The Year of the Tiger: The Legacy of the Election of 1920

[Mechaman]

It is the year of 1920, and the American people have had enough of Republican progressivism.  After 24 years of Republican rule and Bryanite control of the Democratic Party, the people want Change.  The year is 1920, and America has been suffering from one of the worst post war panics in history.  Due to excessive wartime and government spending the government is running a deficit of over $10 billion for the first time in it's history, despite heavy income taxation.  American businessmen lay back in leather chairs, stuffed to their britches in lemon cake and soda, while millions of the poor barely make enough to afford the expensive domestic products that the protective tariff protects.  Worse yet, in an era of so-called "progressivism", groups like the Irish Catholics, Italians, African Americans, Czech Americans, Polish Americans, and other non-WASP minorities are treated like secondary citizens in Protestant dominated America.  Each just asking, begging to be recognized as equals to their White Protestant brethren.  All of them looking for somebody to give them a voice, to make them feel one with American society.
Now was the time for Change.  After many years in the political desert an infamous Democratic machine was about to make the grandest of returns in the Election of 1920.  Their causes would ultimately prove to be the cause of the American people who could barely get by under the ideology of Big Government Republicanism.  The year is 1920, the year of the Tiger.

[Mechaman]

"Irish Catholics, Italians, and African Americans are treated like secondary citizens in Protestant dominated America"

Thanks a lot for skipping other non-WASP and non-Protestant groups.

Sorry it's early in the morning.

[Mechaman]

So yeah I'm going to be pretty busy so the next update might not be up until Saturday.  It should prove to be interesting though.
I won't take 3 months to update this, that I will say right now.

[Mechaman]

So yeah, this took a little while longer than I had hoped.

Prologue:

Throughout it's history the Democratic Party, the Party of the People, has taken a most just and courageous stance against the evils of the protective tariff, a tax designed in such a way as to willingly keep the people of this nation forever at the whims of American businessmen.  The Democratic Party, unlike the Republican Party and it's forebears, believe that the American Government should be a government of the people, for the people, and by the people, nowhere should the word "business" be found.  The protective tariff, in the words of it's own proponents, is a tool to be used by our government for the benefit of American business EVEN AT THE COST OF THE AVERAGE WORKING MAN'S LIVING.  The protective tariff, if none of us shall deal it with the metaphorical bullet to bring about it's demise, if gone unchecked will destroy the economic well being of the American people.  How else can one explain the severe economic panic we are experiencing?  Oh war you say?  In Europe?  What the high hell are American boys doing in Europe fighting a war that was never ours to begin with?  Oh that's right, the so-called "progressives" in the Republican Party arguing that a truly American foreign policy is to play global policeman, to bully our beliefs into the subconscious of the uninformed!  That we should play babysitter to the corrupt monarchs of Imperialist Russia!  To the Republican vandals who rob the poor and merchant classes of their buying power for the benefit of big business and antagonize our trading partners with insane taxes nothing is sweeter than the deploy of thousands of American boys to die on foreign battlefields with the hope of spreading the markets of big business, the longtime love of the Grand Old Party.  That is why more than ever the American people shall turn to the call of the Democratic Party, and when I say Democratic I don't mean the slaves of Bryanism, but that of the true Democratic Party: the party of freedom, the party of liberty, the party of the free market to save them from this hell.

New York Governor George B. McClellan Jr., "On Republicanism April 21, 1920"

[Mechaman]

Alright, I'm finally going to put up a serious update for this timeline that isn't just a randomass speech made by some guy who is governor of New York.

If I decide to throw caution to the wind and stay up late to update all of my TLs because I have no social life on Saturday you might see this update tonight.

I will say (in all honesty) that I should have an update up before next Wednesday (which is when our Fall Break is).  I'm going to be in Boulder, Colorado from Wednesday-Monday (I'll probably get back Sunday Evening, but due to my normal sleeping schedule that I developed over the past 5 months or so don't expect me to be on here at like 1:30AM).

In the meantime I'll take any comments/question you might have.

[Mechaman]

1920: The Beginning

New York Times, April 26th, 1920:

Tammany Rising:
Five days ago George McClellan Jr., the governor of New York and the son of the immortal Union general George McClellan Sr., offered what many have described as "the strongest anti-tariff speech of all time."  A few years ago many would call the governor a fool for stating such a statement, but after a recent poll done in the state of New York asking who they would rather have in office, a Progressive Republican or a Tammany Hall Democrat, 58% said they would prefer a candidate from the Tammany Hall Machine of New York City than they would any Progressive Republican, a clear indication that even against a machine with as bad of a history as Tammany Progressive Republicanism is on the decline.  Also in a related poll, President Roosevelt, who was once considered one of the greatest presidents in this nation, was considered by a majority of 63%, this in New York state, to be worse than average.  In fact just last week US Senator Alfred Smith of New York went as far as to say this:

"If Teddy Roosevelt had quit the job in 1909 he would've been remembered by historians as a visionary, as one of the greatest presidents of all time.  He would've been remembered as the forefather of modern day American progressivism.  If his respect for the traditions of the office of president were stronger than his own personal ego then perhaps we would've been spared one of the worst economic panics in American history, the rights of the American people to express discontent with the government would be upheld, and most importantly 90,000 American boys wouldn'tve died fighting wars that they had no business dying in for the old imperialist powers of Europe."

