What if FDR Didn't Run for a Third Term

Ever since America's founding, there's been a tradition that no President should serve longer than two terms, dating all the way back to George Washington. For the next over one hundred years, there weren't any real challenges to this, until 1940, when this tradition would be broken for the first and only time by Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Despite wanting to step down, the outbreak of World War II led FDR to run for, and win a third term, becoming the longest serving President in US history. But, what if, in an alternate timeline, Franklin Roosevelt respected the two-term tradition, and didn't run for a third term? Enjoy!
DISCORD: / discord
TWITTER: / joshsulhistory
INSTAGRAM: / josh.sullivan.history
MUSIC:
Battle Hymn of the Republic: • Battle Hymn Of The Rep...
Over There Swing Version: • Over There WWII Instru...
Stars and Stripes Forever: • The Stars and Stripes ...
Koniggratzer Marsch: • ✠ Der Königgrätzer Mar...
Video Chapters:
0:00 Introduction
1:13 Background
4:53 Scenario

[@joshuas2601]

What if Prince John Joseph of Austria, the illegitimate son of Felipe IV of Spain and half brother of Charles II, was legitimised and lived longer? How would it affect Spain having no war of succession as well as having a good king?

[@joaquintrillo3070]

That's a pretty good idea

[@brendenchustz7572]

FDR did not just run for a third term he also ran for a fourth term in 1944 and won but he died at the beginning of his fourth term in 1945 being succeeded by his vice-president Harry S. Truman

[@thedanishsocialmonarchist7286]

Josh What if Denmark survived with scania and sleswig throw human history!

[@CampsitePyro]

I think the OP is aware of that. He is just starting the different timeline in Nov 1940.

[@user-gv3up3tp2m]

If there was no Pearl Harbor? How would MacArthur even come into the equation? By 1940 he was a retired general living in the Philippines. It is doubtful Dewey would have recalled him to active duty, in July of 41! I suspect MacArthur would have just faded off into the sunset and never become a contender for the presidency in 44!

[@InfernosReaper]

Wasn't he the military governor of the Philipinnes before then? He'd probably stick to that unless the Japanese invaded

[@markgarrett3647]

Actually the only reason that MacArthur was forced to retire and accept a prestigious job as the Chief military advisor to the Philippine government was because he didn't like FDR's budget reductions of the Army so he'll still be the Army Chief of Staff with that scenario.

[@user-gv3up3tp2m]

@@markgarrett3647 No, whether he was forced to retire or retired willing, he retired in 1937 while FDR was still President! At that point, he had been in the Philippines for 2 years! Usually when we postulate Alternate History, we assume that what came before remains true!

[@robertpolityka8464]

FDR created the job of Military Advisor to the President of the Philippines basically to get MacArthur out of Washington. The General was only 2 years older than FDR. MacArthur's allies could theoretically put pressure on Roosevelt to extend MacArthur's tenure as Chief of Staff until 1944, when the General reached the mandatory retirement age of 64. FDR once said that the two most dangerous men in America were Huey Long and Douglas MacArthur.

[@user-gv3up3tp2m]

Again, I ask if MacArthur would have returned to prominence? In a world where Pearl Harbor and the subsequent/simultaneous invasion of the Philippines never happened! I have a hard time believing Dewey would have called him back to active duty! Thus, I can't see him having the weight to challenge a sitting president in the primaries! All the other comments do not address this! Signing out on this conversation!

[@redjirachi1]

A reversal of this scenario: What If Ulysses S Grant succeeded in his 1880 comeback and became both the 18th and 20th president?

[@PatSmashYT]

I imagine Dewey would upgrade Las Vegas with weapons designed to intercept nuclear weaponry. He would then make a stasis chamber in a hotel to preserve his own life after a nuclear war. Following Dewey winning a second term, he would oversee the construction of the nuclear bomb with Hitler later developing the bomb not long after. Dewey during his second term would calculate that total nuclear war would break out in 1946, with a special platinum chip being needed to activate Las Vegas' defense system in order to save the city. In 1946, Dewey would enter the stasis chamber he built and integrates himself with the hotel he is in. The delivery of the platinum chip ends up being 20 hours late as the Germans and Americans enter nuclear war. The missile defense system in Las Vegas would still be able to save the city, still successfully disabling 68 of the 77 German nukes aimed at the city. Afterwards the world would be plunged into a new post-nuclear era

[@db3games4]

He then secures the remainder of Las Vegas by uniting the gambling crime families and then utilizes this platinum chip to raise a robot army and take over the rest of the Mojave desert

[@LittleFunnyCanadian]

⁠@@db3games4then he wins the Hoover dam in a shock securing the Mojave

[@MonsieurDean]

DEWEY BY DEFAULT!

