1940: FDR Declines Third Term

[Robespierre's Jaw]

What if...incumbent Democratic President Franklin Delano Roosevelt declined a third term in 1940? The Democrats nominate Secretary of State Cordell Hull as their nominee and Maryland Senator Millard Tydings for Vice President. While on the GOP side: Michigan Senator Arthur Vandenburg is selected as the GOP nominee and Thomas Dewey of New York is selected for Vice President. How would a Hull/Tydings ticket match up with a Vandenburg/Dewey ticket? Discuss with maps please.

[True Democrat]

This was a real possibility.  At one point in the convention, when FDR was attempting to replace Garner with Wallace, FDR said that if Wallace wasn't on the ticket, he wasn't running.

[Reaganfan]

Vandenburg/Dewey: 271
Hull/Tydings: 260

[PBrunsel]

Hull had a terrible speech impediment. His voice was described by modern humorists of the day that Hull sounded like, “A mix of Elmer Fudd and a gravel mixer.” There is no way he can compete in a world of radio and newsreel like 1940 (especially against the articulate “Silver Horn of the Senate” Arthur Vandenberg).

By 1940, the Democrats needed FDR to win. Now correct me if I am wrong, but in 1940 the throws of the Recession of 1938 were still being felt (as was the political aftershock of the Court Packing Scheme). There was also the fact that Vandenberg’s isolationism would have played very well in the Midwest and Pacific.

The Socialists in our 1940 ran a very lax campaign, not wanting to attack the President during a time of international strife. However with FDR out of the running, Norman Thomas runs his fourth campaign for President as an aggressive left-winger. “The New Deal is dead; choose Thomas instead” chant starry eyed Socialists unhappy with the choice of Hull for President (when their choice for the Democrats was Agricultural Secretary Henry Wallace of Iowa).

I would say that New England (minus MA and RI) would vote GOP, however New York (even with District Attorney Dewey on the ticket) does not go GOP for the first time since 1928.

Illinois would decide the race (as it has many). Vandenberg, with his Great Lakes appeal and with support from a state with many America First members, would narrowly win ths state by taking large amounts of the vote from the Northern part of the state.

My map:

Arthur Vandenberg/Thomas E. Dewey (R): 267 Electoral Votes, 49.1% of the Popular Vote.

Cordell Hull/Millard Tiding (D): 264 Electoral Votes, percentage of the 49.6% Popular Vote

Norman Thomas/Darlington Hoopes (S): 0 Electoral Votes, 1.3% of the popular vote

By taking over 80% in most Southern States, Hull narrowly wins the popular vote.

The man who ran and won under the slogan “Vote for Vandenberg or Vote for War” would lead a Conservative Administration (akin to that of Calvin Coolidge) and step down after a term in office. Vandenberg was a great legislator, but he was no fan of the executive way of doing things. In 1944, Vice-President Thomas Dewey and Governor John W. Bricker of Ohio would take on the Democratic slate of Florida Senator Claude Pepper and Senator Harry S Truman of Missouri.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

Here's another scenario I post to you: What if Cordell Hull was selected as FDR's Vice President in 1936, after Vice President Garner decided that being Vice President wasn't the job for him. The Roosevelt-Hull ticket easily defeats the Landon-Knox ticket, in 1938, however Japan bombs Pearl Harbour and the Americans become involved in WWII, (WWII began in November 1936, when Germany invaded Poland in this scenario). But, in July 1939, President Roosevelt dies of a brain hemmorage aged 57, and Vice President Cordell Hull is sworn in as the United States' 33rd President. With the War going on, President Hull is re-nominated at the Convention in Philadephia. How would this scenario go if it was a President Hull-Senator Tydings ticket to a Vandenberg-Dewey ticket? Discuss with maps.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Hull/Tydings: 270
Vandenburg/Dewey: 261

[gorkay]

I think Hull would have won, especially if FDR supported him wholeheartedly and if Hull pledged to continue the New Deal. Liberals wouldn't have been happy with him, but would have voted for him for the most part if the only other viable choice was Vandenberg. (Actually it would have made more sense for Hull to choose someone more liberal than Tydings as his running mate.)
If the GOP had nominated someone more to the left, like say Wendell Willkie, the Dems may have been in trouble, because someone with appeal to liberals might have siphoned a lot of votes away from them.