Was Dewey considered some sacraficial lamb in 1944?

[Alben Barkley]

The fact that they nominated Dewey again four years later tells me they saw some potential in him. As Governor of New York, he would have been one of the most prominent Republicans in the country at that time even if he had relatively light experience.

Can you even think of a better experienced Republican they could have run with more gravitas and foreign policy experience? Looking at the bench they had, it was... thin. Their options were basically to nominate Willkie again (wouldn't have worked out well for them as he died before the election), Dewey, or another relatively inexperienced governor like Harold Stassen from a less prominent state.

The only potential nominee they could have gone with who could have possibly posed a serious threat was MacArthur, but as he was leading the US war effort in Japan at the time, that would have created a number of problems. Hard to campaign, for one thing. And FDR could have easily hammered him for challenging his own Commander-in-Chief in wartime, and letting politics interfere with his duty. Truman fired him for less.

So really, it seems Dewey was just the best of their pretty limited options. Perhaps they didn't expect him to win, but he did do well enough that they not only nominated him again in 1948, they thought he was a shoe-in to win this time.

We all know how that turned out, of course...

[Alben Barkley]

Given FDR's health in 1944, he probably was beatable, but it just would have taken a very special candidate.

Dewey had some major problems as a campaigner, which were exposed in 1948.

FDR really was only unbeatable in 1936 and maybe 1940 (though that third term is a pesky thing...if World War II wasn't in progress, I'd argue Wilikie probably could have beaten him on that alone.)

I actually think he was more unbeatable in 1932 than 1940. Hoover was DOA that year.

[Alben Barkley]

The GOP had been decimated during FDR's successive landslides in the 30s, and at one point they were down to 17 seats in the Senate. Things had improved by 1944, but they lacked anyone who could seriously challenge FDR.

This is definitely true and is a major reason why the bench was so thin for them.