[@petebondurant58]

Willkie was the GOP nominee in 1940.

[@InfernosReaper]

If Japan doesn't oust the US from the Philippines, this could potentially work out like that. If it does, though, that's a war. The thing is Japan would inevitably try to mess with the US either that way or some other way and that would get the US into the war eventually.

[@STho205]

That is correct. The UK and US both had rival holdings in the Pacific and Asia from the post Lincoln era of TRs Great White Fleet. If Japan decided to dislodge the UK (Hong Kong, Singapore, Indonesia, etc...) then Japan would still have the US in their way. Hawaii they might ignore, but the Philippines, Midway, etc they likely wouldn't. However if it wasn't for Roosevelt, then Germany/Italy wouldn't take that opportunity to declare war on the US. The war might have just been a Pacific war for the US....and once the Philippines was lost the US might sue for peace...in that most isolationists were never comfortable with a Free Republic owning a colony.

[@danielsantiagourtado3430]

LOVE your content man 😊😊😊❤❤❤❤

[@TIMOTHY1993100]

Great vid bro 👍👍

[@satanicturtle9929]

What if Brittan, France, and Italy held the Stressa Front and prevented the Anschluss

[@maximusjackassicus3042]

Also, without FDR a hundred thousand or so Americans wouldn't have been locked up in internment camps, wouldn't have had their property seized, and wouldn't have lost their constitutional rights. So there's that.

[@SockieTheSockPuppet]

Yeah, people keep idolizing him just because he was President when the war broke out, but fail to recognize just how much of a Tyrannical piece of shite he was in his own right. I mean come on, the guy sent a personal congratulations to Ol' 'Dolphie when he became Chancellor.

[@spartanumismatics8165]

Yep. That's conviently swept under the rug.

[@suarezguy]

Without World War II it wouldn't happen but most other presidents probably would have also done that.

[@thatguywhosenameyoukeepmis9450]

I think that it wouldn't be Hopkins to be his successor, he'd likely choose Henry Wallace(Progressive Secretary of Agriculture) or John Nance Garner(Conservative Vice-President). It would be interesting to see such a primary battle and whether it escalates into a party split or some tense compromise.

[@ImperiumMagistrate]

Garner was not a conservative he was a progressive

[@thatguywhosenameyoukeepmis9450]

@@ImperiumMagistrate He was considered more conservative then FDR certainly, and that was my benchmark.

[@ImperiumMagistrate]

@@thatguywhosenameyoukeepmis9450That is like saying Lenin was more conservative than Stalin. Even Wallace was to the left of FDR

[@thatguywhosenameyoukeepmis9450]

@@ImperiumMagistrate It is in the same idea as saying the democrats of the modern day have conservative and progressive wings, not comparing Lenin to Stalin

[@ImperiumMagistrate]

@@thatguywhosenameyoukeepmis9450 And I am saying John Nance Garner was a progressive period. This is a truism that has spread throughout academia that southern democrats were conservatives and northern democrats were progressive. They do this because they see northerners began to support civil rights (even if for the most part they were vein lip service) and southerners opposing them and so they assume pro civil rights = progressive. But if we review the origins of progressivism the opposite is true. Going back to the Antebellum period, it was northerners who enacted strict black codes including Jim Crow law. The justification was blacks and whites were too different species and could not cohabit. They would denounce the south as a land of miscegenation, with the Republican party proudly declaring itself the "white man's party." These ideas continued into the 20th century. Over time, the democratic party shifted away from Jacksonian traditionalism and moved to populist progressivism. Initially it seemed like a logical evolution but over time it became clear Progressivism was antithetical to Jacksonianism. They supported a central bank, large scale regulations and central government planning. Initially, the actually conservative Bourbon Democrats ruled the party but eventually the progressives took over. Woodrow Wilson was arguably the most progressive president we had until FDR who modeled himself off Wilson. Wilson and his policies were extremely popular in the south and won him supporter from other southern progressives like Ben Tillman, Jeff Davis and James K. Vardaman. John Nance Garner was elected to congress in 1902 and was lock step with Wilson's progressive New Freedom. When it became clear FDR was going to win the Democratic nomination, he dropped out and endorsed FDR earning himself a VP position. Him being labeled as a conservative was just FDR and his sycophants demonizing anyone who opposed him. Just as proof of the absurdity of the New Deal discourse, Wikipedia lists under "Opposition from the Right" Carter Glass - Virginian Senator who established the Federal Reserve Al Smith - FDR's predecessor in NY who was a progressive Rush Holt Sr. - An openly socialist senator from West Virginia Wendell Willkie - A former FDR supporter It labels them as "conservatives and libertarians" and yet it is clear none of them are conservative or libertarian and isn't even consistent. They list Long as a critic from the left yet Holt had the exact same views as Long.

