Vive Le Hughes

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Coolidge in '32!

[Bo]

Good so far, but I think the GOP gained way too many seats in the Senate in 1930. There were only 33 Senate seats (I believe) for election that year, and the GOP had some of those Senate seats before 1930, so I seriously doubt the Democrats would lose all (or almost all) their Senate seats that were up for election that year. A more realistic gain for be 10 Senate seats for the Republicans. In 1930 in RL the Democrats gained 8 Senate seats, and the absolute maximum that the Democrats could have picked up that year was 20 Senate seats. I seriously doubt that the GOP will win the absolute maximum number of seats up for election that year--some Democratic incumbents in the South will survive. You know that only one-third of all seats in the Senate are up for election every two years, right? Other than that, keep up the good work.

Well, perhaps, but I noticed that the Democrats were *really* overinflated from their victories prior. I mean, who could imagine a Democratic majority of 58 in the twenties? Unthinkable. In RL 1928, The Democrats had 35 seats, so I just pushed them down to those levels.

Yes I know that one third of seats are up at midterms.

Even if the Dems were overinflated from their RL levels, that doesn't mean they will lose that much seats at once. Maybe in two elections, but since only one-third of Senate seats are up for election, that just seems to much to lose in one election. I'm assming you're not keeping a chart of which Senators are up for election are which ones are not? If not, I would honestly suggest making the Democrats lose about 10 seats. It's just so much more realistic. I seriously doubt there would be 21 vulnerable Democrats in that one election cycle--maybe in two or three election cycles, but not in one.

Well... ok. I'll change the seats to a net loss of sixteen instead.

Well, I am keeping (somewhat) of a chart, but I've been focusing on the people who are most crucial to the timeline working. I'm just a bit too lazy to go through everything, though.

It's good that you reduced the number of seats lost, but I still think that number should be reduced further. I believe the highest number of seats lost in one election after 1894 was 13 seats (which the GOP lost) in 1932. Thus, I think that the ideal loss for the Dems in this scenario would be 7-13 Senate seats. In RL, the GOP's large Senate majority was reduced throughout the course of several elections (1930, 1932, 1934, and 1936), with each election being a loss of 7-13 seats for the GOP. Thus, I think it would be most realistic for the Democrats to lose about 10 seats this cycle, with about 10 the next election, and another 10 the following election. I think that if there would be an approxiamtely equal number of vulnerable Senate Democrats in each of the election cycles (1930, 1932, and 1934), and if there would be about 30 vulnerable Democrats (out of 58, I believe), that would equal to a loss of about 10 Senate seats in each cycle.  Besides, since the Dems didn't massively increase their Senate numbers in either 1924, 1926, or 1928, there would be no reason for them to lose so many seats and have so many vulnerable incumbents in this election.

[Bo]

In regards to the rest of your TL, I hope Robinson decides to lower tariffs and to increase stimulus spending in an attempt to make the recession/Depression less severe. Even though I still think the GOP would be favored to win in 1932 and immplement some sort of New Deal program. Also, as a side note, I hope the Holocaust doesn't occur in this TL.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Good so far, but I think the GOP gained way too many seats in the Senate in 1930. There were only 33 Senate seats (I believe) for election that year, and the GOP had some of those Senate seats before 1930, so I seriously doubt the Democrats would lose all (or almost all) their Senate seats that were up for election that year. A more realistic gain for be 10 Senate seats for the Republicans. In 1930 in RL the Democrats gained 8 Senate seats, and the absolute maximum that the Democrats could have picked up that year was 20 Senate seats. I seriously doubt that the GOP will win the absolute maximum number of seats up for election that year--some Democratic incumbents in the South will survive. You know that only one-third of all seats in the Senate are up for election every two years, right? Other than that, keep up the good work.

Well, perhaps, but I noticed that the Democrats were *really* overinflated from their victories prior. I mean, who could imagine a Democratic majority of 58 in the twenties? Unthinkable. In RL 1928, The Democrats had 35 seats, so I just pushed them down to those levels.

Yes I know that one third of seats are up at midterms.

Even if the Dems were overinflated from their RL levels, that doesn't mean they will lose that much seats at once. Maybe in two elections, but since only one-third of Senate seats are up for election, that just seems to much to lose in one election. I'm assming you're not keeping a chart of which Senators are up for election are which ones are not? If not, I would honestly suggest making the Democrats lose about 10 seats. It's just so much more realistic. I seriously doubt there would be 21 vulnerable Democrats in that one election cycle--maybe in two or three election cycles, but not in one.

