1948: Henry Wallace runs for reelection

[MarkWarner08]

Let's imagine the party bosses didn't replace Henry Wallace with Harry Truman as FDR'S 1944 VP nominee. FDR dies in 1945 and Wallace assumes the reins.

What if Wallace doesn't drop the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Say Wallace negotiates an unpopular ceasefire with Tojo and then announces an increase in funding for New Deal programs. Wallace then signs a peace treaty with Stalin and the U.S dismantles its nuclear weapons prorgram.

What happens next?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Not going to happen.  While the bosses could easily have chosen someone other than Truman to replace Wallace in  the 1944 election, I can't see them not dumping Wallace.  Now if you want to speculate about what happens when Wallace runs for his first full term in 1944 after having FDR die in '42 or '43 that would be plausible.  No sitting President has been denied a renomination that he actively sought since before the Civil War.

[Dr. Cynic]

I have to agree with Ernest here. Wallace was going no matter what.

[Lincoln Republican]

Henry Wallace is kept on the 1944 Democratic ticket as the Vice Presidential candidate.  President Roosevelt dies in 1945.  Wallace assumes the Presidency.

Without using the atomic bomb in 1945, WWII would have been prolonged, costing thousands more U.S. and others lives.  Wallace negotiating a ceasefire with Japan would not have been a popular move in the U.S. or in Congress.  The Congress would accept nothing less than the unconditional surrender of Japan.  Wallace would have been at loggerheads with the House and Senate.

Announcing an increase in funding for New Deal programs would as well mean Wallace was on a collision course with Congress.  The expansion of the New Deal was stopped in 1937, and many New Deal programs had been abolished by 1943.  WWII aided greatly in pulling the U.S. and much of the world out of the Great Depression.  Therefore, new post war initiatives were required, not the New Deal of the 1930's.

For Wallace to sign a peace treaty with the Soviet Union and to have the U.S. dismantle it's weapons program would been to say the least extremely risky.  If Wallace made such a deal, most likely he would have been tricked into it by Stalin, and the Soviet Union would have no intention of dismantling it's weapons program.  This would have therefore left the U.S. at the mercy of the Soviet Union, and would have made any international role for the United States impossible.

Add all of these together, and they spell one word, IMPEACHMENT!

Given this irrational behavior, I doubt very much that Wallace would last too long on the job.  

If Wallace did manage, somehow, to make it to 1948 still in office, there is no way he would have been nominated by the Democrats to run in the 1948 election.  

If, by some act of sheer stupidity on the part of the Democrats, they had actually nominated Wallace for President in 1948, Tom Dewey would have won an election victory comparable to that of FDR in 1936.      

      

[Lincoln Republican]

Here's a map for the 1948 election

Republican
Governor Thomas Dewey of New York for President
Governor Earl Warren of California for Vice President

Democrat
President Henry Wallace of Iowa for President
Wallace picks Senator Ernest McFarland of Arizona, author of the GI Bill, for Vice President

States Rights or Dixiecrat
Governor Strom Thurmond of South Carolina for President
Governor Fielding Wright of Mississippi for Vice President

Outside of the south, the only state to stand with Wallace is his home state of Iowa, by a narrow margin.

Dewey/Warren                415
Wallace/McFarland             78
Thurmond/Wright               38

[CPT MikeyMike]

Winfied - Nice job and great analysis. I dont think though that Wallace would pick up any southern states. I think Thurmond would be a stronger force out there.

That's just my opinion...what do you think?

[Lincoln Republican]

Winfied - Nice job and great analysis. I dont think though that Wallace would pick up any southern states. I think Thurmond would be a stronger force out there.

That's just my opinion...what do you think?

Mikey, you raise a valid point, but the southern states I awarded to Wallace were such solid Democratic states at the time I doubt anyone or anything could shake them loose from going Democrat in 1948.

Actual 1948 margins with Truman, Arkansas-by 40.71% margin, Georgia-by 40.50% margin, North Carolina-by 25.34% margin, Oklahoma-by 25.49% margin, Texas-by 41.68% margin.  These are huge leads, virtually impossible to switch.

Yes, Thurmond would have eaten somewhat into these margins with Wallace as the Democratic nominee, however, Wallace would still have won these "Solid South" states, even if by  reduced, though still very comfortable, margins. 

[Lincoln Republican]

One thing I should add to this 1948 election, is that I of course have no idea if Senator Ernest McFarland of Arizona would have accepted the Vice Presidential nomination to run with Wallace.

If Wallace carries out the policies as described by the author, MarkWarner08, at the beginning of this thread, it is doubtful almost any reputable Democratic Governor or Senator would want to run on this ticket. Therefore, I have doubts if McFarland would even run with him.

In this case, Wallace may have to have gotten for his Vice Presidential nominee Senator Glen Taylor of Idaho, the candidate who actually did run with him when Wallace did in fact run for President in 1948 on the Progressive Party ticket.  Taylor shared many of Wallace's views.