For his remarks the New York senator was strongly rebuked by Republican leadership, who noted that outbursts like Smith "were part of the Democratic partisanship that is threatening to destroy the fabric of this nation."  Senator Smith has become a pest in the side of Republican leadership due to his opposition to the aggressive action of the administration against the Socialist Party, namely party leader Eugene V. Debs.  The President defended his action of imprisoning the Socialist Party leader, claiming that Eugene Debs speeches against American intervention in Europe "is a threat to the morale of the American people."  Smith criticized this latest statement by claiming "whatever Mr. Debs freedom of speech is, it sure not is in anyway any more of a threat to the American people than the Republican Party has proven itself to be these past twenty four years.  Look at the polls Teddy, they agree."  This back and forth between the President and the New York Senator has turned nasty to the degree that the President has banned Senator Smith from the White House.
Another area in which the President is getting hit hard in approval in his support of the Czar in the Russian Civil War as well as his stance against Irish independence, of which a majority of the population supports.
On the flip side, many Tammany Hall and other Democratic machines have recently spoken out loudly against interventionism in the Russian Civil War and in support of Irish Independence.  Also amongst the criticisms levied against the Administration and congressional Republicans is condemnation of the protectionist tariff, with the average tariff rate at 48.51%, which many prominent Democrats derided as "the source of all the economic hardships that have befallen everyday Americans."
Already there are many Democrats that have come up on the list of possible Presidential nomination, three of whom: Senator Smith, Massachusetts Senator John F. Fitzgerald and California Senator James D. Phelan, are Irish Catholics.  The presence of this many Irish Catholic politicians, many of whom favorite sons of urban Democratic machines, suggests that the Bryanite and Southern factions that have controlled the nomination for the past 16 years may have a hell of a fight.
Although Irish Catholics find themselves in more positions of power than ever in the history of these United States there is the question of the other Democratic voting segment: White Southern Protestants.  Despite being in the same party these two voting segments often clash and in the event of a Democratic candidate of Irish ancestry and Catholic faith being nominated, even in a year of economic crisis as this.....one has to wonder if the long "Solid" Democratic South might crack just a little.  Not enough for the Republican Party to win, but just enough to foment a seed of doubt in the Democratic Party for generations to come.
One thing we can already say though: whoever wins the nominations for the major parties this year will play a huge hand in history.

[Mechaman]

Alright I shouldn't be doing this but I will: I'm making another update tomorrow night.

Before I do that I would like to ask: What does everyone think of how I set up the TL so far?  I know it's unorthodox, but I thought it would be quite interesting.

[Mechaman]

Is this going to involve what you talked about in your Westman timeline, with Irish-Catholic Libertarians attempting a take over or something like that? 'Cause I'm good with two of the three words in "Irish Catholic Libertarian", and good with three fourths of the term "Irish Catholic Paleo-Conservative"

Urr maybe.
Like I tell everyone else when I make these timelines: even I don't know how they will turn out.  At first Irish Catholic Libertarians may take over......then next thing you know it's Anglo Protestant State's Rights taking over the Democratic Party (like Hans TL lol).
Just saying.
Actually I got this idea after someone posted a thread asking what a Roosevelt in 1912 situation would've looked like and I said a "Smith in 1920" scenario would've been pretty interesting.  Not sure if Al Smith will be the candidate yet though, in fact I'm not even sure who will be the candidate yet.
I always found the rise of the Irish Catholic politician interesting, thus why I am usually biased towards Irish Catholic Democrats with libertarianesque views in my TLs.

[Mechaman]

Is this going to involve what you talked about in your Westman timeline, with Irish-Catholic Libertarians attempting a take over or something like that? 'Cause I'm good with two of the three words in "Irish Catholic Libertarian", and good with three fourths of the term "Irish Catholic Paleo-Conservative"

Urr maybe.
Like I tell everyone else when I make these timelines: even I don't know how they will turn out.  At first Irish Catholic Libertarians may take over......then next thing you know it's Anglo Protestant State's Rights taking over the Democratic Party (like Hans TL lol).
Just saying.
Actually I got this idea after someone posted a thread asking what a Roosevelt in 1912 situation would've looked like and I said a "Smith in 1920" scenario would've been pretty interesting.  Not sure if Al Smith will be the candidate yet though, in fact I'm not even sure who will be the candidate yet.
I always found the rise of the Irish Catholic politician interesting, thus why I am usually biased towards Irish Catholic Democrats with libertarianesque views in my TLs.

1) I think Smith 1920 would be sweet. However, I would call him a "Paleo-Conservative" more than a Libertarian per se...

2) Is the list of Presidents TR for five straight terms, or Tr for two, Taft for one, and TR for two?

3) There were other Irish Catholic politicans such as JFK in the 60's that weren't as isolationist as Smith in the 20's. It would be interesting to see a Kennedy-like Nationalism collide with a Smith-like Isolationism. Both were Irish Catholic somewhat Conservative Democrats from different eras, but Kennedy was a Cols-Warrior.

I'm really just babbling on and thinking out loud with this post

Please do when you have a thought, speak it.
It's been really helpful so far.
Seriously you deserve "newcomer of the year" status or something.