Well... ok. I'll change the seats to a net loss of sixteen instead.

Well, I am keeping (somewhat) of a chart, but I've been focusing on the people who are most crucial to the timeline working. I'm just a bit too lazy to go through everything, though.

It's good that you reduced the number of seats lost, but I still think that number should be reduced further. I believe the highest number of seats lost in one election after 1894 was 13 seats (which the GOP lost) in 1932. Thus, I think that the ideal loss for the Dems in this scenario would be 7-13 Senate seats. In RL, the GOP's large Senate majority was reduced throughout the course of several elections (1930, 1932, 1934, and 1936), with each election being a loss of 7-13 seats for the GOP. Thus, I think it would be most realistic for the Democrats to lose about 10 seats this cycle, with about 10 the next election, and another 10 the following election. I think that if there would be an approxiamtely equal number of vulnerable Senate Democrats in each of the election cycles (1930, 1932, and 1934), and if there would be about 30 vulnerable Democrats (out of 58, I believe), that would equal to a loss of about 10 Senate seats in each cycle.  Besides, since the Dems didn't massively increase their Senate numbers in either 1924, 1926, or 1928, there would be no reason for them to lose so many seats and have so many vulnerable incumbents in this election.

For god's sake Roch, quit nitpicking.

[Psychic Octopus]

This is frankly embarrassing me, but fine, I'll put it down to 12 seats.

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

This is frankly embarrassing me, but fine, I'll put it down to 12 seats.

Please don't. I never nit-pick about the numbers, but don't let someone write your TL for you.

[Bo]

This is frankly embarrassing me, but fine, I'll put it down to 12 seats.

Thank you. It just makes it so much more realistic. Other than that, I liked the update very much, though.

[Psychic Octopus]

This is frankly embarrassing me, but fine, I'll put it down to 12 seats.

Please don't. I never nit-pick about the numbers, but don't let someone write your TL for you.

Yeah, but it seems quite more realistic now that I think about it. The Democrats didn't gain much in 1924 or 1918, so it seems kind of odd to see them jump and lose all of there seats. I'll just have their majorities reduced gradually through 1932 and 1934 and so on.

[Psychic Octopus]

President Robinson was visibly defeated in the 1930 midterms, as the voters rejected his efforts to overcome the depression, pushing in two substantial Republican majorities in the Senate. GOP leaders were summoned to meet with the President on ways to help solve the nation's ongoing trauma. Robert La Follette would propose a massive stimulus spending in order to "shock" the economy back to life, while Bachmann's Contract With America would plead for more public works spending. Robinson would approve of the latter proposal, as the President had much more marginal role in affairs, but dissuaded the ideas of a "stimulus" as he viewed it as potentially squandering needed resources.

In New York City, former British Chancellor of the Exchequer Winston Churchill dies in a car crash. The politician was born into a noble family, and was currently resting in the political wilderness. He received a mention in the New York Times, which remembered him as the man largely responsible for the disastrous Gallipoli landings on the Dardanelles during the Great War.

The lame duck President would grapple with Congress over the excess of needed provisions, deliberately dragging out processes and submitting his ideas, some of which didn't go far enough to please both parties. Bills were stalled, and processes moved much slower then they did in the prior year. The efforts and trauma had pushed Robinson to meet new levels of frustration, as his legacy and conscience deteriorated.

On October 27th, President Robinson suffered a massive stroke. The affliction caused a great deal of shock, as the United States had never been in such a particular dilemma. Vice President Baker was immediately notified, and took over, becoming the first "Acting President of the United States". The public wasn't sad when they learned President Robinson was in a comatose state, as many reviled the man. Acting President Baker would sign a few public works programs into law, but did nothing particular notable in his two month tenure.



Acting President Newton Baker

President Robinson, after easing into his office again, was just as frustrated as before. In his absence, nothing had changed. The situation around the country was getting worse and worse. Even Robinson, the "Scrappy Joe", began to feel that the country needed a new leader. Entering a deep depression of his own, he prepared for his party's second destruction.

The Democratic Nomination:

With Robinson refusing to run again, the nomination was left wide open. However, few wanted the opportunity of losing an election in a landslide, and no one wanted the flurry of insults and taunts that would await them in the general election. In the end, the nomination would go to Senator James Reed of Missouri, a fiscally conservative isolationist. Charging "What's needed in America now is a set of principle", he and his VP candidate, Albert Ritchie, set out on the campaign trail.

