westvirginiarebel
Junior Member
I have been banned from alternate-timelines.com?
Posts: 50
|
Post by westvirginiarebel on May 8, 2016 8:21:25 GMT
WI Roosevelt had supported Taft in 1912, or won the nomination himself? How does either one fare as President when World War One begins, how do they handle Mexico?
|
|
|
Post by MinnesotaNationalist on May 8, 2016 16:53:00 GMT
Boy what an interesting scenario, Teddy being my favorite president and all.
Teddy would definitely intervene in Mexico, I have little doubt about that. Whether or not it'd be a successful intervention is another matter, whether it'd degrade into a 100 years early Iraq or it'd be a successful invasion and putting an American-friendly 'democracy' in power.
Teddy had outspoken support for the Allies throughout WWI, and he would do everything in his power to make sure that America eventually joined the war. If I remember correctly, Nicolas II of Russia wasn't a big fan of Roosevelt after the negotiations in the Russo-Japanese war, so American supplies to Russia would probably be minimal. American presence in the war would probably have led to Germany losing much quicker than in reality (Maybe 1917, 1916 even?), possibly in time for the Russian Monarchy to be saved.
If Roosevelt won another re-election in 1916, he would have likely died in office in 1919, leading to Hiram Johnson as new president and then a re-enactment of what happened in 1919, America leading the peace negotiations than failed to actually uphold it at home (Assumingly Johnson, as an isolationist, would be trying to get America out of the war as quickly as possible, and certainly would try to stay out of any League of Nations style organization)
|
|
|
Post by Epic History on May 12, 2016 2:57:17 GMT
Boy what an interesting scenario, Teddy being my favorite president and all. Teddy would definitely intervene in Mexico, I have little doubt about that. Whether or not it'd be a successful intervention is another matter, whether it'd degrade into a 100 years early Iraq or it'd be a successful invasion and putting an American-friendly 'democracy' in power. As the various conflicts on the Philippines showed, the early 20th Century US was more than willing to engage in and win an Iraq type conflict. Any attempt at a Mexican insurgency would be quickly put down with skill. I could see some sort of Lend Lease type deal, but it would be extremely hard to get the US into the war period, never mind when casualty lists for both sides are available to the American public. Roosevelt was also pretty critical of the UK's blockade on Germany, IIRC, which could result in some interesting ramifications. Roosevelt's health declined due to his 1913 trip to Brazil. Presuming he wins the presidency in 1912 or gets tapped to be VP, the aforementioned expedition would never occur. It's very likely he could live for another decade or so in this ATL.
|
|
fjihr
New Member
Posts: 21
|
Post by fjihr on May 12, 2016 4:03:33 GMT
The thing is, Wilson is still going to win. One thing to keep in mind is that TR and Taft drew into support from two different bodies of voters. TR gained support from progressives, and adopted several radical progressive policies such as National Health Insurance and national primaries, while Taft ran on his conservative record as president. If Teddy wins the Republican nomination, most conservatives stay home with some voting for Wilson, and if Teddy sucked up the defeat, his voters will be split between Debs (his more radical ones) and Wilson (the moderate ones).
To prove this point, in California where there was no Republican ticket on the ballot, TR barely won, and in the 1910 midterms the Democrats made huge gains. I get how the latter doesn't amount to a Democratic victory in 1912, but even in 1912, with higher than usual Republican/Progressive turnout, many seats were still won by the Democrats.
|
|
|
Post by Gog3451 on May 12, 2016 15:56:35 GMT
They might still lose. I think Roosevelt could win, but I'm not sure about Taft. Now Roosevelt definitely is more involved in Europe and the US might intervene sooner, like in 1915 with the Lusitania. Taft, eh I'm not sure.
|
|