Most consequential presidential election?

[buritobr]

In the 20th century

1932 and 1980?

[L.D. Smith]

Wait do you mean you want this topic narrowed down to the 20th century?

Because 1860 is the obvious choice with the topic as is (with 1788 and 1796 being distant, but significant second and third places)

But making the 1700 and 1800s verboten opens up 5 big ones

Those being: 1916, 1932, 1964, 1968, and 1980. Narrowly I give it to 1932.

But 1860 easily in the grand scheme of things...easily!

[ElectionsGuy]

1932

[buritobr]

Wait do you mean you want this topic narrowed down to the 20th century?

Because 1860 is the obvious choice with the topic as is (with 1788 and 1796 being distant, but significant second and third places)

But making the 1700 and 1800s verboten opens up 5 big ones

Those being: 1916, 1932, 1964, 1968, and 1980. Narrowly I give it to 1932.

But 1860 easily in the grand scheme of things...easily!

I though that it was better to narrow the question to the 20th century, because 1788, 1796 and 1860 would be too obvious

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

1860, 1896, 1932, 1936, 1964, 1980, 1988

[H. Ross Peron]

1800, 1844, 1860, 1876, 1896, 1932, 1948, 1968, 1980, 2000, 2008

[buritobr]

1860, 1896, 1932, 1936, 1964, 1980, 1988

Why 1988?

[Del Tachi]

1968

[New_Conservative]

1964

[Maistre]

1968

[Mister Mets]

1932 ended a period of essentially one-party rule.

1916 may have been the most consequential close election, coming before the US's entrance into World War One.

Although there's much we don't know.

For all we know if Dewey had won in 1948, it would have prevented the Republican resurgence with Ike, Nixon and Reagan.

[ElectionsGuy]

1932 ended a period of essentially one-party rule.

1916 may have been the most consequential close election, coming before the US's entrance into World War One.

Although there's much we don't know.

For all we know if Dewey had won in 1948, it would have prevented the Republican resurgence with Ike, Nixon and Reagan.

And also started a period of one.

[Anonymouse]

Here's a wild card: 1976.

Ford wins and all the woes of the late 1970's get pinned on the GOP. Watergate, vietnam, "malaise," Iranian hostage crisis, all perceived as a 12-year Republican orgy of incompetence and corruption. There is never a Reagan Revolution (with all that entails) in this timeline! Ted Kennedy (or someone very much like him) wins a landslide in 1980, opening the door for a second Great Society with Democratic super-majorities in Congress.

For all we know if Dewey had won in 1948, it would have prevented the Republican resurgence with Ike, Nixon and Reagan.

At least one historian has suggested that a Dewey victory would have prevented the resurgence of the southern strategy; stopped the GOP from adopting its intense Red-baiting campaign; and led to a much more liberal Republican Party in the long term. It's interesting to imagine a United States divided, today, between an anti-elitist, know-nothing "populist" Democratic Party anchored in the South (but with support from working-class whites nationwide)... and a business-oriented "progressive" Republican Party drawing support from educated whites and minorities across the country! Basically an extension of the 19th century's voting patterns.

Imagine a 2012 Democratic platform calling for single-payer healthcare and constitutional amendments banning abortion and same-se marriage.

[Old School Republican]

1940

[TheElectoralBoobyPrize]

Here's a wild card: 1976.

Ford wins and all the woes of the late 1970's get pinned on the GOP. Watergate, vietnam, "malaise," Iranian hostage crisis, all perceived as a 12-year Republican orgy of incompetence and corruption. There is never a Reagan Revolution (with all that entails) in this timeline! Ted Kennedy (or someone very much like him) wins a landslide in 1980, opening the door for a second Great Society with Democratic super-majorities in Congress.

Yeah, Republicans should be glad they lost '76 just like Democrats should be glad they lost '04. However, a couple things...

1. I'm not sure the Iran hostage crisis would have happened with Ford and Kissinger at the helm. I'm not being partisan though...some other foreign policy blunder might have happened instead.

2. Don't you think a move towards neoliberalism was inevitable at some point? Hell, Democrats might have been the one to implement it (the more left-wing parties have sometimes adopted free-market reforms in other developed countries simply because they were the ones in power when the reforms were most needed).

[SingingAnalyst]

Recently? 2008. The Dems showed they could win without the South, that an ethnic minority could be elected president, and that young people could elect a president over the objections of their elders.

[UBI man good]

Sorry to bump this topic but.

1788, 1860, 1896, 1932, 1940, 1944, 1968, 1976, 1980, 2000, 2008, 2016

[The time for charity has passed.]

In the 20th century

1932 and 1980?

1912, because it really marks the beginning of a progressive movement within the Democratic Party. For the first time you had a Democratic regime representing government activism, social reform, a new national reserve bank, and international cooperation. And this from a party still largely rooted in the South. It presaged the rise of the New Deal Coalition, and therefore is to me the dawn of the modern Democratic Party. Wilson is also a pivotal figure, since in my mind the decision to enter into a foreign war was on the level of the Louisiana Purchase and secession as a moment in which the fundamental nature of the republic was irrevocably changed.

1932? Perhaps. One could say FDR saved capitalism from itself. The election of a Democrat was a foregone conclusion, but this particular Democrat was the right person for the job at the most critical juncture of the 20th Century.

1940? We would have entered the war under Wilkie. Maybe sooner than in the OTL.

1968? The Democratic Primary was hugely consequential, though I think the changes happening in the country had little to do with who was in the White House. It did mark the beginning of the end of the New Deal Coalition, which would have huge consequences when it came to the future of the welfare state in America.

1980? The New Right triumphs for the first time. Reagan, his administration, and his allies were responsible for shifting the soul of conservatism away from pro-business elitism to a coalition of moralists and small government activists. This movement had been growing for some time, but Reagan made the New Right a dominant force within American politics like never before. We can thank this election for the current contentious left/right divide.

