of its unity and optimism. Though smaller compared to the nominating conventions, the Maryland Institute in Baltimore was packed for the Whig Party convention. Republicans in the South who had been alienated by the party's nomination of radical La Follette found relief in this new organization, as had other disgruntled moderates.

  A basic platform was settled, including an opening stipulation countering "two-party duopoly, tyranny and undemocratic government in all forms." Convention delegates agreed on clauses limiting the powers of the executive branch, reducing federal spending, and increasing the protective tariff to McKinley-levels. In the upcoming 1926 midterm elections, any candidate who would have ran as an Independent Republican now ran as a Whig candidate. The new Whig Party would act as an effective classical liberal Centrist party and would, by 1927, surpass the Prohibition party in membership totals.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #182 on: January 26, 2016, 06:16:10 PM »

1926 Congressional Elections  

Senate
Democratic: 44 (+1)
Progressive: 24 (+7)
Whig: 9 (+5)
Socialist: 6 (-1)
Republican: 5 (-9)
Nationalist: 5 (+1)
Farmer-Labor: 3 (-2)
Independent: 0 (-2)

House
Democratic: 201 (-3)
Progressive: 103 (+14)
Socialist: 40 (0)
Nationalist: 40 (+2)
Whig: 36 (+8)
Republican: 11 (-20)
Farmer-Labor: 4 (-1)


 Senate Leadership

Majority Leader Carter Glass (D-VA)
Sen. Minority Leader William E. Borah (P-ID)
Sen. Minority Leader James E. Watson (W-IN)
Sen. Minority Leader Ashley G. Miller (S-NV)
Sen. Minority Leader Frederick Hale (R-ME)
Sen. Minority Leader Lawrence C. Phipps (N-CO)
Farmer-Labor delegation caucuses w/ SP


 House of Representatives Leadership

Speaker Woodrow Wilson (D-NJ)
Minority Leader William Stephens (P-CA)
Minority Leader Upton Sinclair (S-CA)
Minority Leader T. Jeff Busby (N-MS)
Minority Leader Frederick Gillett (W-MA)
Minority Leader Edward John King (R-IL)
Minority Leader Ole J. Kvale (FL-MN), caucus w/ SP

  Once more the Democrats held on to the majority to the positive economy headed by President McAdoo. However, the poor public perception to the Budget Act resulted in lessened enthusiasm for the ruling party and, as a result, notable bounces for the Progressive candidates. The Whigs and Nationalists continued to gain seats as Republican organization fell into total disarray.

  Georgian Senator Thomas E. Watson, one of the few Farmer-Laborers in Washington, died in 1922. He was succeeded for a single day by white supremacist and suffragette Rebecca Latimer Felton due to a vote-gaining ploy by Governor Thomas Hardwick. Having been involved in upper society and political activity for many years, Felton had been enormously popular in her home state. However, the following special election selected conservative Democrat Walter F. George for the senate seat. In the '26 election, Felton reluctantly agreed to a "Draft Felton" movement and challenged George from the Right, eventually managing to win in a slim victory.

  There had also been a tight race for Illinois' senate seat. Incumbent Republican William B. McKinley had lost his nomination to cross-party Progressive Hugh Magill. Wealthy Representative Frank L. Smith ran as a Whig candidate to thwart Magill's progressivism. In the end, the contest narrowly went to Irish Democrat George E. Brennan with about 43% of the vote.

  Senator Arthur R. Robinson, who had succeeded popular Indianan Senator Samuel L. Ralston in 1925, faced a five-way race in '26. Former football coach Evans Woollen won the Democratic nomination and William O. Fogleson had been the Socialist Party candidate. Robinson was expected to win rather easily throughout most of the summer. On August 3rd, former Senator James Eli Watson stormed onto the scene, now carrying the Whig label, and quickly won the spotlight speaking out against Robinson's "carelessness in the Senate". In a narrow turnout, Watson defeated Robinson for the seat.

  In Wisconsin, Robert M. La Follette Jr. won his father's old Senate seat upon the retirement of Socialist Frank J. Weber. La Follette Jr., a candidate of the Socialist Party, won a cross-endorsement by the Wisconsin Progressive Party and easily won the election. Former President Hiram Johnson, following the example of John Quincy Adams, ran for and won a House seat from California in 1926.

  
Senators Elected in 1926 (Class 3)
Hugo L. Black (D-AL): Democratic Hold w/ 80%
Carl Hayden (D-AZ): Democratic Hold w/ 60%
Thaddeus H. Caraway (D-AK): Democratic Hold w/ 80%
Samuel M. Shortridge (P-CA): Progressive Gain w/ 60%
William E. Sweet (P-CO): Progressive Gain w/ 50%
Hiram Bingham III (W-CT): Whig Gain w/ 50%
Duncan U. Fletcher (D-FL): Democratic Hold w/ 75%
Rebecca L. Felton (N-GA): Nationalist Gain w/ 45%
H.F. Samuels (P-ID): Progressive Gain w/ 45%
George E. Brennan (D-IL): Democratic Gain: 45%
James E. Watson (W-IN): Whig Gain w/ 40%
Thomas Taggart (D-IN): Democratic Hold w/ 50%
David W. Stewart (P-IA): Progressive Hold w/ 60%
Charles Curtis (P-KS): Progressive Gain w/ 60%
John C.W. Beckham (D-KY): Democratic Hold w/ 55%
Edwin S. Broussard (D-LA): Democratic Hold w/ 100%
Harry B. Hawes (D-MO): Democratic Hold w/ 50%
Ashley G. Miller (S-NV): Socialist Hold w/ 45%
George H. Moses (W-NH): Whig Gain w/ 60%
Robert F. Wagner (D-NY): Democratic Gain w/ 45%
Lee S. Overman (D-NC): Democratic Hold w/ 60%
Gerald P. Nye (P-ND): Progressive Gain w/ 60%
Atlee Pomerene (D-OH): Democratic Gain w/ 50%
A. A. Bagwell (S-OK): Socialist Hold w/ 40%
Frederick Steiwer (P-OR): Progressive Gain w/ 40%
Gifford Pinchot (P-PA): Progressive Gain w/ 45%
Ellison D. Smith (D-SC): Democratic Hold w/ 100%
Peter Norbeck (W-SD): Whig Gain w/ 55%
Reed Smoot (W-UT): Whig Gain w/ 55%
Porter H. Dale (W-VT): Whig Gain w/ 60%
C.L. France (FL-WA): Farmer-Labor Hold w/ 50%
Robert M. La Follette, Jr. (S-WI): Socialist Hold w/ 55%
Logged
geekknight
Rookie
**
Posts: 18
Netherlands