And Taft had term in between 1909-1913 and then TR again.

[Mechaman]

So yeah, something came up last night.  So yeah if things go the way I think they will go in the next few weeks.....well I might be a little distracted from making TLs.

I mean I will try, but if it comes down to a random political forum and the ladies........no contest.

[Mechaman]

Alright I'm finally going to make an update for this TL sometime before I leave for Thanksgiving break on Tuesday.  But first here are the results from the 1912 and 1916 Presidential Elections:

1912
Republican:
Incumbent President William Taft stands down so former President Theodore Roosevelt can run for president.  California Governor Hiram Johnson is nominated for Vice President.
Democratic:
New Jersey Governor Woodrow Wilson with the endorsement of Bryan and other influential anti-Tammany and anti-Bourbon Democrats wins the nomination over Tammany Hall favored Champ Clark of Missouri.  Indiana Governor Thomas R. Marshall is nominated Vice President.
Map:

Former President Theodore Roosevelt (New York)/Governor Hiram Johnson (California) Republican Party 53.97% PV 350 EV
Governor Woodrow Wilson (New Jersey)/Governor Thomas R. Marshall 42.15% PV 181 EVs(Indiana)

1916 Election:
Republican:
President Roosevelt is renominated for a second term by the Republican Party as is Vice President Hiram Johnson.  US involvement in the War of European Powers is pretty unpopular but Republican Party is confident that the progressive reforms passed by the administration will help them win.
Democratic:
Governor William Gibbs McAdoo of New York wins the nomination with the support of the Bryanite faction of the Democratic Party.  To ease tensions with the traditional Bourbon wing of the Democratic Party he names Thomas F. Bayard, Jr., Congressman of Delaware, as his Vice President.
Map:

President Theodore Roosevelt (New York)/Vice President Hiram Johnson (California) 48.17% PV 270 EVs
Governor William Gibbs McAdoo (New York)/Representative Thomas F. Bayard Jr. (Delaware) 49.56% PV 261 EVs

[Mechaman]

What were the closest states in 1916?

California: about 1,100 votes (I'm bad with numbers)
Washington: give or take about 800.
Pretty much the West Coast.

[Mechaman]

The Republican Side:

Meanwhile on the Republican Side a number of politicians were ready to take Roosevelt's place as the President of the United States.  The leading three candidates, all progressives, were:
Vice President Hiram Johnson of California: Although Roosevelt was an unpopular President in many areas of the country Johnson still has support amongst the American West.  He could appeal to Bryan Democrats to pull of an upset election and keep the Republican streak of electing presidents for four more years.  However, his closeness with the administration is likely to cost him, as he stopped protesting Roosevelt's interventionist foreign policy in 1916, before the election.
Senator Robert M. La Follette, Sr. of Wisconsin: Senator La Follette has made a name for himself by opposing foreign interventionism at every turn, even under Roosevelt.  Despite strong differences on the War of European Powers La Follette endorse Roosevelt for President in 1916.  If nominated President La Follette could potentially win over the dove vote.  However La Follette's strong progressivism has the potential to turn away droves of conservative voters (namely pro Gold Standard Republicans and the like) to a Democratic ticket.
Mining Engineer & Humanitarian Herbert Clark Hoover of California: Unlike La Follette or Johnson Hoover has no experience in electoral politics.  However he is very popular among the American people due to his humanitarianism, particularly towards a defeated Germany and poverty stricken Russia.  In 1919 he was listed in Time's "Ten Most Important Living Americans".  A believer in the Efficiency Movement, Hoover believes that the presidency should be used as "a vehicle for improving the welfare of all Americans by regulation and encouraging voluntarism."  His pro business philosophy (compared to his opponents) and his strong support of the Protective Tariff could go a long way in helping him win the nomination against the Progressive Vanguard.

Up next: The Grand Old Rally, the Republican National Convention of 1920.

[Mechaman]

The Grand Old Rally
The Republican National Convention
Chicago Coliseum, Chicago, Illinois
June 8th, 1920-June 12th, 1920:




The Republican National Convention of 1920 had a renewed air about it, as if the total disaster many political analysts at the time had predicted wouldn't come in November.  Delegations from throughout the nation would put forth their favorite sons for the possibility of succeeding President Theodore Roosevelt, the only US President to serve more than two terms.  Although he had known the Oval Office more than any man before him, many suspected that when the history books are written all that was going to be mentioned of Roosevelt's last two terms is the size of his ego and how it brought disaster upon the country.  A guest at the Republican National Convention in 1920, however, wouldn'tve got that impression.  Instead the first day of the Convention was devoted to the showing of tributes of President Roosevelt and portraying him as the most accomplished president since Abraham Lincoln.  President Roosevelt himself would take the stage by the end of night to make this speech:


"Ladies and gentlemen of this Grand Old Party, in recent years the logic of my actions have been called into question.  Many people, you know them as Democrats (audience laughs) have propagated this right and just progressive platform of mine as foolhardy and ego driven.  Let me ask all the good people present in this arena: is the goal of promoting democracy and liberal republicanism the goal of a foolhardy egomaniac?  Is the promotion of the social security of the average working American man, woman, and child the goal of one whose only goal is to satisfy his self image?  Did I merely run for a third term in 1912 because I was bored than merely try to pass the greatest set of progressive legislation in the history of these United States?
I am but a man, a man who had a vision that the working men and women of this country would finally reap the true benefits of their labor.  That the interests of the American people, and not that of the monetary elite, would reign supreme.  That the privileges of American prosperity and respect for civil liberties and rights wouldn't be limited to just these 48 states but to dozens of now free states around the globe.
The occupation of President of the United States is hardly the job of an egotist, especially when given to a man such as I.  I dare anyone here today to say they would've made the choices I have made these past 7 years to better their image!  The decisions this Executive has made were by no means choices to better his image, but choices he thought in his heart were right.  May History damn my image, may History claim that Teddy Roosevelt was an egomaniac imperialist who was at the whim of European monarchs, for I care not a whit what History says when Providence has known that the weight of my actions were right!
See this is the problem of our Democratic colleagues, they do not grasp the consequences of inaction.  In the Great War they didn't see that the Allied Powers were the ones who stood for the advancement of liberal democracy while the Central Powers represented evil empire.  And now in this Great Russian Conflict they do not understand, do not grasp the threat posed upon decent western society by the spectre known as "Socialism".  Call it "Marxism", call it "Communism", call it "Socialism", it doesn't matter!  In the end it is the same thing: the overthrow of moral society!  These men who are trying to take power in Russia, these Bolsheviks, are no different from the breed of men who shot down in cold blood our beloved presidents James Garfield and William McKinley.  Their only purpose is to cause strife, to cause chaos, to cause anarchy.  The stability of the great Russian state is essential to the health of our European allies who would surely be vulnerable to the Marxist Scourge that threatens the existence of capitalist society.  And if we turn a blind eye to this monster.......time will only tell before this menace threatens the fabric of our own American society.
If there is anything I want to be remembered for in the history books written by honest men it is that Theodore Roosevelt, more than any American President, did everything in his power to prevent these dark forces from trampling Western Civilization.  Write anything else you want, belittle my name for all generations to come, but let that be my legacy."
After President Roosevelt's speech he would get a thunderous applause from many of the delegates.  The La Follette delegates, however, were as silent as mice.

On June 9th the balloting for the successor to Roosevelt would begin.  The delegations would put forth various favorite son candidates (such as Illinois Representative Frank Lowden, Ohio Senator Warren Harding, etc.) who would get a token showing (a few votes here and there but nothing substantial).  But the three front runners were Vice President Hiram Johnson of California, Senator Robert La Follette, Sr. of Wisconsin, and Engineer Herbert C. Hoover of California.  After the first round of balloting (which had a slight lead for Johnson) it became obvious that the selection of Presidential nominee would not go down easy.
Immediately after the first round of balloting the candidates started courting votes from favorite son candidates.  Of note a number of the favorite son candidates were conservative Republicans (also known as "Gold Standard" Republicans) who didn't have favorable views of either of the three candidates.  All three candiates would make certain concessions to this group of delegates:
Johnson promised that in support of votes he would push for former Senator Henry C. Lodge (who lost to John Fitzgerald in 1916) of Massachusetts, a prominent conservative Republican, as his running mate.
La Follette promised that in support of conservative Republican backing that he would push for the nomination of Senator Joseph Irwin France of Maryland as Vice President, a notable anti-imperialist conservative Republican.
Herbert Hoover also promised to consider backing the nomination of a conservative Republican, Ohio Senator Warren G. Harding (also an anti-interventionist conservative Republican) as well as to "govern from the pragmatic center" for the backing of conservative Republicans.
However powerful President Roosevelt's speech at the beginning of the Convention was it wouldn't be enough to get the ghost of his unpopularity out of the balloting.  His unpopularity would inevitably transfer over to Johnson, his vice president.  By the fourth round of balloting Hiram Johnson would receive a measly 186 votes.
After the fifth round of balloting, where Johnson got barely 104 ballots, he was approached by Herbert Hoover................

[Mechaman]

A Conversation
Herbert Hoover and Hiram Johnson
June 10th, 1920:



Hoover: Hey Hiram, you got a minute?
Johnson: What do you want?
Hoover: Listen, I don't know what you're trying to prove out there but you've got to face the facts: you have little chance of winning the nom.
Johnson: Yes, but neither do the favorite son candidates who are still on the balloting.  I figure if they are going to stick it out so will I.
Hoover: Hiram, I know you do not like Bob Follette.  Do you really want to entertain the idea of his presidency by staying on the ballot.
Johnson: (laughs)  If Bob Follette gets nominated as President we will have our asses kicked like a government mule.....and we would deserve it.
Hoover: See?  The man is a nut job who for all we know might be a closet socialist.  And I do not say that lightly.
Johnson: Maybe you're right.  But why should I throw my support behind you?  You've never been in an election before, ever.  At least Wacko Bob has done that.
Hoover: Maybe you're right.  Maybe I do lack the necessary experience to run an electoral campaign, but who is America's most famous humanitarian?
Johnson curses under his breath.
Johnson: Okay, fine.  I'd rather it be you than Robert La Follette.