2000? Technically still in the 20th Century, Bush and his neoconservatives are responsible for the new pro-military, pro-American-power orthodoxy currently dominating White America. A lot of that has to do with 9/11, and who knows what the response would have been under a Gore administration, but I can guarantee you the nation would have taken a radically different path.

[dw93]

The 10 most Consequential IMHO:

1. 1932
2. 1980
3. 1912
4. 1968
5. 2000 (if it counts as 20th century)
6. 1992
7. 1916
8. 1948
9. 1960 (the parties and the country would be different if Nixon won)
10. 1988

[The time for charity has passed.]

The 10 most Consequential IMHO:

1. 1932
2. 1980
3. 1912
4. 1968
5. 2000 (if it counts as 20th century)
6. 1992
7. 1916
8. 1948
9. 1960 (the parties and the country would be different if Nixon won)
10. 1988

When I have time, I plan on doing a detailed TL of Nixon winning in 1960, titled "Only Nixon Could Go to Selma."

[The time for charity has passed.]

The 10 most Consequential IMHO:

1. 1932
2. 1980
3. 1912
4. 1968
5. 2000 (if it counts as 20th century)
6. 1992
7. 1916
8. 1948
9. 1960 (the parties and the country would be different if Nixon won)
10. 1988

When I have time, I plan on doing a detailed TL of Nixon winning in 1960, titled "Only Nixon Could Go to Selma."

[Intell]

Here's a wild card: 1976.

Ford wins and all the woes of the late 1970's get pinned on the GOP. Watergate, vietnam, "malaise," Iranian hostage crisis, all perceived as a 12-year Republican orgy of incompetence and corruption. There is never a Reagan Revolution (with all that entails) in this timeline! Ted Kennedy (or someone very much like him) wins a landslide in 1980, opening the door for a second Great Society with Democratic super-majorities in Congress.

For all we know if Dewey had won in 1948, it would have prevented the Republican resurgence with Ike, Nixon and Reagan.

At least one historian has suggested that a Dewey victory would have prevented the resurgence of the southern strategy; stopped the GOP from adopting its intense Red-baiting campaign; and led to a much more liberal Republican Party in the long term. It's interesting to imagine a United States divided, today, between an anti-elitist, know-nothing "populist" Democratic Party anchored in the South (but with support from working-class whites nationwide)... and a business-oriented "progressive" Republican Party drawing support from educated whites and minorities across the country! Basically an extension of the 19th century's voting patterns.

Imagine a 2012 Democratic platform calling for single-payer healthcare and constitutional amendments banning abortion and same-se marriage.

That's idiotic and anyone with a basic knowledge of world politics 101 and ideology 101  would know that would never ouccr.

[khuzifenq]

Here's a wild card: 1976.

Ford wins and all the woes of the late 1970's get pinned on the GOP. Watergate, vietnam, "malaise," Iranian hostage crisis, all perceived as a 12-year Republican orgy of incompetence and corruption. There is never a Reagan Revolution (with all that entails) in this timeline! Ted Kennedy (or someone very much like him) wins a landslide in 1980, opening the door for a second Great Society with Democratic super-majorities in Congress.

For all we know if Dewey had won in 1948, it would have prevented the Republican resurgence with Ike, Nixon and Reagan.

At least one historian has suggested that a Dewey victory would have prevented the resurgence of the southern strategy; stopped the GOP from adopting its intense Red-baiting campaign; and led to a much more liberal Republican Party in the long term. It's interesting to imagine a United States divided, today, between an anti-elitist, know-nothing "populist" Democratic Party anchored in the South (but with support from working-class whites nationwide)... and a business-oriented "progressive" Republican Party drawing support from educated whites and minorities across the country! Basically an extension of the 19th century's voting patterns.

Imagine a 2012 Democratic platform calling for single-payer healthcare and constitutional amendments banning abortion and same-se marriage.

That's idiotic and anyone with a basic knowledge of world politics 101 and ideology 101  would know that would never ouccr.

"Progressive" =/= "left" and "populist" =/= "right".

I'm curious to see how different groups of immigrants/Cold War refugees and their descendants would vote under such an alignment. I know Vietnamese Americans are relatively Republican partly due to Reagan granting amnesty of South Vietnamese refugees.

[PR]

1932.

[RoboWop]

Here's a wild card: 1976.

Ford wins and all the woes of the late 1970's get pinned on the GOP. Watergate, vietnam, "malaise," Iranian hostage crisis, all perceived as a 12-year Republican orgy of incompetence and corruption. There is never a Reagan Revolution (with all that entails) in this timeline! Ted Kennedy (or someone very much like him) wins a landslide in 1980, opening the door for a second Great Society with Democratic super-majorities in Congress.

For all we know if Dewey had won in 1948, it would have prevented the Republican resurgence with Ike, Nixon and Reagan.

At least one historian has suggested that a Dewey victory would have prevented the resurgence of the southern strategy; stopped the GOP from adopting its intense Red-baiting campaign; and led to a much more liberal Republican Party in the long term. It's interesting to imagine a United States divided, today, between an anti-elitist, know-nothing "populist" Democratic Party anchored in the South (but with support from working-class whites nationwide)... and a business-oriented "progressive" Republican Party drawing support from educated whites and minorities across the country! Basically an extension of the 19th century's voting patterns.

Imagine a 2012 Democratic platform calling for single-payer healthcare and constitutional amendments banning abortion and same-se marriage.

That's idiotic and anyone with a basic knowledge of world politics 101 and ideology 101  would know that would never ouccr.

I guess a "basic knowledge of world politics" requires you to ignore everything outside the anglosphere or before 2000.