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #183 on: January 27, 2016, 01:25:44 PM »

Nice updates again! It seems the Republican Party really is done for. I wonder when the (probably inevitable) crisis will hit?
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #184 on: January 27, 2016, 02:17:53 PM »

Nice updates again! It seems the Republican Party really is done for. I wonder when the (probably inevitable) crisis will hit?

It's certainly headed that way! Hm, we will see~
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #185 on: January 27, 2016, 03:55:20 PM »


A Landmark Supreme Court Case: Sacco and Vanzetti v. Massachusetts

  President McAdoo, marginally satisfied with the midterm election results, would focus on making as much progress as possible in his second two years. He began acting as a beacon for Democratic "moderation", speaking out against Progressive reform. In one address, the president compared the move to nationally legalize labor unions to a "child shaking a barrel".

  McAdoo instead worked to change the conversation to his handling of Prohibition violence. He had worked diligently behind the scenes with men like J. Edgar Hoover to radically expand the boundaries of the FBI and the Justice Department in order to capture criminals and gangsters at a higher rate than in any prior year. Larry "Lucky" Luciano had been on of those captured on bribery charges, and was later indicted on bootlegging charges. In April, the president would sign off on the establishment of the Bureau of Prohibition in what Hoover explained was "the greatest accomplishment of President McAdoo to date".

  The president also became lauded for his handling of the horrific Mississippi Flood in late spring. Hundreds of thousands of Americans, mainly persons of color, were displaced from their homes and forced to move to relief camps away from the Mississippi Delta. Secretary Clarence F. Lea did little in directing flood relief effort, and it came to the president to command action. McAdoo had the Emergency Flood Relief Act pass through Congress with near unanimity, which established temporary housing in Midwestern cities for anyone left homeless by the flood.

  The one issue which captured everyone's attention in 1927 was the outcome to the Sacco and Vanzetti case. Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti, Italian-born anarchists, were convicted of armed robbery and found guilty for first-degree murder in 1921. As was slowly revealed over the course of the six-year interval, much of the evidence utilized in the prosecutor's case had been fabricated and the jury may have included overly prejudicial individuals.

  The case itself caught international attention within three years, and protests rang out in major North American and European cities in 1927. The Socialist Party and the IWW stood by Sacco and Vanzetti, declaring that foul play led the two to an unfair conviction, and they organized much of the protests in the United States. These organizations endlessly petitioned the Supreme Court to examine the case for discrepancies, and at last, due to growing international pressure, President McAdoo released a statement recommending the courts re-examine the case.

  The Supreme Court finally agreed to take up the case on April 5th, 1927, with Justice Brandeis leading the call for reexamination.
 
Supreme Court of the United States in 1927
Chief Justice Felix Frankfurter - Nom. Fitzgerald
Justice J. McKenna - Nom. McKinley
Justice Oliver W. Holmes - Nom. Roosevelt
Justice Horace White - Nom. Knox
Justice Willis Van Devanter - Nom. Knox
Justice George Sutherland - Nom. Roosevelt
Justice Louis Brandeis - Nom. Roosevelt
Justice John Crawford Crosby - Nom. Fitzgerald
Justice James C. McReynolds - Nom. McAdoo

  In early summer, Sacco and Vanzetti v. Massachusetts kicked off. The first week of discussions had been disrupted by protesters on both sides, with some demanding Sacco and Vanzetti, "Get what's comin' to them," and others calling out, "Injustice will not be tolerated," thereby perpetuating the idea that this was a politically-driven case. The trial became famous for lasting only eighteen days, and there were those who argued that the case for prosecution of first-degree murder received a greater amount of time than the case for acquitting, although the latter statement had not been proven without doubt.

  For a short time it appeared that the justices would stand by the side of the defense. Chief Justice Frankfurter was deeply criticized for his "overt liberalism" in other, less significant cases, and the Washington Post speculated that Justice Brandeis would lead the charge for acquitting the accused. Even Upton Sinclair wrote in June that "the chance [was now] possible" for justice. The public now understood, from observing the case, many of the falsehoods and political assumptions that drove Massachusetts Judge Thayer's initial call for execution.

  There had been little doubt that the anarchist leanings of the accused drove the direction of the case, and the call to execute, as H.G. Wells wrote, "Reds as murderers," was clear. With this all in tow, and fully processing the controversy, the court eventually decided in favor of the prosecution. Justice McKenna led this call, and, he became the majority when Justices White, Devanter, Sutherland and McReynolds stood with him. Dissent came only from Justices Brandeis, Crosby, Holmes and Frankfurter. According to the majority, the evidence was genuine, the jury had no prejudice, and the facts were straight. The opposition disagreed on every point, stating that this was a politically-minded case and it required a thorough investigation.