The Republican Nomination:

The Republican candidate in 1932 was a subject of interest ever since the crash in 1929. The strongest contenders arriving at the convention appeared to be retreads from 1928, along with Robert "Young Bob" La Follette of Wisconsin. Going into the lead on the first ballot was Frank Lowden, the party's 1928 nominee. However, he failed to gain traction, and his supporters quickly drifted away to other candidates. By the tenth ballot, no clear frontrunner had yet emerged. Meanwhile, Herbert Hoover, the third place finisher in 1928, began subtly wooing over delegates. Touting his record as a "Great Engineer", he charged that he was well suited to deal with the crisis at hand. A moderate-turned progressive, Hoover was a newcomer to politics, after serving in mining companies and heading the relief efforts in the Great War. As candidates dropped out, the plain-spoken Hoover mystified the convention. Breaking precedent, Hoover addressed the convention, and after an unusually good speech, Hoover won the nomination on the eighteenth ballot. To run alongside him, the innovative Governor Alf Landon was chosen, and the Hoover/Landon ticket headed to certain victory in the fall.

The Election of 1932:

In the campaign, Hoover presented himself as the leader needed to surmount the depression and lead the nation back into prosperity. Charging that the Democrats were ill-adept and fully responsible for the economic malaise, the Reed/Ritchie ticket was bombarded with attacks and labels. President Robinson, getting frequent reports of the Republican attacks, was furious at the "misrepresentation and distortion of fact for political gain". The Democratic ticket would run on a campaign saying that the worst is almost over, and testing the waters with a newcomer would be quite dangerous. Despite the back and forth, the American people came out on election day and cast their vote for the Great Engineer.

Electoral Vote:

Hoover/Landon: 472
Reed/Ritchie: 59

Popular Vote:

Hoover/Landon: 61.6%
Reed/Ritchie: 35.8%

1932 Congressional Elections:

The voters were not at all dissatisfied with the Republican congress, and hoped that giving them full control would alleviate the depression and halt the bickering and paralysis the government had gone through for the last four years.

Senate Results:

Republicans: 62 (+11)
Democrats: 34 (-11)

House Results:

Republicans: 296 (+30)
Democrats: 135 (-31)
Farmer-Labor: 4 (+1)

Coming Up: The Great Engineer

[Vosem]

Two excellent updates -- and frankly, Roch, the 21-seat gain could come from Democrats switching parties to save their political careers that aren't up for reelection in 1930. That's perfectly feasible.

Excellent TL, NiK! Keep going!

[Barnes]

Very good updates, NiK! I really like the way the Republican Party is heading!

[Historico]

Awesome updates Nik, It was sad to see Ol' Scrappy Joe get pushed out of office by the Economic Collapse, but it seems like ITTL Burbonisim will stay the predominant flavor of the Democratic Party for Decades to come. I kinda have a problem with Hoover getting the nod, and although his ideas for the ecnomy may have changed, but I just think his volunteerisim would be a part of his core ideals...So IDk, I look forward to seeing how you figure and Older, Wiser and Alternate Herbert Hoover would do in the White House lol...Keep it comming

[Psychic Octopus]

Bump for the other forummers who are FINALLY venturing on to this board.

[Bo]

Go Hoover!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think he will handle the Great Depression much like FDR did in RL. I wonder if WWII will occur, though? I have two questions, though:

1. So President Robinson was in a coma for two months and then woke up from his coma? I wanted to clarify that.
2. You mind telling us what is happening around the world at this period in time? Like in France, Germany, Britain, Italy, and the USSR?

[Psychic Octopus]

Go Hoover!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I think he will handle the Great Depression much like FDR did in RL. I wonder if WWII will occur, though? I have two questions, though:

1. So President Robinson was in a coma for two months and then woke up from his coma? I wanted to clarify that.
2. You mind telling us what is happening around the world at this period in time? Like in France, Germany, Britain, Italy, and the USSR?

1. President Robinson experienced a stroke, which led him to be bedridden for two months, and not able to function properly as President. Acting President Newton Baker proceeded on with his policies, fearful of what to do next.

2. Germany will be covered in the next update. As you may notice, the lack of major foreign problems is because of the League of Nations, as it is considerably more powerful. The Anglo-Japanese alliance is keeping things stable in the Far East, as Japan is more docile and less militaristic then it was in real life. The Manchurian Crises were butterflied out in this timeline. I believe I noted Mussolini and Stalin's Soviet Union earlier.

[Psychic Octopus]

Sorry about the lack of an update; I know you are all looking forward to the Hoover Administration. I've been a bit tired (and lazy), but I expect to have an update by the end of the week.