At 7:06PM local time Hiram Johnson would endorse Herbert Clark Hoover for the nomination of President.  The effects would be felt the next morning when a majority of Johnson's former delegates flocked to Hoover.  At 10:45 AM on June 11th, 1920 Herbert Clark Hoover would win the necessary amount of ballots to win the nomination for President.  This would make him the first person nominated for President on a major party ticket who lacked political or military experience.

Herbert Clark Hoover, the 1920 Republican nominee for President.  He would be the first person nominated for president on a major party ticket who didn't ahve any previous government or military experience.

With Hoover nominated as president the Convention heeded his suggestion of nominating Senator Warren G. Harding of Ohio as Vice President.  Harding was recommended as a VP pick by one of Hoover's advisors due to the Senator's "good looks".


Republican Senator Warren Harding of Ohio, the 1920 Vice Presidential nominee of the Republican Party

[Mechaman]

Teddy, I was with you up until "lack of manhood."

Yeah, bad wording.
Admittedly I'm not the best speech writer.

[Mechaman]

Coming soon!

"Of Great Precedence"
The 1920 Democratic National Convention

Trust me folks, if you thought the last few entries were good (or if for some reason they sucked) you don't want to miss what I have in store for the DNC!

[Mechaman]

Of Great Precedence
The Democratic National Convention
Civic Auditorium
San Francisco, California
June 28th, 1920-June 6th, 1920:



The 1920 Democratic National Convention would be filled with an air of anticipation.  Hundreds of delegates from around the country to put forth their candidates to win the Democratic nomination for president.  After a period of 24 years since a Democrat last held the Presidency, an ailing economy, the unpopularity of Roosevelt as well as that of the protective tariff and the interventionist foreign policy of the incumbent administration seemed to lift Democratic spirits about the Election of 1920.  Before that could happen though the different factions of the Democratic Party would have to duke it out in what would be called "one of the most intense Convention Floor Fights in the history of National Conventions".  Many could sense that, after 12 years of being put on the back burner the urban faction of northern Democrats were going to give the Bryanite faction (which had successfully put out nominees in 1896, 1900, 1908, 1912, and 1916.......all to losing results) hell.  However, the Southern Democrats, ever the opportunists, would run their own candidates to advance the agenda of State's Rights and conservatism.  All told, almost twenty candidates would appear on the first ballot.
At the end of the first ballot 1916 Democratic Nominee and former Governor of New York William Gibbs McAdoo would have the lead with 281 votes, way less than the needed amount.  McAdoo was known for his efforts to "curb the influence" of Tammany Hall, the powerful urban machine that dominated Democratic Party politics in New York City.  As revenge for 1912 Tammany Hall and other urban city machines ran their own candidates to assert the dominance of the urban machines.  Acting in collusion the urban machines would deny McAdoo the nod.  Having secured the votes of the urban areas and their areas of influence the urban machine delegates would rally behind:

The Machine Opposition

US Senator James Phelan of California:

A 1st generation Irish Catholic American, James Phelan was a leader of the conservative faction of the Democratic Party.  He supported the traditional Bourbon Democrat platform of lowered tariffs and laissez faire economics.  He was a bit more conservative than some of his northern contemporaries.

US Senator David I. Walsh of Massachusetts:

Another 1st generation Irish Catholic American, David I. Walsh was a prominent isolationist conservative Northern Democrat.  Notably amongst his stance was his opposition to capital punishment and support of Universal Suffrage as well as federal child labor legislation.  Although he normally ran afoul of the Boston machine with his calls for reform and opposition to boss dominated politics.  He also, despite outcry from Southern Democrats, condemned the Ku Klux Klan as "a body of barbarians, of murderers" when speaking in favor of anti-lynching legislation in May of 1920.  Just a month after those remarks he would face the Convention, along with his fellow machine appointed Democrats, to prevent the Bryan faction from once again winning the nomination.

Governor Thomas Bayard Jr. of Delaware:

A member of the prominent Bayard political family, Governor Bayard (like Phelan) was a left over of the Bourbon Democratic faction of the late 1800s.  Like Phelan he is a conservative who is silent on the issue of anti-lynching legislation in order to win over urban voters in the South.   He, however, was openly opposed to Republican attempts at Prohibition, something quite a few Southern Democrats support.  He is mainly in the running to sway urban voters in the mid Atlantic away from Bryanite candidates.

Former Governor James E. "Pa" Ferguson of Texas:

A fiscal conservative and anti-Prohibition Democrat who (like his colleague Senator Oscar Underwood of Alabama) opposed the influence of the Ku Klux Klan, James Ferguson would be nominated by the Austin machine to the presidential ballot.  In 1917 he would face charges of impeachment by the Texas State Senate relating to his veto of appropriations to the University of Texas due to his objection to certain faculty members he found objectionable.  He would serve two terms from 1915-1919 (Ferguson, a believer in term limits for politicians, promised to serve no more than two terms) as the Governor of Texas.  Despite his conservatism he would be considered "one of the most progressive Governors in Texas history" due to his push for education funding and support of anti-lynching legislation.  He was known as "The Gentleman Governor".  He would also go public with his opposition to "Tyrant Teddy's" suspension of civil liberties during the Great European War.  Despite his opposition to the KKK he had a base of support in the South and the Midwest that was untouched by the base of Bryan supporters and Jim Crow Democrats.  He was also good friends with........