  A great deal of the public was completely outraged. The case, in reaching the Supreme Court, found greater attention than it had previously and everyone had been talking about it. When the decision was reached on July 3rd, studies found that 95% of United States newspapers printed a headline relating to the case the following morning. Those on the Right were ecstatic regarding the decision, and dozens of groups paraded around with American flags and banners reading "Red = Dead". The Left, and many of those who had been apolitical or in the Center, could not comprehend the outcome of the case, and with confidence in the system thrashed, the incorruptibility of the Supreme Court fell into doubt. Sacco and Vanzetti were executed on Christmas Eve, 1927.

  President McAdoo said nothing on the court case itself, and focused solely on flood control initiatives for the remainder of the year. Later in life, McAdoo would write that he held "great misgivings" over the Sacco and Vanzetti case, fearing the precedent that endangered the First Amendment. Calling into question the legitimacy of the court decision, the president asked, "how is it we eliminate crime at such expediency yet fail to witness these crimes at the state level?" Would this case set a precedent that would make it crime to be an anarchist or communist? The question arose with greater fear than ever before.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #186 on: January 28, 2016, 05:26:50 PM »


The Era of President McAdoo: One of Stability and Moderation

  The United States stood more divided than ever after the Supreme Court decision. The Center was quickly disappearing while organizations calling for once-drastic solutions were perceived as reasonable. President McAdoo had been the man holding this all together.
 
  Pilot and social activist Charles Lindbergh won some national attention after completing his flight across the Atlantic on May 21st. When he found his way back to the United States, Lindbergh received a ticket tape parade down 5th Avenue in New York City. He would become an overnight sensation, and would utilize the opportunity to promote the aviation industry. The president would meet with Lindbergh in New York to congratulate him on the achievement, gaining positive press in the meanwhile.

  Other than this momentous flight, little had occurred on the national stage. Each of the minor parties would struggle to win some ground in the latter part of 1927. The Socialist Party had been prompting Congress to vote on labor legislation to no avail. The Nationalists were establishing various state branches in Michigan, Illinois and throughout most of the South. The Progressive Party designated former Senator Ole Hanson as the new PNC Chairman.

  In the summer Republican National Committee Election, incumbent John T. Adams ended up finishing in a distant third place, therefore losing his post. Nebraskan representative Robert G. Simmons came in second. The winner, Allen T. Treadway, a Massachusetts congressman, won on a hardliner platform calling for an immediate renouncing of Adams' "Progressive subversion". Chairman-elect Treadway, as was clear as day, was committing himself all too late to a dead cause.

  The RNC had been outwardly supportive of Progressive candidates in the midterm elections, believing in C.E. Hughes' idea of GOP Unity. Hughes himself had endorsed TR Jr. for Governor of New York, exemplifying this idea in practice. Most right-leaning GOPers had moved on to either the Whigs or the Nationalists by 1927, so few paid any mind to Treadway's irrelevance.

  William McAdoo had been undergoing great popularity for his gangster-thwarting FBi initiatives and his neutrality regarding the Supreme Court's decision. The New York Times referred to the president as the "great mediator", the one politician who serves the people, not himself. Even though there had been stagnant wages and an unregulated financial sector, the ever-improving peacetime economy led the president to have approval ratings as high as 71% in an August Des Moines Poll.

  With all of this going for him, as the president would later write, "I felt as though my administration succeeded in what was promised. Settling the nation after Fitzgerald's passing was our primary objective and it was met." President McAdoo announced with a rather matter-of-fact tone on August 12th, "I shall not be a candidate for president in 1928." He stated that he felt it was necessary to honor President Washington's example and stick to a two-term plan. McAdoo had always disapproved of President Roosevelt's four terms, claiming he had walked upon a "slippery road" in doing so. "Two terms ought to be the limit," the president said.

  The upcoming presidential election which had initially been prepped by the press a "Second McAdoo Landslide" now had a wide-open field for every party. Though the Democrats would likely retain a fair advantage, the Progressives would stand a much greater chance than they had since 1916.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #187 on: January 29, 2016, 08:32:54 PM »


Democratic Party Frontrunner, State Secretary James M. Cox

Chapter Ten: The Election of 1928: Follow The Leader

  The election season broke out rather early for the country's expectations, thanks in part to President McAdoo's announcement that he would not seek an additional term in office. McAdoo would continue his presidential reign unstained by the worry of re-election. He would not go too much further in asserting his policies, but did spend his final year working with Congress to draft a minor regulatory bill for Wall Street in order to ensure the future stability of the financial sector.

  The big question for the Democrats was who would be the president's successor. Vice President Copeland was considered too stained by his past in Tammany Hall to be a viable candidate, and he would go on to work with Senator John Hylan (D-NY) after the incumbent president left office. Secretaries Swanson and Bryan who had gained great notoriety for their accomplishments in President McAdoo's administration, each decided against running for the Democratic nomination.

  The role of heir apparent went to State Secretary James M. Cox, who announced his intention to run for the presidency on September 5th. James Cox, once the Democratic governor of Ohio, since became known for retaining international peace and reestablishing relations with Great Britain. Although foreign policy was not the most critical issue going into the next year, Cox's affiliation with the McAdoo Administration would skyrocket him into a clear frontrunner status in early polling.

  Cox was far from the only Democrat hoping to succeed McAdoo. John W. Davis was considered an early favorite for the Democratic nomination, and his unwillingness to state his intentions on the matter fueled speculation that he may run. Davis had been politically inactive following his defeat in 1924, only appearing briefly with Governor Cornwell (D-WV) at a state event. Another Southerner, Senator James A. Reed (D-MO) declared in October that he would be vying for his party's nomination. Reed's entrance took some pressure off of Davis, but the West Virginian was still considered the top-choice of Southern Democrats.