[@edwinrodriguez1812]

Cordel Hull would have been the Democratic nominee. A Southern New Deal supporter and sitting Secretary of State, he would be the most likely to put together the Roosevelt coalition during the 1940 Convention. Hopkins makes sense until the War started becoming the main issue. Fun video

[@franciswhite4032]

What if Pepto Bismal were available in Vincennes, France in the summer of 1422? Imagine the world today if the fruits of Agincourt were harvested.

[@olisomething]

what were the fruits of agincourt?

[@franciswhite4032]

France and England in a personal union under Henry V.

[@undisputedwrestling]

Pepto Bismal is an AWESOME name

[@danielsantiagourtado3430]

Josh: Scenario; Wilhelm II dies in the same year as his father and his son Wilhem III takes the reigns under a regency and later on his own.

[@franciswhite4032]

Or, even simpler, his arm was disfigured during his birth.

[@sethbartley2212]

I would imagine without the immense spending and loss of material to the war the depression would likely end much sooner. This is a facinating look at a possible timeline that is much more nuanced than germany conquers the world and time ends. (I wonder if nukes still come into play and we have a cold war with the national socialists. This timeline is so much more complex with a multipolar powerset. I would love to see more.)

[@monsieurcharcutier4490]

So, FDR caused Pearl Habor? I knew he ruined everything. when you said conservative isolationism it got so hot in here, steamy even😂

[@JoshSullivanHistory]

Japan had attempted to negotiate with the US numerous times, which FDR continually rebuffed, and so the Japanese felt America wanted war, and tried to prevent that by attacking Pearl Harbor.

[@InfernosReaper]

Yeah, he wanted to use Japan to get into war with their ally, Germany, since most people didn't want to get involved in Europe's BS, because they didn't know about the "Final Solution"

[@TIMOTHY1993100]

Yea he should’ve kept selling oil to the Japanese

[@A_reasonable_individual42]

​@@TIMOTHY1993100we were eventually going to have to fight them so in the end it was strategic

[@jayisnotoramIhomophobic]

Wake up Josh uploaded

[@Blueyes21]

You should talked were does the development of the atomic bomb play in all of this ? Which side develops it first and use its control ?

[@Mrcinemazo9nn]

What if Austria-Hungary was made of chocolate?

[@mr.gigagod9736]

What if you started on your homework

[@robertmiralles6334]

What if you do something of value?

[@plorabare]

​@@robertmiralles6334What if I took a shower?

[@robertmiralles6334]

@@plorabare You will be more cleaner and fresh.

[@joshuayang0331]

what if you are the chocolate

[@wallyguy939]

I see this as an absolute win

[@mr.lanterngaming3469]

Have you done a video about what if Washington had run for a 3rd term?

[@Predanator99]

First of all good video! Second of all (big breath)... The soviets wouldn't have lost the war without land lease. They would maybe get stuck in Ukraine or Poland because they would ran out of men while performing worse. But 1942 land lease was a joke for the ussr. It got way bigger later but not then.

[@l4c390]

FDR didn't want to run but was asked to by the party since they didn't think they would win otherwise given that the economic situation in late 1939 wasn't good. With a contested election in 1940 it is highly unlikely that the US would have started mobilizaiton in Sep 1940 (instituting the draft, mobilizing the reserve, and kick in ship builing into high gear).

[@malekalbrecht9956]

No that with the USSR is cap. It has been researched while the US was essentiall. It is called that the Soviets would have done it with out.

[@jacobdalland1390]

Well, that scenario ended up being scarier than I thought LOL

[@charles-etiennenicole6765]

what if joan of arc survived and how she would change france and the colonisation

[@xo-1320]

Actually something to note is the South was in favor of the economic reforms as it was the most anti-capitalist part of the country(not in the Marxist sense mind you) and they only started pushback do to part of FDR cabinet being will to expand into the on going social movements of the time.

[@ImperiumMagistrate]

I did a similar video. Nice job Josh

[@petercox1925]

Great video. It does make me wonder whether Japan would keep going into Australia with the USA not involved. I do think the USSR would probably still fought the Germans to a standstill before they reached Moscow. The big wildcard would be whether anyone developed the nuclear bomb, and when.

[@Wyliecoy0te]

Germans win in Stalingrad? That seems over-the-top. Perhaps the Germans could liberate the Stalingrad pockets, but they were over stretched and lacked fuel. Also the USSR didn’t get much lend-lease form the USA until 1943. In other words, Lend lease helped the red army get to Berlin, but it didn’t stop the Germans at Stalingrad.