US Senator Alfred E. Smith of New York:

Known as "Tammany Hall's favorite son" by critics, the New York City born Alfred Emanuel Smith, a Catholic of German, Irish, English, and Italian descent was a prominent figure of the "New Liberal" movement that rose up in opposition to so-called Bryan "liberalism" in the mid 1910's in the Democratic Party.  Smith and other "New Liberals" like him support a platform of radically reduced protectionist tariffs (some members even support outright abolishment of the tariff), lowered taxation on all income levels (notably reduction of the income tax on the upper class from 65% to 35%), opposition to Prohibition, support of Universal Suffrage, support of worker protection legislation, support of a "guaranteed wage" for all working men, women, and children, support of a non-interventionist foreign policy, opposition to capital punishment, and support of anti-lynching legislation.  Of late he got banned from the White House after making sharp criticism of President Roosevelt, especially about his "misguided, idiotic, Imperialist foreign policy".  He has been especially harsh about the suspension of civil liberties as it regards the "American war effort" in the wake of the arrest of Socialist Party leader Eugene V. Debs.  He has been called by his opponents a "closet socialist" due to his strong show of support for Eugene V. Debs, while being called "America's bravest Senator" by his supporters.

These five men, the appointed angels of wrath of the Democratic urban machines, would be sent on a mission to avenge the loss of Champ Clark in 1912, doing their damnedest to make sure that no Bryan Democrat makes it to the Presidential ballot in 1920.................

[Mechaman]

The Bryan Establishment:



By the time of the 1912 election William Bryan and his so-called "liberal" Democrats had taken over the Democratic Party leadership, so much so that the nominee, Woodrow Wilson, made a scathing speech of Bourbon Democrats on the Convention floor.  It would seem as if though in the future the only way someone could be nominated the Democratic nominee is if they appealed to William Bryan or his followers.
However, by 1920 the popularity of Bryan Establishment, which failed to produce a successful candidate from 1896-1916, would erode.  A number of the progressive reforms (with the exception of Prohibition) pushed by the Bryanite faction had already been passed by the Roosevelt Administration to a mixed degree of success.  It had become like William Taft had said "you might as well vote Republican" if you wanted progressivism.  Well it was 1920 and progressivism had brought with it one of the worst economic downturns in history.  By 1920 northern Democrats like Alfred Smith and David I. Walsh began to portray the Bryan wing of the party as hypocrites for crying out against "centralization" while calling for the nationalization of the railroad and the banks.
And now at the 1920 Democratic National Convention the urban machines, long tired of playing the cuckold partners in the relationship with the Bryan faction, had risen up and created a full on siege of the Bryanites, going all out to make sure none of the Bryan candidates came anywhere near the number of ballots needed to reach nomination.
William McAdoo, who just four years before was suggested as the compromise candidate between the conservative and Bryan Democrats, couldn't get 300 votes on the first ballot.  And his numbers kept getting lower and lower and lower and lower until the 10th ballot.
It was then that McAdoo, tired of the persistence of the machine Democrats, finally relented and met the machine bosses in a "smoke filled room" at the convention.

June 4th, 1920
8:12 PM

McAdoo: Alright gentlemen, what do you want?
Charles F. Murphy, Tammany Hall Boss: Do you want to know what we want?  We want respect.  For the past three elections the Bryanites and you so called "progressives" have shafted us to the side.  We just finally want our fair piece, we need to dip our beaks so to speak.
McAdoo: This is pointless, I can win this year.  And it's pointless to put my prospects at risk due to a petty feud with Bryan.
Murphy: You just don't get it do ya laddie?  We don't just want to beat the Republicans we want it to be a decisive enough victory, a credible enough victory so there is no doubt in anyone's eyes that the 1920's will be a Democratic decade.  We can't pull that off with a "progressive" whose only differences with Republicans is tariffs.  We need a bold new candidate, a bold new president to unite our voting blocs.
Governor George McClellan, Jr. Listen William, we respect all that you have done for the party, but the delegates are speakin' and they don't want you as the candidate.  What we can do however is guarantee a position in the future administration.
McAdoo ponders this.
McAdoo: Alright damn it.  Might as well.  Al, you got my support.

After the 10th ballot was cast William Gibbs McAdoo would drop out of the race and give all of his delegates to New York Senator Alfred Smith, giving the Senator just enough votes to nab the nomination of Democratic Presidential candidate:


Democratic Presidential Candidate Alfred Smith, the first Catholic to win the nomination of a major party in American history.  His nomination would be of great controversy, with his opponents calling it a "shoddy deal made in a smoke filled room of Tammany insiders."