  While Cox represented the middle-of-the-ground establishment and Reed constituted the party's Right, by late fall there had been no liberal Democrats in the race. Leader of the Left Democratic Coalition, Senator David I. Walsh (D-MA), refused to enter the presidential race, as had prominent Representative Oscar Aud der Heide (D-NJ). It fell to center-left Representative Alben W. Barkley (D-KY) to lead the Fitzgerald cause for a proactive government. Barkley would declare his intention to run on December 2nd, but would struggle to gain notoriety outside of Kentucky.

  A "Draft Ford" Movement also took off towards the final months of 1927 with the goal of pushing Senator Henry Ford (D-MI) to run for president. Ford had acted out explicitly against the majority of the party on more than one occasion (Most significantly during the aforementioned budget debate) and was treated more as an independent than a Democrat by those who knew him. Ford would stick to silence on the presidency, ignoring any questions on his personal ambitions throughout the year.

  Other, more unknown Democrats who declared presidential aspirations were Texas businessman Jesse H. Jones, Wyoming Governor Nellie T. Ross, and Senator Joseph T. Robinson (D-AK). Much to the disappointment of his colleagues, former Governor Al Smith, lacking the funds for a national campaign, would campaign for Royal Copeland's old Senate seat in 1928 instead of the presidency.
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #188 on: January 29, 2016, 10:05:25 PM »

Has Hughes, Jr. served as Solicitor General ITTL? If not, what is he doing?
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #189 on: January 29, 2016, 10:29:52 PM »

Has Hughes, Jr. served as Solicitor General ITTL? If not, what is he doing?

Hm.. Hughes, Jr. would likely be working in corporate law at around this time.
His father has more political maneuvering to do in this timeline, so we'll see about the son pretty soon!
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #190 on: January 30, 2016, 01:49:04 PM »


Massachusetts Governor Calvin Coolidge

  The Republican Party was all but kaput. The RNC briefly worked with Chairman Treadway on his original idea to rebuild the GOP, but after months of inaction, it had been clear that it was time to thread the needle. Treadway made a statement on November 5th where he stated that, officially, the GOP would not nominate its own candidate for president. The party would endorse its candidate in the summer preceding the election, and would financially support that person as heavily as possible. From this point on, the RNC now operated as such: an observing financier organization.

  The party most likely to receive this endorsement was undoubtedly the Whigs. The new Whig Party had clear momentum, was growing at the fastest pace of all major political groups in 1927-1928, and most significantly, it had the backing of Wall Street and J.P. Morgan. Whether or not it would find a notable presidential candidate was another story. Minority Leader Frederick Gillett, understanding that he could not win in '28, stated that he would not contest. Another prominent Whig, Leonard Wood, passed away in 1927.

  Only two well-known contenders would run for the Whig nomination. First had been Senator George H. Moses (W-NH). Serving as a Republican since 1918 and re-elected in 1926 as a Whig, Moses worked as one of the "New England Bosses" who helped assure New Hampshire remained in the Republican column. His presidential campaign adhered less to business interests and more to social liberalism, championing the institution of a federal Anti-Lynching bill.

  Similarly to Senator Moses, Senator James Eli Watson (W-IN) served first as a Republican in the nineteen-teens before associating himself with the Whigs. Watson gained fame for writing dozens of House Speaker Joseph Cannon's speeches, effectively becoming his protege. With Cannon's assistance, Watson was propelled into mainstream Indiana politics, eventually winning a seat in the Senate. The Indianan fell perfectly aligned with the Whig Party's message of reduced spending, and announced his presidential intentions proclaiming McAdoo's lower spending was "tepid and superficial". Watson and Moses each campaigned throughout the Midwest and West in order to espouse the Whig Party as a new conservative option for the electorate.

 The Whigs contested most heavily with the Nationalists to gain the Right-Vote. The Nationalist Party was now tied with the Socialists when it came to House seats, and had five senators in office. Frank Lowden was now joined by former Attorney General A. Mitchell Palmer and temperance proponent Herman P. Faris in the party's inner-circle. These men coordinated to grow the Nationalist Party into a forceful right-wing organization, not unlike the Austrian National Socialist Bloc.

  It reportedly took weeks of convincing from Lowden and his colleagues, but on January 12th, 1928, former Massachusetts Governor Calvin Coolidge threw his hat into the presidential ring. Coolidge won national acclaim for his handling of the Boston Police Strike, his institution of conservative financial reform, and his consistent championing of smaller government. The governor's endorsement of the Nationalist Party cemented his status as a staunch rightist in 1924 and Lowden benefited greatly from Coolidge's campaign assistance.

  For the Nationalist selection, Calvin Coolidge would run uncontested. Running a campaign similar to his governorship, Coolidge would call for reduced federal government involvement in personal affairs, a restructuring of the tax system, and new foreign policy initiatives to assert U.S. dominance on Central American states. With a wider potential base and an untarnished past, Coolidge would fare better than Lowden had.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #191 on: January 30, 2016, 05:58:28 PM »


Fmr. Head of the ARA, Herbert Hoover

  Although the Whigs and Nationalists had been forming arduous obstacles for the Democrats, the role of second-party had clearly gone to the Progressives. With the Republican Party out of order, the reformist Bull-Moose Party would be the chief opposition forces to the incumbency. The Progressive National Committee had organized a centralized national restructure, what those in the upper echelon called the "New Roosevelt Coalition", which would give the party a higher advantage in Midwestern cities.