[@bintangwicaksana3689]

What if Henry Wallace suceeded FDR instead of Harry S. Truman by keeping him as the VP candidate in 1944 election

[@mattthesilent777RED]

I have an idea: pick a US President and do a what if based on them not dying or not being elected

[@greggkimball4110]

In your timeline, the GOP nominee (Dewey) would have won California's and Arizona's electoral college votes too, as both were solidly Republican until the end of the 20th Century.

[@arlosmith2784]

Actually the Democratic Party carried California in every presidential election from 1932 through 1948. The elections in which it voted Republican were between 1952 and 1988 and before 1932.

[@zeugor7464]

Massively overestimating the lend lease acts contributions to the Soviet Union during 1941-1943 as most equipment given to the Soviets Union wasn't until 1944-1945, yes, the majority of logistical trucks from 1941 and then on was American trucks, but it wasn't such a hindrance that it would have caused the Soviets a war ending defeat in the logistical department. Edit: Its massively speculated that the outcome from no lend lease to the Soviets is the Soviets having sustained much more casualties militarily and in civilian lives as well from the 27 million in our timeline, to a speculated 36 million range.

[@A_reasonable_individual42]

Yeah I feel like the Soviets would have sustained more casualties but I don't think they would have given up.

[@ricgillingham8056]

Churchill hated Communism but still allied with the soviet Union he once said he would of made a deal with the devil him self to guarantee victory it was a nessasery evil and so would Deewey so I have to disagree.

[@orirotem2298]

Please do what if spain's empire never fell/reunited today and what if the spanish armada succeeded

[@thorpeaaron1110]

What if Huey Long became President next?

[@hungarycountryball1056]

I feel like Dewey would still embargo Japan though, given anyone he appointed would’ve likely suggest embargoing Japan for the Indochina war.

[@InfernosReaper]

Why did the US even care about that war? I didn't, specifically. Instead, the US pushed Japan, because Japan was a potential way into fighting Germany due to the Axis alliance.

[@A_reasonable_individual42]

​@@InfernosReaperbecause they were expanding their territory.

[@InfernosReaper]

@@A_reasonable_individual42 Until Japan messed with US territory, it didn't matter from a practical standpoint. Nah, FDR wanted to use Japan's *alliance with Germany* get into the war against Germany

[@A_reasonable_individual42]

@@InfernosReaper because we had our territories in the Pacific and we knew we were eventually going to fight them.

[@InfernosReaper]

@@A_reasonable_individual42 In hindsight, yes, sure. At the time, though, the US and Japan had *decades* of good relations. *If* Japan hadn't been stupid enough to ally with Germany, FDR would've ignored Japan and focused on goading Italy.

[@nwebster84]

What if George Washington hadn't run for even a second term? He initially didn't want to run again, and he would have set a precedent. Who would have been the first to challenge that tradition? Who would have been successful? Would a constitutional amendment have been passed, and would it have been limiting to one or two terms?

[@GingerWaste]

the usa seal at the start of the video goes blurry as it grows

[@AndreasEvgenikos]

Although rather interesting I do disagree with regards to the Soviet Union. The lend-lease’s significance to the Soviets was a factor that allowed for a greater acceleration of Soviet momentum during the counteroffensives. Since, the most important part of the lend-lease was the logistical support, it’s lack would merely delay the timeline of the red army by one to two years. But the crucial battles such as Moscow, or Stalingrad, or the siege of Leningrad, would be largely unaffected as the key factors that led to soviet victory here were a combination of the weather as well as the resolve of the Soviet people and the iron nerve of men like Zhukov.

[@AndreasEvgenikos]

The difference this makes is that Berlin falls to the Soviets in September/October 1946 rather than May of 1945.

[@AndreasEvgenikos]

See David Glantz on the matter.

[@TIMOTHY1993100]

Nope they would have starved without lend lease, food was a key import after they lost Ukraine

[@danielsantiagourtado3430]

Amazing video as always josh! Suggestion: What if Franz Josephs assasin succeed and his brother maximilian became Emperor?

[@diegoyanesholtz212]

Probably the Deutch mark would be the Reserve currency of the World and not the US Dollar.

[@baronbrummbar8691]

not likley .......... the US still owned most of the worlds gold and germany was highly indebted to american investors

[@diegoyanesholtz212]

@@baronbrummbar8691 I don't know. But the world seems more multipolar. Maybe the Pound Sterling will continue. It will not be the US dollar because when the world reserve currency change was the Bretton woods conference and creation of the IMF and the World Bank. In this alt hist it did not happen. It will be a German or British world order. And America will not be an empire.