[Bo]

BUMP. This TL is very good so far.

[Bo]

Second BUMP.

[Psychic Octopus]

Sorry about the lack of an update; I haven't had the time to update this. Maybe later in the week.

[Psychic Octopus]

I'm working on a massively-detailed update currently. It shall most likely be posted tomorrow, and if not, then this weekend.

[Psychic Octopus]

Quite sorry (I didn't have time to work on it this weekend), but I'm almost complete and I promise Hoover's first term will be up tomorrow.

[Bo]

Bump.

[Psychic Octopus]

Bump.

Sorry - I have time tomorrow to update, and I will do so then.

[Psychic Octopus]

The First Term of Herbert Hoover

An orphan, Herbert Hoover was an unlikely president. Rising from what many consider a lowly part of society, he worked his way up to the top, becoming a successfully mining engineer. During the early stages of the Great War, Hoover organized the return of 120,000 Americans from Europe: tourists, students, and executives alike. Leading volunteers in the distribution of food, clothing, steamship tickets, and cash, Hoover set the stage for a public career. Heading operations based in London, he generously provided much needed aid to the ailing country of Belgium. In recognition of his efforts, President Hughes appointed Hoover to head the US Food Administration. Setting effective rationing days, his efforts in consumption reduction and distribution helped set the stage for a new term: Hooverizing. After the war, Hoover chaired relief efforts in Germany and the Soviet Union, much to the dismay of many prominent politicians. Declaring: "Twenty million people are starving. Whatever their politics, they shall be fed!" Hoover successfully retorted claims that he was a supporter of Bolshevism. Declared by the New York Times as one of the nation's most important men, Hoover served as Ambassador to France for two years in Wilson Administration, trying to improve American relations with the world, and chaired efforts to help Japan overcome a deadly earthquake. His expertise would give him a unique way of thought, and a deep interest in helping people.

But none of his prior experience could possibly have prepared him to deal with the "Great Depression". As it spread rapidly around the globe, it became clear that Hoover was thrust into a precarious position. Inheriting a nation faced with a quarter of its populace unemployed, Industrial productivity and production at record lows, and a cynical public, the "Great Engineer" would need to act in a fast and unprecedented manner.

The economic woes were not confined to the reaches of America, and by 1933, the Great Depression had reached into Europe, disrupting commerce and weakening the power of the League of Nations. In Britain, Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald –The first Labour prime minister -- was beset by problems on all sides, as his national government had no clear resolve to save the nation.

In Germany, the rise of the far right had begun with the selection of Adolf Hitler as Chancellor. A superb orator, Hitler was able to command the emotions of the German people. On February 27th, the Reichstag burned in a fire allegedly started by Marinus van der Lubbe, a Dutch bricklayer and supposed Marxist. At Hitler’s urging, President Paul von Hindenburg passed an emergency decree that would suspend civil liberties, leading to the mass arrest of communists, including all of the Communist parliamentary delegates. In their absence, the Nazis would gain a majority, and subsequent elections would confirm their dominance. The implications had swept into a perfect storm for the Nazi Party, an on March 30th, President Hindenburg would unexpectedly die of natural causes, removing the Chancellor's last remaining obstacle to power. In March, Adolf Hitler would rise to the occasion and per the Enabling Act, become Führer und Reichskanzler, thus effectively consolidating his power and becoming both head of government and head of state.

On March 4th, Herbert Hoover would be elevated to the presidency, after four months of a paralyzed government. He would be forced into a position of great dismay; no president had faced such a crisis since the days of Abraham Lincoln. The Great Engineer would announce a heavy increase in spending, in an attempt to ‘stimulate’ the American economy. With unemployment at 25%, Hoover would ram through a number of public works programs, with the intention of creating jobs. In a surprise move, Hoover would decide not to take the United States off of the gold standard, winning mediocre cheers from conservatives, but disappointing his liberal following. In The New York Times, Franklin Roosevelt would write of his “grave disappointment in the actions of President Hoover”, accusing him of selling out to the “upper class elites.”

The President would force a repeal of the Smoot-Hawley tariff act, trying to reframe the patchwork of US economic relations. Calling for “International cooperation on the grave economic issues of our time”, Hoover would, in partnership with other members of the League, announce a worldwide economic conference to be held in New York City, slated for January 1934.

Next Update: The Conference

[#CriminalizeSobriety]

Very well done, NiK!

I would expect Hoover to govern in 1932 the same exact way you have him doing. More!