  About a dozen Progressives had shown interest in the presidency by the end of the year, though no one as nationally renowned as Robert La Follette, Sr. The former senator's passing left a gaping hole in Progressive leadership, and as a result, the contest for the nomination was wide open. Californian representative Raymond Haight declared his candidacy, as had Missouri activist John K. Holmes. Former president Hiram Johnson refused a second run at the presidency, citing his desire to serve in the House. Senate Minority Leader William E. Borah of Idaho also refused to run.

  In February, Senator Charles Curtis of Kansas declared his intention to run. Once a Republican, the moderate senator ran a campaign of moderate reform, echoing President Johnson's "path of realism" in 1920. Curtis' campaign won adoration from many former Republicans, but his ties to the GOP establishment alienated many staunch progressives. Another moderate, Senator Giffort Pinchot (P-PA), announced his presidential campaign in mid-February. Neither Pinchot nor Curtis won much national attention, and each struggled within the party to gain the same attention.

  On March 2nd, former Head of the American Relief Administration Herbert Hoover, in a Des Moines address, declared that he would be fighting for the Progressive Party's presidential nomination. Hoover was the sole candidate who was already a household name by 1928. He had worked extensively with President McAdoo's federal workers to lessen the panic in Mississippi during the flood, and assisted the poorer population, especially, in moving from their homes into temporary housing. Hoover's move was criticized by some on the Left as one of "careful politicking", though most of the country appreciated his humanitarian work.

  As each of the major Progressive candidates were, at best, center-left, the Socialist Party made an active effort to corral potential dejected leftists to their party. SP leadership retained party unity throughout the 1920s and worked out an agreement that with the presidential nominee, he or she would act in neutrality towards the Soviet debate. This agreement was later solidified at the party's national convention and was credited as a major step in quelling divisiveness.

  The Socialist Party ended up circling around one candidate for the election: Upton Sinclair. Serving as the Minority Leader in the House for the party, Sinclair fought most consistently and vehemently for workers' rights in Congress. His routine filibustering was often satirized in the mainstream press, but it, along with his famous authorship, made Upton Sinclair famous. He had also been largely ambivalent towards the Soviet debate, not choosing to outwardly proclaim his alliance with Trotsky for several years. Sinclair would be uncontested for the nomination.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #192 on: January 31, 2016, 03:06:07 PM »

      
The Chicago Daily News
     
The Peoples' Poll for March 1928

DEMOCRATIC PARTY  %      PROGRESSIVE PARTY  %  WHIG PARTY  %  
James M. Cox48%Herbert Hoover31%James Eli Watson50%
Alben W. Barkley23%Charles Curtis29%George H. Moses44%
Henry Ford22%Raymond Haight22%Frederick Gillett04%
James A. Reed03%John K. Holmes07%Kyle M. Basie01%
Others/None of These04%Others/None of These11%Others/None of These01%

  The Des Moines and Chicago Daily News polls each predicted similar outcomes, and throughout the entirety of the campaign season, those candidates who had led the polls in February continued to lead them in March and April. Democratic State Secretary James M. Cox led the pack handily because of his strong ties with the McAdoo Administration. Cox stormed the campaign trail, meeting with giant crowds in strategic swing states for most of the spring.

  James Cox proclaimed a continuation of McAdoo's moderate tactics, stating he would only follow the "peoples' will". Most critical was Speaker Woodrow Wilson's semi-endorsement of the candidate, which took place a mere ten days prior to Wilson's death. The late speaker remarked on Cox's resilience during the Roosevelt years as governor and stated that he was the "sensible next step in line".

  Herbert Hoover of the Progressives seemed to lead the pack, with Senator Curtis closely behind. These two had popularity in completely different parts of the nation. Hoover was most popular with the Mid-Atlantic and West Coast progressives while Curtis found major support in the Midwest. Like Cox, these two would campaign fiercely for their party's nomination, with Hoover always seeming two or so points ahead in the polls. Representative Haight remained relevant for most of March, but in June would drop out and endorse Hoover for the nomination.

   Senator Watson was the Whig leader going forward, but he along with Senator Moses deeply struggled to find relevance in this "new two-party system." The majority of the national press ignored the smaller parties in 1928 and focused entirely on the Democratic and Progressive races. The Socialists and Nationalists were at an even worse disadvantage as their nominating contests were not contested. The Whigs were stuck in the middle, and only some local papers remarked on the battle between Watson and Moses. Senator Moses attempted to win over some press when, during a stop in Indiana, stated that Watson "enjoyed the company of other men."

  Much to Moses' dismay, his grasp for attention occurred hours before the Pomerene Regulatory Bill failed in the House, on June 1st, 1928. This bill had been promoted extensively by President McAdoo as a means to regulate sectors of Wall Street and fight early signs of economic deflation taking place. McAdoo/Fitzgerald Democrats and the Socialists fought for the bill, but a coalition of Whigs and newer Progressives had the legislation murdered when an amendment was added calling for "state," not federal, "oversight of regulatory measures."

  When the bill failed, 220 to 215, Congressional disarray was blamed, along with McAdoo's inability to keep the Democrats together. The new House Speaker, one Finis J. Garrett of Tennessee, did not have the same political skill as Woodrow Wilson and failed to prevent the amendment from being added. With this failure of the McAdoo administration, James Cox himself likewise suffered a setback. This occurred even though Secretary Cox had nothing to do with the bill and following polls had Barkley and Ford with increased percentages.
Logged
/
darthebearnc
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,367
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #193 on: January 31, 2016, 03:08:55 PM »

This is my favorite historical timeline on the forum Smiley Keep it up!
Logged
NeverAgain
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,659
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #194 on: January 31, 2016, 03:13:13 PM »

This is my favorite historical timeline on the forum Smiley Keep it up!
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #195 on: January 31, 2016, 03:24:00 PM »


Thanks so much!
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #196 on: January 31, 2016, 08:09:29 PM »


Senator Henry Ford Rode in his Signature 1921 Model-T

  The failure of the regulatory bill ended up spiraling James Cox and his campaign into damage control. Though he retained his consecutive lead in the polls, Cox was repeatedly forced to answer for the shortcomings of Speaker Garrett. Essentially, his only answer constituted, 'if we elect more forward-thinking Democrats, the problem will fix itself'. The press was unenthused with Cox's retorts and by May, began to portray him as a lackluster figurehead for the Democratic establishment.