[@45Steamer]

What if Henry Wallace was FDR running mate in 1944 instead of Harry Truman

[@67nairb]

Wallace was too chummy with the Soviets, that's why the Democrats ousted him and put Truman in as FDR's running mate in 1944.

[@suarezguy]

I think Dewey would have definitely beaten a candidate Henry Wallace. But I think, even being pretty anti-Communist, a President Dewey would at least eventually accept, support giving some aid to the Allies with the Nazis going against both Britain and the Soviet Union (and Churchill being willing to ally with Stalin), let alone if the Nazis seemed to still be winning against both (and also if Japan did not back down from its demands and grew closer to Germany).

[@CampsitePyro]

Sounds interesting. Please expand upon this video. I know that the further you get away from a point in time, events are pure speculation. However, I’d like you to take a stab at it. Thanks!

[@JonathanGoedeke]

Most likely way to bring this to pass might be if Roosevelt has a stroke early, during his second term. Not a fatal one, but a clear warning sign that he his too old and too sickly to stay in office. He will figure that if he runs for a third term, he'll never finish it. So he sticks to his plan to retire and not run for a third term

[@GeraldM_inNC]

A much better question is: what Huey Long hadn't been assassinated.

[@AhmadsStuff]

Safe to say that if Roosevelt wasn’t elected in 1940 the world would be much worse for newer countries and basically everyone

[@sorenrekel-bludau9867]

Thank's for this scenario. I've had Dewey win the 1940 election as well in my timeline, but with Roosevelt not running because there was no WWII breaking out in 1939. The Democrats end up being more conservative ans segregationist like in your video as well. I'd have loved to hear more about domestic issues, though.

[@joshualawrence7785]

What if William Harrison survived 1841?

[@jozefmasny8349]

How could he run when he was on wheelchair?

[@twilliamspro]

Dewey has a very unfortunate moustache given hitler just won

[@Everydayfunguy]

Be careful. At 8:17, you predict the fall of the Soviet Union due to a lack of American aid. That wouldn’t he the case. I'll have to find the source, but America and Britain only provided about 15% of the war materials necessary for their war effort. The Soviets in 1941 may have been falling back, but largely did well on their own at the beginning. Their factories were also beyond the Urals, which the Nazis couldn’t have captured because they were overextended and deep within enemy territory as it was. The Germans were never going to win this war.

[@mrkrazy_kng]

i was going to say the same thing

[@cristianbalan518]

I think most of us agree the Soviets would've won regardless of USA entering the war.

[@baronbrummbar8691]

you forget about the distractions the american material caused on the southern front ........ and the fact that both lenin and stalin grad would definitley be in german hand .............. and with those those important logistical hubs wich would prevent and soviet pushback and give the germans the oportunity to take over moscow and with all three citys in german hand the supply situatio works definitly against the soviets as they now have awfull supply lines the US aid was the tipping factor in this war

[@cdcdrr]

I very much disagree. The Soviet Union had already lost their most valuable farmland by the time of Stalingrad, and if the city falls entirely, which is quite possible as it held on by a sliver before Operation Uranus, they'd very soon lose their vital oil fields in the Caucasus. With the Soviets deprived of both food and fuel, and the Germans eventually getting the oil fields working and their synthetic fuel industry safer from Allied attacks, the Germans would finally have the opportunity to go on the attack again. Controlling the western bank of the Volga, they could move up to Moscow and Leningrad in a battle of maneuver. By itself, Britain simply cannot take the pressure off, and Stalin would be well aware he cannot reconquer everything that was already lost with a deteriorating famine and the larger share of the Soviet population now living in German-controlled territory. Either he concedes to Hitler's demands or pulls his armies back to the Urals waiting for an intervention that will not come, while the Germans go about exterminating the Slavic population from the land. Which both amounts to the same outcome. The Soviet Union would just waste away until the Nazis or Japanese feel they're ready to break off another chunk.

[@RandyrheBlackKnight]

Also Per Zukhov himself, the Entire Soviet Logistics chain was reliant on the US, their trucks, their trains, their boots and their rations were ALL lend lease. Remove the Lend Lease and you actually remove the Soviet's ability to MOVE supplies to the Red Army, let alone the Red Army itself. Moreover without all that aid, they couldn't even run most of their factories to continue make war material as most of the parts the factories themselves needed were US imports. Soviet Lend Lease wasn't Guns, they had plenty of those, Soviet Lend Lease was LITERALLY EVERYTHING ELSE. That's why Stalin could throw so many Men at the War, the US was picking up the slack caused by those Men fighting instead of Farming and Working

[@PaoloCavestro-ey9bb]

What if FDR had adopted the cult of Makima, Revy, Cutie Honey, Marin Kitagawa, Trixie Tang, Judy Neutron, Marge Simpson, Wendy Corduroy, Lois Griffin, Sailor Moon and Maddie Fenton instead of Abrahamic shit?

