1936 Maximum Democrats

[Nofix]

1938 House elections (or how I imagine they would go).

The Republicans fragment and the conservative half joins with the Southern anti-Roosevelt Democrats to form the Freedom Party. The liberal Republicans join either the Democrats or United Left. U.L. is a party born out of the various left-wing third parties of the day (American Labor in NY, Wisconsin Progressive, and Farmer Labor) and the left-most Democrats and Republicans.

 

[Ariosto]

Wilkie would probably still split with the Democrats. He was opposed to things like the TVA from the beginning. Whether he joins a Republican Party or a different party though is another thing (maybe the Liberal Party in New York?).

The Liberal Party of New York was not in existence until the Mid-40's, though he was instrumental in creating it; its original concept was for it to become a National Party, with Wendell Willkie being is standard bearer in the '48 election after having been elected Mayor of New York on its ticket in '45. Unfortunately he died, and the party was left without a major politico to lead it anywhere.

So the Republican party is the only party for him around the time we are discussing.​

Not quite, but this was one of the few times in modern political history that one of the two major parties was actually in danger of complete collapse. Even in OTL people at the time were seriously speculating about the demise of the Republican Party. A conservative party is bound to rise to oppose FDR even if the Republicans splinter.

Even under these circumstances it is not in danger of collapse; there remains a dedicated base of Republicans who are voting only for Republican candidates, and many of those typical Republican voters who have been voting Democratic are liable to return to the party in '38. I can't see Roosevelt abstaining from some of the dangerous actions that he attempted, such as the Court Packing and his attempted purge of Conservatives during that election, and with the perceived amount of support he has he may take those efforts beyond what he did. Republicans, conversely, might do even better in '38 under these circumstances.​

He was a liberal internationalist, pro-Civil Rights, but anti-Government involvement in business. Not quite sure where to put him.

The Republicans. There really isn't anywhere else to go at the time.​

The Republicans had the chance of repeating the Whigs, a fragile coalition (Bob Taft and Tom Dewey in the same party with no uniting force) that was being torn apart for various reasons against the better united Democrats.

The Coalition at the time was not nearly as fragile as it appeared, and in earlier years Thomas Dewey and Robert Taft agreed on many things, including opposition to the New Deal and an Isolationist foreign policy. It wouldn't be until after the '44 Presidential election that their views really began to diverge. (An example of this was that, before John Bricker was put on the ticket with Dewey in '44, Dewey had approached Earl Warren in an effort to balance it, both geographically and politically. Warren declined of course.)

Edit: Interesting infobox, but again I disagree that the Republicans would fragment as you suspect.​

 

[Emperor Julian]

The Liberal Party of New York was not in existence until the Mid-40's, though he was instrumental in creating it; its original concept was for it to become a National Party, with Wendell Willkie being is standard bearer in the '48 election after having been elected Mayor of New York on its ticket in '45. Unfortunately he died, and the party was left without a major politico to lead it anywhere.
​

​

This could be an interesting timeline on its own.

 

[Ariosto]

[/INDENT] This could be an interesting timeline on its own.

I've thought about it, but the problem is that the party itself would never have really gained any traction even if Willkie had be alive to lead it. Now, I can see it coming close if not outright breaking into the double-digits in the '48 election, at the equal expense of both Truman and Dewey, but he wouldn't carry any states. Shortly after that point Willkie would almost certainly be dead, and the Liberal party would start to fade from the national scene as a minor contender. It would be dependent on some other national leader being found to bear its standard into the '50 and '52 elections. Nelson Rockefeller comes to mind, but that would require him becoming a national figure earlier, likely with Dewey stepping down in '50 and Nelson Rockefeller narrowly being elected Governor on the Liberal/Republican party ticket.​

 

[Emperor Julian]

I've thought about it, but the problem is that the party itself would never have really gained any traction even if Willkie had be alive to lead it. Now, I can see it coming close if not outright breaking into the double-digits in the '48 election, at the equal expense of both Truman and Dewey, but he wouldn't carry any states. Shortly after that point Willkie would almost certainly be dead, and the Liberal party would start to fade from the national scene as a minor contender. It would be dependent on some other national leader being found to bear its standard into the '50 and '52 elections. Nelson Rockefeller comes to mind, but that would require him becoming a national figure earlier, likely with Dewey stepping down in '50 and Nelson Rockefeller narrowly being elected Governor on the Liberal/Republican party ticket.​

Perhaps Taft wins the Republican nomination in 1952, and then Eisenhower is nominated by the Liberals?

 

[Ariosto]

Perhaps Taft wins the Republican nomination in 1952, and then Eisenhower is nominated by the Liberals?

They rejected Eisenhower in OTL, with the Vice-Chairman thinking him no better than Taft when it came to "delivering this country to the forces of reaction." If Willkie is the original head it might be possible due to butterflies by increased Republican influence in the party, but I'm still not sure if that would be enough.​

 

[Nofix]

1936 House elections. Added a little to the Democrats popular vote margin, and subtracted a little from the Republicans, and boom, you have the Republicans down to 40 seats.

 

[wilcoxchar]

Nice. Where did you find the popular vote numbers? I looked but couldn't find them anywhere.

 

[Ariosto]

Nice. Where did you find the popular vote numbers? I looked but couldn't find them anywhere.

They are on the main Wikipedia article, in which case I assume he used uniform swing.
​

 

[wilcoxchar]

They are on the main Wikipedia article, in which case I assume he used uniform swing.
​

Oh, huh. Last time I looked it didn't have the national popular vote numbers.