  Where Cox faltered, the other candidates picked up the pace. Representative Barkley experienced a brief rise in the polls after stating that, "Unlike Secretary Cox, as president I will ensure that our party remains strong." The Kentucky representative reaffirmed his earlier policy proposals, demanding the government enact new legislation designed to secure the "good health of every American" through the establishment of social insurance. Though such a program was lauded by the liberal wing of the Democrats, Barkley was denounced by the inner-establishment.

  Barkley's brief polling pick-up was cut short by Senator Henry Ford's much-anticipated announcement that he would be running for president on the Democratic ticket. Ford declared to a massive crowd in Lansing, Michigan that he would be running for the "necessary expansion of consumer capitalism" while too maintaining a "socially fulfilled American middle class." The senator called for new protectionist legislation for the poor, measures to prohibit Eastern European immigration, a lowered tariff, and a leaner government. The core of the Democratic base much preferred Ford to Cox, and this began to show in the polls.

 With only a few weeks until the Democratic convention, Ford gained a firm second-place to Cox's lead. Senator Ford's well-known anti-immigrant and antisemitic stances, as represented clearly in his "Dearborn Independent" newspaper chain, made him lose a great deal of support from likely New York delegates, but with Cox appearing less and less reliable, Ford was the next choice.

The Des Moines Register: June 1928
Which candidate would you endorse for president?

Democratic: James M. Cox: 40%             Progressive: Herbert Hoover: 47%
                 Henry Ford: 34%                                   Charles Curtis: 33%
                     Alben W. Barkley: 21%                            Raymond Haight: 11%
                  James A. Reed: 4%                                John K. Holmes: 4%
                 John W. Davis: .5%                                Hiram Johnson: 1%
     Other: .5%                                           Other: 4%


     Whig: James Eli Watson: 57%                    Socialist: Upton Sinclair: 90%
                  George H. Moses: 39%                                  Seymour Stedman: 4%
               Frederick Gillett: 2%                                     Norman Thomas: 3%
                John G. Shields: .5%                                    James H. Maurer: 1%
                Kyle M. Basie: .5%                                       Benjamin Gitlow: .5%
      Other: 1%                                                   Other: 1.5%

  Minority Leader Upton Sinclair, the uncontested candidate for the Socialist Party, had drawn in the largest crowds of any candidate in this cycle. Due chiefly to the Sacco and Vanzetti decision, faith in the political system was deteriorating fast. The Socialist Party, after a major growth trend in the period between 1917 and 1923, was largely ignored in most recent years. Still, the party remained a firm presence in the American political consciousness as a notable alternative to the status quo.

  The party lost some momentum to the Progressives and the Democrats after Fitzgerald's presidency and death, but the labor movement as whole did not blink. There were an estimated forty-two labor strikes and stoppages during the last full year of President McAdoo's administration, and most had occurred in minor industries and/or under-the-radar. The mainstream press, under strict guidelines by the federal government, deliberately did not report on any of these strikes. Thus, the SP-sponsored Daily Worker, which rejected such censors, reached new readership heights in 1928.

  The Daily Worker became as much a household name as The New York Times, and on newsstands the two papers were usually spotted side-by-side. This newspaper would, predictably, endorse Upton Sinclair for president and revealed a list of campaign stops for the candidate. Sinclair rallies were giant as a result, and he had the ability to bring together radicals of all sorts towards his campaign. He stated that if elected, he would fight for the "direct implementation of socialist programs" including worker-owned corporations, national healthcare coverage, and completely subsidized food and housing. However, with President McAdoo and his policies remaining beloved by the public, Sinclair would run his campaign more as a theoretical cause for "what we can make possible" rather than a pragmatic election strategy.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #197 on: February 01, 2016, 05:04:14 PM »


Herbert Hoover with Sen. Charles Curtis at the 1928 PNC

  The first major nominating convention of the year was that of the Progressive Party. Taking place on June 6th in Philadelphia, the Progressive National Convention was roughly the same size as the one four years prior, though with less support from local unions. With La Follette's tendency gone, the moderates had full control over the party by this point, and thereby lost support from the Nonpartisan League.

  The leading contenders had also been center-left moderates, with the most radical of the bunch, representative Raymond Haight, only receiving 10% in recent polls. When La Follette Jr. announced that he would be running as a Socialist Party member, many of his father's supporters followed suit. Still, according to mainstream press, party-goers and locals, the Progressive Party was as vehemently reformist as ever.

  The party platform included stipulations demanding a less-stringent working day, railroad nationalization, and an end to the "Lean Government Budget". Dozens of speakers endorsed the platform and their select candidates, most notably former President Johnson who gave full support to Herbert Hoover. TR Jr. did not endorse a candidate, but did remark that the party needed to expand its base if it hopes to win any future election.

PROGRESSIVE BALLOT1st Call2054 DELEGATES
Herbert Hoover1405
Charles Curtis476
Raymond Haight131
Hiram Johnson30
Theodore Roosevelt, Jr.5
Gifford Pinchot5
John K. Holmes1
OTHERS/BLANK1

  On the first ballot, the former head of the ARA, Herbert Hoover, won the nomination with 1,455 votes. His easy win was somewhat unexpected, but it had been clear that the party believed he stood the best chance of any Progressive to bring in a victory in the presidential election. Senator Curtis was almost eager to drop out and endorse Hoover, and proclaimed that "if the voice of America is heard... Herbert Hoover shall be our next president."