[@randomguy6152]

What if Crassus conquered Persia and the civil war went 3 ways

[@JARJCC97]

came up with A presidential tagline for dewey: DEWEY DOES WHAT DEWEY DO sounds corny but come on you got to have fun with it

[@arlosmith2784]

Had FDR not run, John "Cactus Jack" Nance Garner (his VP) would have become President. Polling at the time showed Garner was the Democratic favorite if FDR hadn't run. FDR sought a 3rd Term because Garner had become a critic of the New Deal, and FDR did not want him as successor. Henry Wallace was made VP nominee in 1940 because of Garner's criticisms of FDR. The Garner factor is not discussed in this video 👎

[@JoshSullivanHistory]

He may be "Cactus Jack", but what exactly does he do with those cacti?

[@arlosmith2784]

@@JoshSullivanHistory He was from Uvalde, Texas in West Texas which is ranching country. People from West Texas tend to consider themselves "Westerners". Cactus is an important symbol of the Southwest US: Much of west Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and Southern CA is covered with cactus and sagebrush.🏜️

[@NewDealChief]

Bro, this entire scenario is literally just TNO but the U.S. doesn't enter WW2. Literally the same in most aspects. There are so many things that are worth criticizing here, but the only one I'll mention is that there is no way Harry Hopkins, a man who was literally suffering from cancer, becomes the 1940 Dem nominee. FDR would most likely would champion either Secretary of State Cordell Hull or Secretary of Agriculture (and arguably FDR's best friend) Henry A. Wallace.

[@lonniemcclure4538]

On the flipside, what would have happened if FDR had been in better health and hadn't died?

[@Klyis]

There probably wouldn't be much immediate change as FDR privately confided to those close to him that he planned to retire once the war was won. His goal for his last term was to see America through to victory and little else so he likely steps down as president in early 1946. Truman still succeeds him as president. Of course FDR would remain incredibly influential and if he chose to stay active in public after retiring he could still indirectly sway support for national policies simply by voicing approval or disapproval for them.

[@MrAsianPie]

No red lining meaning that many American urban populations weren’t demolished.

[@death-istic9586]

Hi!

[@FrenkyZ690]

Mamice ja sam gladan

[@fatheadgaming3584]

No views? Lemme fix that

[@Frazier16]

I think eisenhower would still be presdient. He was more libreal than taft and suported the civil rights movement so could have gotten the black vote.

[@datboi945]

but was given bigger acclaim due to his involvement with one of the country’s most important wars

[@Frazier16]

@@datboi945 well he was still loved for his ww1 service

[@patrickmackin3579]

Interesting speculation. How would Dewey have reacted to the Holocaust? Presumably Israel would not be created in 1948, so what happens then? Obviously nobody knows but it is interesting to consider.

[@JoshSullivanHistory]

Without a Soviet advance into Eastern Europe, which uncovered the many camps and such in Poland, it's likely that the outside world never learns about the Holocaust. If word somehow got out about it, I guarantee Dewey would STRONGLY condemn it, but I doubt he'd do anything. And yea, Israel wouldn't exist.

[@Michiganian]

ok

[@nwebster84]

I think John Garner would have been the Democratic nominee in 1940, but the moderate Dewey would have still defeated him.

[@petebondurant58]

James Byrnes, Henry Wallace or Joseph P. Kennedy Sr. would have been president instead.

[@EightBit72]

9:56 There is no way the British empire survives to losing to the Nazis. The Raj would fall as the Indians realize their colonizers are not that strong and hence legitimacy drops just as IOT.

[@JoshSullivanHistory]

The British don't *lose* to the Nazis, but rather they just make peace. The Nazis admired the British, as they saw them as Germanic peoples who managed to conquer other races, such as India, and they wanted to cooperate with them, in a similar manner to how the German Empire did with Austria-Hungary, with Britain as a junior power.

[@Lukdnuke_Narson]

Hi

[@45Steamer]

What if the 22nd amendment was never ratified?

[@toddwebb7521]

What if Hitler admiring and British hating Democrat and former ambassador to Britain Joseph Kennedy Sr wins the democratic nomination in the FDR doesn't run again scenario?

[@FKHC2005]

when, 40 or 44

[@toddwebb7521]

@@FKHC2005 40

[@FKHC2005]

@@toddwebb7521 thanks

[@robertmiller3529]

What if France and the UK invaded Germany immediately following the greman invasion of Poland?