The Vice Presidential balloting would also prove to be a chaotic battle between Delaware Governor Thomas Bayard, Jr. of Delaware and former Texas Governor James "Pa" Ferguson.  Smith, looking for a peace candidate, endorsed Ferguson, a southern conservative, for the nomination of Vice President.  The balloting would go on for three votes, the first one Bayard had a small lead, the second one Bayard came close to winning the necessary amount of votes necessary.  Before the third vote Senate Majority Leader Oscar Underwood, a noted anti-KKK Democrat, would make this speech:

"Dear brothers and sisters of the Convention, ask yourselves what is it that we truly seek in the Vice President?  Should he be a man who is willing to compromise to advance himself, or a man who would be willing to make great sacrifices necessary to better the lives of his fellow man.  If you believe him to be the latter, then vote for James Ferguson."
In a shocking upset the anti-KKK conservative James Ferguson would beat Thomas Bayard for the nomination of Democratic Vice President.
The ticket would be, to that date, the most anti-KKK ticket to date.


James "Pa" Ferguson of Texas, the first Texan to make it onto a major party ticket.  Along with Al Smith he would be part of the most anti-Ku Klux Klan Democratic ticket in history (at least up to that point).

[Mechaman]

Coming Soon:

Smith vs. Hoover...............the Election of 1920

[Mechaman]

New Update coming tonight!

The Senator's Speech

[Mechaman]

The Senator's Speech:


Democratic New York Senator and Presidential nominee Alfred Emanuel Smith of New York

June 6th, 1920, 8:15 pm:

"My fellow Democrats, we are at a most precipitous time in American and world history.  As we speak in the post war era grandiose alliances between nations in the form of leagues are taking place, hoping to create world empire.  Also, the impact of successful revolution upon the old monarchs of Europe have brought forth their own certain sets of circumstances.  A constant in most of these is the United States of America, which under the previous nigh 24 years of Republican rule has gotten itself stretched much too thin throughout the world in a misguided effort of spreading democracy as well as the corporate interest.  Because it has always been in the interests of the Republican Party, the party of the businessman and the stock protector, to only look out in the best interest of American business.  The so-called "Progressive" politics of one Theodore Roosevelt is merely grandstanding for the sake of appearance of appealing to the common man.  If it weren't for the progressive politics of one William Bryan I wonder if Mister Roosevelt and his "progressive" Republican cronies would've even bothered coming up with meaningful regulations like food and drug regulations or "trust busting" (loud applause from various Bryan Democrats)?  I don't think so, since it has become apparent over the past eight years that the progressive Republican monkier is a label co-opted by Republican corporate imperialists to hold political power way longer than the people would've other wise demanded it.
But Al, one might say, surely the threat of International Communism is enough to justify a strong interventionist policy!  No says I.  The Bolsheviks of Russia, as weakened as they will be if their revolution based on the ramblings of an inebriated madman do succeed, would fail to operate their Marxist utopia for ten years, let alone take on the world.  And neither do the protestations of one Eugene Debs, a member of the Socialist Party of the United States of America, threaten the security and welfare of this nation.  I know Eugene Debs, I met Eugene Debs before, Eugene Debs is no violent revolutionary, he is an exerciser of the values of free speech and expression that the Founders of this country so cherished in the face of oppression.  All those politicians, those in command of state governments and federal bureaucracies, that have jailed various members of the Socialist party, God fearing decent Americans fed us with the unconstitutional excesses of this current administration, would be unrecognized as Americans by those same forefathers if they were alive today.
In this current crisis American military interventionism is not the solution, IT IS THE PROBLEM.  The Republican Party platform of the past two decades running has been one is in diametric opposition the the policies of the Democratic Party.  Where we, the Democratic Party, the People's Party, have promised free markets, liberal trade, and peace and goodwill towards all nations the Republican Party has promised controlled markets, protective trade, and a forceful hand in the direction of other nations.  We have seen how destructive this policy has been for people in nations that have felt the hand of Republican oppression in places like the Philippines, Cuba, the land of the dying Ottoman Empire, and Russia.  In the past 24 years there has been nothing that has destroyed the image of America the land of peace and freedom than the violent hand of American Imperialism that has been forced unto other nations.  Now more than ever it is necessary that we as Democrats, the believers of federalism, the people that support limiting the influence of the American federal government on the individual, even the non-American individual, to step up and return this country back to the intent of the Founding Fathers of respecting the rights of sovereign states.
But what is non-interventionism if we do not have the courage to speak out against those who would deny such freedom to exist?  How can we support such an administration as Teddy Roosevelts continue to err on the side of British tyranny against our proud and freedom loving Irish brothers and sisters?  Don't you know that there is no more freedom loving heart than an Irish heart (scores of northern Democrats start applauding, southern contingent uncomfortably quiet)?!  Our ancestors came to this land, with a love of liberty, to make this nation truly great.  They helped build the many canals and roads of this nation, they fought and died for this land, the least we could do is take a courageous stand and support the freedom of those who stayed behind for a free Ireland.  How can we as Democrats, the party of freedom and liberty and courage, not take a stand this once in support of the freedom of the green isle that has provided so much to these United States of America?
And not to mention the struggles of the average working American man and woman in this country, many of them forced into jobs that are just a step above slave labor.  This injustice must be put to a stop, no man or woman should feel coerced into accepting a job that pays almost none for hours and hours of heartfelt effort.  For far too long the needs of the working family have been ignored, I say no longer.  This Democratic President will be about the working man.  I will push for safe workplaces.  I will push for a guaranteed (minimum) wage for all Americans.  In a Smith Administration the potential of workers will no longer be squandered for the profits of a few.
It is about time, about damn time that we make a stand for our beliefs, that we start meaning what we say.  Sadly, the Democratic Party hasn't always done that, but no more.  In the next four years, under a Democratic administration, under a Democratic Congress, we stand by our rhetoric and serve the American people in the most Constitutional way possible.  We make a stand for the downtrodden, the weak, the oppressed, the disadvantaged, the hopeless.  We put our faith in what is absolute good, and we have the bravery to put down what is absolute bad.  Even if it goes against the institutions that helped bring us to where we are today, even if it forces us to make enemies out of friends we do what is right, no matter the consequences.  We as human beings are entrusted with our Creator a set of morals, of right and wrong, or moral and immoral.  It is our solemn duty, both as Americans and as Democrats, to uphold those sacred values.
Thank you fellow Democrats, and God Bless."