 

[wilcoxchar]

I wrote up the start of a planned short timeline based on this. The ultimate goal is to have the Republican Party collapse, so some parts are going to be tilted against the Republicans.


Part One: Change in Republican Leadership

After the humiliating defeat in the 1936 elections, the trouble for the Republicans continued even before the 75th Congress began. In Oregon, Senate majority leader Charles McNary, who had been one of the major unifying figures in the party, was defeated for reelection. At the time, there was no Republican whip because there were already so few Republicans in the Senate that it was not needed. This meant there was no obvious successor for the position of majority leader. Immediately, party figures in the Senate began debating who would be McNary's replacement. Gifford Pinchot, one of the most influential members of the progressive wing of the Republicans, supported Hiram Johnson of California for the position. Meanwhile, the more conservative members of the party sought a suitable candidate, and found their man in Frederick Steiwer, McNary's fellow statesman. The struggle for the party leadership in the Senate already underscored the unraveling of the party as a whole. Things soon became even more dire for the Senate Republicans with South Dakota senator Peter Norbeck's death in December 1936. Tom Berry, elected to a third term as governor of the state in November, appointed Democrat Herbert Hitchcock to replace Norbeck, a Republican. This brought the number of Republicans in the Senate down to eight.

The contest for the Senate party leadership was brief, but emphasized the deeper divisions within the party. Hiram Johnson was a general supporter of the New Deal during Franklin Roosevelt's first term. The former Bull Moose frequently crossed the aisle to support the President's economic package, and saw and understood the federal government's role in the turnaround of the national economy. The potential nomination of Johnson saw a scandal of its own erupt within the ranks of the Republican Party, as Johnson had gone so far as to endorse Roosevelt in the 1932 and 1936 presidential elections. However, so desperate were the Republicans at the time that Hiram Johnson was seriously considered for the position. To oppose Johnson, more conservative Republicans proposed Frederick Steiwer for the position of majority leader. Steiwer, the keynote speaker at the 1936 Republican national convention, was a staunch opponent of the New Deal but, like William Borah, not a full blown conservative. Steiwer won out in the selection of the minority leadership. As with McNary's tenure as minority leader, no official Republican Whip was appointed due to the small Republican representation in the Senate.

With the heavy loss by the Republican Party in 1936 in the presidential election as well as in Congress, many prominent Republicans called for the replacement of John Hamilton, the chairman of the Republican National Committee. Hamilton was the leader of the Kansas Republican Party, and was chosen to chair the RNC after the 1936 convention and the nomination of Kansas governor Alf Landon as the 1936 presidential candidate. However, after Landon's landslide defeat and the Congressional losses that came with it, Hamilton was reconsidered for the chairmanship. Arthur Vandenberg, a former Michigan senator who was defeated in 1936, was approached to take up the Republican Committee chair after the start of the new Congress in 1937. Vandenberg had been considered for the vice presidenital nomination in 1936 in Cleveland, but declined due to the likelihood of Roosevelt's reelection. Vandenberg accepted this new offer, however, wanting to stay in the political spotlight after losing his seat. The outspoken conservative was thought to be a good choice due to his ability to work with conservative Democrats in the Senate to oppose many New Deal initiatives during Roosevelt's first term.


New positions:
Senate Republican Leader: Frederick Steiwer (OR) replaces Charles McNary (OR)
Republican National Committee Chair: Arthur Vandenberg replaces John D. W. Hamilton

---------

Hamilton's replacement is needed because he played a large part in building the Republican ground level organization and rebuilding the confidence in the party that allowed them to resurge as much as they did in 1938 in OTL. I wasn't quite sure who to replace him with, but Vandenberg seems like a decent choice.

 

[Archangel]

Look forward to see the political realignment.

 

[Plumber]

1938 House elections (or how I imagine they would go).

The Republicans fragment and the conservative half joins with the Southern anti-Roosevelt Democrats to form the Freedom Party. The liberal Republicans join either the Democrats or United Left. U.L. is a party born out of the various left-wing third parties of the day (American Labor in NY, Wisconsin Progressive, and Farmer Labor) and the left-most Democrats and Republicans.

Mmm, with the Republicans essentially vanquished after 1936 and with more New Dealers than ever, it's quite possible that FDR is forced to move to the left. Instead of being cut, the New Deal is expanded, and the economy correspondingly does better. The Democrats make small gains in 1938, like in 1934. The Supreme Court capitulates to Roosevelt after his reelection, averting a court-packing fight.

Or Roosevelt cut the budget anyways, and 1938 is dominated by a new leftist party that supports an expanded New Deal and makes significant gains at the expense of the Democrats.

 

[TNF]

Mmm, with the Republicans essentially vanquished after 1936 and with more New Dealers than ever, it's quite possible that FDR is forced to move to the left. Instead of being cut, the New Deal is expanded, and the economy correspondingly does better. The Democrats make small gains in 1938, like in 1934. The Supreme Court capitulates to Roosevelt after his reelection, averting a court-packing fight.

Or Roosevelt cut the budget anyways, and 1938 is dominated by a new leftist party that supports an expanded New Deal and makes significant gains at the expense of the Democrats.

I think the latter is certainly possible, especially when one considers that Roosevelt was always uncomfortable with deficit spending and only threw in the towel on it when events forced him to do so. A coalition of the CIO, Farmer-Labor, Progressive, Socialist, and Communist parties united by a common goal of expanded spending/keeping the U.S. out of the World War.