[@andreiz112dn5]

nooooooooooooooo, fdr my love

[@adamhenrywalker]

The good ending

[@jordanmarbury1067]

I will say before I say my complaints that I think this is a good video, but some of the things in it were just a little too unrealistic. I will start in relative order with Japan. Japan was going to attack the USA no matter what happened, why? because the Japanese army was not going to listen to the government and America held the Philippines. now on the army, the Japanese army had on many occasions refused orders from the government to not attack with the government just going along with it because they didn't want to look weak, the invasion of French Indochina during the war and the invasion of Manchuria before, and any Japanese empire without the Philippines would be extremely vulnerable as the resource rich lands of indonesia would be able to be cut off with little effort by the Americans, and no president would just give up such a massive amount of land no matter for what reason, and even if they did they very well could face impeachment for it Now for the soviet union, most of the lend lease happened after both Stalingrad and Moscow, and while it was very helpful in limiting casualties it was not a necessity, if you want a better look into it look at the video that possible history did on it that goes into the specific reasons and stats. Know finally, britain was not holding on to her empire after any world war 2 timeline, and it is likely that even if there was no war that they could only hold on to places like canada and australia, they were just to outnumbered in places like india and africa to hold onto it for an extended period of time and the populations would, especially in a world were fascists won, nationalists would be massively strengthened. thank you for reading and have a great rest of you day to whoever's reading this

[@LoneForShort]

isnt this literally just TNO lore

[@baronbrummbar8691]

no ... the TNO lore is that the germans took gibralter and locked the british supply line to the mediterain ..... wich resulted in Romel winning and taking the suez canel - the chang ewith the US was that perl harbour was a bigger sucess destroy the US fuel reserve and ther repair docks (on top of the pacific fleet)

[@holdendriver8034]

kind of feel like this guy is way overstating Americas input in the war, I mean don't get me wrong they did a lot but I just think the soviets would not have given up under any circumstance.

[@A_reasonable_individual42]

Yeah I don't think they would have given up but I do think they would have had a harder time pushing back the Germans.

[@palestinian48.]

1 minute ago

[@michail1237]

1st

[@g.g.g.1826]

I don't think the USSR would collapse, even without american aid

[@AntonDDimov]

I don't know man...in Wikipedia Dewey is portrayed as pro-intervention ....

[@JoshSullivanHistory]

After American entry into WW2, Dewey became interventionist and internationalist. But, in 1940, he was against US intervention.

[@just_hris]

Lend lease to the Soviets wasn't crucial. The vast and resource rich land of the soviets with its enormous population was the reason why Soviets won and also the mistakes of OKH and the actually good attacks by the red army.

[@dominik_skate9789]

I'm celebrating a $32k stock portfolio today. I started this journey with $4000 have invested on time and also with the right tearn now have time for my family and the life ahead of me

[@user-hz9wq9jl2r]

please how, am still a newbie on investment trading

[@josequezada7505]

All you need as a beginner to make good profit from Bitcoin is a professional trader who will trade on your behalf else you may make losses

[@gdonderowicz4687]

ever since i came across bitcoin trader Marie Brandon my life have totally changed. yours can also change it's just a matter of commitment and focus

[@nilsuhanarslan9062]

I have heard a lot about investment with Marie Brandon and how good she is, please how safe are the profits?

[@viniciustreze8877]

I have also been trading with her, profits are secured and over a 100 percent return on investment. She's such an amazing woman with good skills keeps me happy all week knowing I earn $15,000 extra income trading with her.

[@EightBit72]

8:19 that’s unlikely. US aid was only one factor, lack of oil for the Germans plus the lack of popularity of the regime were other factors. More likely the Soviets still win, a few years later, and take all of Germany as puppet.

[@Frazier16]

Truman before he qas presdient said " if the nazis are winning, well suport the soviets, and vice virsa" it was about weakaing germany and helping Britain

[@alex4863]

Assuming Henry Wallace doesn’t get in office, we would be big trouble. FDR is the blueprint of American success to what it is now.

[@EPluribusUnumYT]

I think this video doesn't work because you purely state that FDR was priming Harry Hopkins for the spot and leave it at that, when Hopkins was one of many people that FDR and the Democrats were thinking of running in that race should FDR. Not even just that, but the person that was wildly considered the favorite to win the Democratic nomination wasn't even Hopkins, it was Secretary of State Cordell Hull, whom Roosevelt also goaded into running for the position. There is also the factor of the impending collapse of the New Deal Coalition, as the members who were third parties (I.E: The La Follettes) were gearing up for a party of their own to contest in 1940 Election to move past Roosevelt. Plus there is the issue of no matter what Dewey campaigned on, what would he actually be able to do should he actually win, the same congress. Furthermore it ignores Dewey's political evolution that made him an internationalist by his 2nd run for the Presidency. Basically a lot of info is left out that would probably led to a different outcome than what you say would happen in the title, had this been called "What would happen if Hopkins and Dewey were the candidates" might have been a different story

[@catandfoxworldbuilding]

this was interesting until you actually got past the election, from there on you made the most hairbrained alt-ww2 scenario I have ever heard in my life. All of it after the election makes as much sense as TNO

[@67nairb]

What's with Iron Cross to represent Germany? Why not put the swastika.