Senator Smith's speech would make national news due to his fiery oratory.  The New York Times would call his speech "perhaps the most liberal convention speech in history."

[Mechaman]

The "True Democrats"




In the wake of the nomination of Alfred Smith and James Ferguson to the Democratic ticket a number of staunch KKK supporters and white supremacists, such as James Thomas Heflin of Alabama and Ellison D. Smith of South Carolina, bolted the party convention.  It was certain that controversy surrounding the candidates, namely Al Smith's immigrant roots (ie "he's not a true American"), his connections with Tammany Hall, and both of the candidate's records of opposing the Ku Klux Klan soured a number of southern Democrats.  Not to mention the perception that a "corrupt bargain" was struck between the "papist criminal machines" and "the backstabbing Bryanites" to limit the power of the Southern "true Democratic" wing of the party as much as possible.

At the time it was certain that these Democrats made a public statement that they were not happy with the party candidate and would not go to the polls to vote them into office.  Many were left shocked, wondering how this group of politicians would react.  Would they endorse Hoover, or would they make their own ticket in protest of the national Democratic ticket?

Whatever happened it probably wouldn't be good news for the Democratic ticket.

[Mechaman]

A Chicago Hotel
June 7th, 1920:




Hoover: Well Warren, it looks like this election is suddenly taking a favorable turn.
Harding: What do you mean Herb?
Hoover: The Southerners, bolting from the DNC.
Harding: How does that favor us?
Hoover: Well you see they didn't like Smith because of his anti-lynching views and his Catholic upbringing, why don't we you know....
Harding: Absolutely not!  Any Republican ticket that doesn't endorse Civil Rights and oppose the lynch mob is not a Republican ticket I will be a part of!
Hoover: Alright, settle down.  Okay we'll keep the Civil Rights plank on our platform, but what about winning?
Harding: Well, it looks like this one might be headed to the US House of Representatives, or that is at least our best case scenario.  Right now the Democrats hold 52 of the Senate seats and 245 of the House seats.  That is a pretty good majority right there.  And considering that we won't drop this Civil Rights platform it's probably safe to say that the Southern Democrats might just give a "no confidence" vote.
Hoover: I still say this is suicide.  I mean come on Warren, we could possibly win an otherwise unfavorable election.
Harding: And I say that any Republican Party that turns it's back on equal rights IS NO LONGER WORTHY TO BE CALLED A "REPUBLICAN PARTY".

[Mechaman]

Robert LaFollette: A Man with a Hard Choice:



The nomination of the ticket of Herbert Hoover would be met with resistance from the Republican left.  The most prominent of these voices was that of Robert M. LaFollette, the progressive Republican senator from Wisconsin who was well known for his isolationist and left wing economic views.  Hoover thought that he could get LaFollette on his side by nominating Harding, an isolationist conservative, as his runningmate.  However, the conservative views of Harding would be unacceptable to LaFollette who saw the Republican ticket as "bought and p'aid for by the corrupt banker interests".  Alfred E. Smith, hearing about LaFollette's displeasure about the Republican ticket, tried a personal appeal to LaFollette on the basis of his anti-interventionist views.  LaFollette, even though he didn't have a high opinion of the Tammany Hall machine that was behind Smith's nomination, was favorable towards Smith's support of a "guaranteed wage" for all American workers.
Alfred Smith would make a personal appeal, appearing to LaFollette in person to talk about a possible endorsement:

June 15th, 1920
Madison, Wisconsin:



Nobody knows what the two men discussed, but it would go a long way in persuading Senator LaFollette in his decision.

Later that night in Madison:
Robert M. LaFollette, Sr. Assembled press and fellow citizens of Wisconsin I must say that after much deliberation I have to make a hard decision.  The hardest decision of my life in regards to the Election of 1920.  The politics of today are most unsatisfactory with the Rooseveltarian interventionists taking over the Republican Party and the Ku Klux Klan lynch mob having influence over the Democratic Party.  However, there seems to be some hope for this country, and it is of that hope I am going to talk about today.  That hope is New York Senator Alfred Emanuel Smith, the Democratic nominee for president.  Now I have never supported a Democrat for president, I never believed that the Democratic Party could operate as a force for true progressivism until I talked with Alfred Smith and all I can say is that America we are in for a most extraordinary four years.  He has the vision, he has the principle, he has the courage needed for the future of America.  Thus he has my full support in this coming election.

LaFollette's endorsement would go a long way in helping Al Smith's bid for the presidency.