  Hoover spoke at length in his acceptance speech on a variety of topics, including the necessity for expanded government assistance and a reformatted social structure to deal with racial violence in the South. He also mentioned his personal reaction to McAdoo's win in 1924 and how it solidified "Democratic hate" and "Democratic endorsement of the Klan".

PROGRESSIVE BALLOT1st Call2054 DELEGATES
Gifford Pinchot1899
OTHERS/BLANK155

  The party near-unanimously nominated former Pennsylvanian Governor Gifford Pinchot for vice president. He was nominated mainly as a means to assist the party's standing in Pennsylvania, but also to ensure Progressive dominance in the Great Plains states. Pinchot worked with President Roosevelt on his conservation legislation and served as the first Chief of the U.S. Forest Service.

  The Hoover/Pinchot ticket was unlike any other the party had nominated. Not only was it notably moderate in comparison to the one chosen four years prior, but it did nothing to entice independent or left-leaning Democrats. Hoover ran a steady, moderate campaign in 1928, endorsing safe issues and remaining silent on those which doomed La Follette. Other than Hoover's statement against the Klan, he became one of the least controversial presidential candidates in history.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #198 on: February 02, 2016, 05:05:26 PM »


The 1928 Democratic National Convention

  The most highly attended and energized convention of the season was undoubtedly that of the Democrats. The convention itself took place in Houston, Texas at the appropriately named Sam Houston Hall. It had been major news that the party was holding its convention in the South, as no party had done so since the Civil War, and this fact was printed in the hundred-or-so newspapers reporting on the event. After two  universally admired and successful Democratic presidents, the party now planned to win its third consecutive election. Should the party be successful in this attempt, it would be the first time since 1836 that the Democrats retained the White House for three consecutive terms.

  Each of the prominent candidates had high hopes going into the event, as well as over one thousand delegates ready to take their pick at the nominee. The party platform was simple: the continuation of President Fitzgerald and President McAdoo's neutral foreign policy, light regulations on major industries, and a boosting to crime control. Each candidate had their own interpretation of these principles, but they had been in agreement on the bare essentials.

  State Secretary Cox remained the frontrunner going into the convention, despite numerous slip-ups and taking the heat for Congressional disunity. Cox's delegation was made up mostly of Northerners and pro-establishment moderates. His platform, "A Just Government", was a touch more progressive than that of the president's policies, and its biggest controversy had been Cox's calling for "a greater international presence" and a "formal entrance into the League of Nations." In this era of neutrality and isolation, the last thing Americans wanted to do was get involved once more in European affairs, and this stance damaged Cox's campaign heavily in the polls.

  Therefore, one has the opposition. Representative Alben Barkley of Kentucky had fought a left-leaning campaign in an exceptionally moderate party. Barkley, who had advocated for legalization of labor unions two years prior, was rejected by the party establishment and had zero support from the current administration. The Left Democrat Coalition, from the insistence of Senator Walsh, did not endorse Barkley for the presidency, citing his "illogical" stance against Prohibition and the expansion of the FBI. Barkley, regardless, had the support of his home state, as well as parts of Missouri, Arkansas and Oklahoma. Most of the South would side with James Reed and his conservative policies after John Davis endorsed the senator in late-May, though Reed failed to captivate the same audience as Davis had.

  In the latest polls, Cox had lost a substantial amount of ground to Senator Henry Ford. The Michigan senator utilized his prominent public image and Wall Street funding to run one of the largest and most extravagant campaigns in the history of modern American politics. Though he initially called for more radical proposals, including the abolition of the Electoral College, Ford steadily moved to the center in his campaign, picking up major support from the establishment. His support came primarily from the Midwest.

  The party had been prepared for a multi-ballot convention. Not since the 20-ballot DNC in 1920 had the Democrats experienced a true contest. The press incessantly speculated on the plausibility of a 30 or 50-ballot convention between Cox, Ford and Reed. The delegates on the opposition hoped that a longer convention would increase their chances of victory, and each campaign leader had a plan readied for implementation should such a scenario occur.

  Thirty minutes before the balloting began, from his direct interference, President McAdoo had been designated to speak. McAdoo remarked on the "long road" ahead for the Democrats and stated that the party needed to nominate a shoe-in in order to preserve the dominance witnessed in the 1924 race. He then stated, "For the joint-purpose of moral preservation and pragmatism, I shall endorse Senator Henry Ford for president."

  This had shocked the convention, and understandably infuriated Secretary Cox. In the days following the DNC, McAdoo would claim that Cox proved himself to be a poor candidate, and one who posed a "high risk to put up against Herbert Hoover". Ford's delegation, estimated at the convention's start to constitute about 278 delegates, grew to encompass well over the required threshold.

DEMOCRATIC BALLOT1st Call1097 DELEGATES
Henry Ford758
James A. Reed188
James M. Cox110
Alben W. Barkley12
Joseph T. Robinson9
William G. McAdoo5
OTHERS/BLANK15

  Just like that, the junior Senator of Michigan and founder of the Ford Motor Company, Henry Ford, was nominated for president by the Democrats on the first ballot. The delegations of Mississippi and Alabama were furious and threatened to bolt the convention. After receiving vocal support from the South Carolina and Virginia delegates, the situation seemed bleak. Ten minutes of hollering and threats of splitting damaged McAdoo's plan to keep the party unified, and it did not quell until Ford began speaking.