[@datboi945]

youtube ad restrictions

[@67nairb]

Oh. I hope you had a Merry XMAS and I hope you have a Happy New Year.@@datboi945

[@TheFenecFox]

As much as I hate FDR AND his policies... I don't like this scenario much more.

[@vexintersect1312]

Most aid was given to the soviets in 1943... the soviets would absolutely be able to defend themselves. They just wouldn't be able to push into ukraine, Romania, and belarus.

[@TSmith-qv4on]

What if fdr stayed president until 2024? I wonder how that would work

[@MrAsianPie]

Hell world

[@TSmith-qv4on]

@MrAsianPie why? I know obviously his age would be a problem but come on I'd be interesting to see how fdr would deal with vetinam war, the civil rights thing, the iran/Iraq war and how he'd respond to 9/11 and the cororanavirus

[@MrAsianPie]

@@TSmith-qv4on By far one of the worse presidents in American history (if not _the_ worst), no matter what you're political beliefs are

[@elisraxd1259]

Bro really thinks the USAland lease was crucial to a Soviet victory

[@bossy1496]

go look up how much the US sent to the Soviets in lend lease, and if you say that is not tide turning numbers, you are an idiot

[@A_reasonable_individual42]

It was a massive help to the Soviets

[@elisraxd1259]

@@A_reasonable_individual42 it was very important indeed but not a crucial thing to a Soviet victory

[@A_reasonable_individual42]

@@elisraxd1259 yeah I don't think they would have given up but they definitely would have had more casualties in this timeline.

[@genghiskhan5701]

Stalin himself said it was crucial according to Khruschev's memoirs Also Zhukov

[@cristianbalan518]

Yeah no, the Soviets would still win ww2 even without the Americans. Try better!

[@JoshSullivanHistory]

“Today some say the Allies didn't really help us ... But listen, one cannot deny that the Americans shipped over to us material without which we could not have equipped our armies held in reserve or been able to continue the war.” - Georgy Zhukov, 1963

[@cristianbalan518]

@JoshSullivanHistory I didn't say the Allies didn't help, I didn't say the Soviets were invincible. What I am saying is that the Germans would be depleted of resources and materials for war (namely oil) and weren't suited to fight in the Russian winter. (The major factor for which they didn't win) As the Russians just wouldn't surrender whatever the situation. Partisans would also play an important role. It is interesting to note that North Africa wouldn't be freed, leaving the whole Mediterranean under axis rule. But the let's be serious, at the end of the day, even without a second front, how do you beat a unending human wave?

[@JoshSullivanHistory]

@@cristianbalan518 “He stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany's pressure, and we would have lost the war.” - Nikita Khrushchev on Josef Stalin

[@lesbaguette4381]

The Soviets win? No, no way. But I do think that the Germans would have ground down to nothing against the Soviets - Zhukov didn't know that German plastics happened to be made of a material that would freeze in Soviet winters, for example. The fact of the matter is that Russia is fucking enormous, the Germans were very explicit in their goals of Slavic genocide, and the USSR had made sure the Russian people knew that. The fact of the matter is the Soviets can just keep retreating, and German treatment of occupied populations would engender too much resistance to hold the country. It'd just... take too long. Attrition would win the war, while both the USSR and the Germans would lose.

[@mr.gigagod9736]

Lend lease only represented 5 percent of the Soviet war budget, and only about 15 percent of non-logistical armored vehicles. Not to mention in the most important years of the war (1941-1942) the soviets only received less than 20 percent of total lend lease, and they performed just fine even winning at Stalingrad.

[@fredericoandrade7686]

I'm here to talk about the biggest lie in the video. The Soviet Union never really needed American supplies which were ridiculously small and the British even without the USA would win in Africa against Erwin Rommel and the Soviets would still win in Stalingrad so everything would be delayed by 1 2 or even 3 years with an all communist Europe except The United Kingdom and in any case the USA would enter the war because they would not accept an all communist Eurasia since at some point the Soviets would invade Japan and their puppets would perhaps even betray the United Kingdom by invading India and Africa since the Soviets would only have strength to perhaps overcome the Royal Navy in 10 years to invade the British islands