  The senator spoke only four sentences, first thanking the party for his nomination and then proclaiming that he will win the upcoming election with the "greatest landslide of any Democrat in our lifetime." Ford's confidence did settle the convention somewhat, but the nomination of a Southern vice presidential nominee was now inevitable, and everyone knew who it would be.

DEMOCRATIC BALLOT1st Call1097 DELEGATES
John W. Davis939
Royal S. Copeland91
Alfred Smith57
OTHERS/BLANK10

  In a tricky move by the Northern establishment to prevent a Bourbon revolt, the party near-unanimously selected John W. Davis as the vice presidential candidate. As previously mentioned, Davis was less politically active than his competitors, but retained the immensely positive notoriety throughout the South that drove his '24 campaign. To the press, the party, and President McAdoo, the Ford/Davis ticket appeared perfect. Hoover would have his hands full with this one.
Logged
Pyro
PyroTheFox
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,697
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #199 on: February 02, 2016, 09:20:24 PM »


Upton Sinclair in 1928

  The final three conventions of the election season were much smaller than the DNC and the PNC, in both sheer size as well as significance. The Whig Party had made a great deal of clamor with their June 29th Whig National Convention, but it turned out to be strikingly (and depressingly) similar to their founding convention. Taking place in the exact same location, Baltimore, a small delegation of Whigs, chiefly from the Northeast, decided very swiftly on their party's nominee.

  For all it was hyped up to be, the press could not stop remarking on the "Greatest Convention That No One Attended", and the candidates lost respect from the electorate as a direct result. The delegates acted more like the Nationalist Councilors, and privately nominated their candidate behind closed doors. In this case, it turned out to be Senator James Watson. The nominee did not make a speech, instead returning to Washington to begin his campaign where, as he himself put it, "We believe we can definitely win ballot-access."

  The Socialist Convention took on an appearance more like the public was used to, but again did not have the necessary hype or press attention that made the DNC what it was. The fallout from Sacco and Vanzetti resulted in a definite heightened interest in socialism and other radical, anti-capitalist ideologies, but it failed to truly manifest itself at the party convention. The convention had a healthy attendance, nonetheless.

  When debate broke out regarding the SP's future platform, it took hours upon hours to get through just the preliminary discussion. Such was the trade-off for having such a democratized, diverse organization: everything took unnecessary time. The two pro and anti-Stalin factions fought tooth-and-nail for a clear position on the platform, but the debate ended without any result in this field. Now less influenced by Seymour Stedman, the party's platform called for, "direct democracy, revolution, and an active proletariat guiding these movements." It also, for the first time, mentioned the fight for "negro emancipation" and stressed the ultimate goal of "making illegal any membership of the Ku Klux Klan".

  Due to an influx from disgruntled, La Follette Progressives, the party hesitated to call for full communism, but the overall spirit of the convention seemed far more revolutionary than the others this cycle. Upton Sinclair, the uncontested candidate for the SP nomination, spoke briefly at the convention, where he proclaimed his appreciation for the party's strong organizational structure and wholly welcomed new party members.

  Sinclair, along with his vice presidential nominee, black activist James W. Ford, were revitalizing the ideals of socialism through the utilization of Eugene Debs as a martyr for the cause and the proclamation that, "Working people around the world have had enough with the status quo." There had certainly been more excitement for Sinclair than Stedman, and this became further evident through the Socialist Labor Party's endorsement of Sinclair's candidacy in July.

SOCIALIST BALLOT1st Call1088 DELEGATES
Upton Sinclair1088

SOCIALIST BALLOTBefore ShiftsAfter Shifts1088 DELEGATES
James W. Ford621953
Earl Browder225102
John Reed15121
Benjamin Gitlow911
Louis Waldman401
OTHERS/BLANK1810

  At last, the Nationalist Party held its convention towards the end of July. It was held at the Kansas City Convention Hall, and was open to the public for free admission. Giant American flags covered the main walls, and an enormous portrait of George Washington stood at the back of the arena, right behind the main podium. It had about as many attendees as the Socialist Party. Kermit Roosevelt gave the opening address, where he called for an immediate "end to foreign neutrality" and an asserting of "Americanism" upon the Southern Hemisphere.

  Frank Lowden also appeared for a brief speech, and in it he proclaimed, "This year, 1928, shall be the year of the Nationalists. We shall take the majority in Congress, we shall take the White House, and we will revive the American spirit." He received a massive roar from the audience for this remark. The party platform called for a similar resolution, including an asserting of imperialist dominance on Central and South America, the outlawing of all socialist and communist parties, and the build-up of the American military for the "inevitable clash with the British Empire".

  The party appeared to lurch towards the Right in one defining moment at the convention. One of the guests speakers, far-right Representative Virgil Effinger (N-OH), had been remarking on the defeatist attitude of Congress and the party divisions preventing "our nation from reaching its full potential." He then stated to overwhelming approval that, "should we recapture the heart of the American public and win a majority in November, I shall introduce a Constitutional Amendment suspending Congress and granting greater executive powers to President Calvin Coolidge." Coolidge himself did not partake in the convention, but in the following days, stated that he would consider signing off on this amendment.

  The Nationalist Councilors nominated Senator Lawrence C. Phipps as the vice presidential candidate to tail Calvin Coolidge. Phipps, more of a moderate than Coolidge, was chosen as a means to bring the West towards the Nationalists from the Progressives. As the Progressives did not nominate someone from the West onto their ticket, this plan did have some legitimacy behind it.

NATIONALIST BALLOT1st Call9 COUNCILORS
Calvin Coolidge9

NATIONALIST BALLOT1st Call9 COUNCILORS
Lawrence C. Phipps5
Arthur H. Bell3
Virgil Effinger1
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11  
« 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 0.453 seconds with 15 queries.