Posted on 08/19/2013 7:54:54 AM PDT by GrandJediMasterYoda
Garner would’ve had a problem with renomination in 1948 solely on the basis of age (he turned 80 that year — though there was no way to know he’d die just two weeks short of 99 in 1967). Clearly most of the Southern Dems would’ve been behind him, but he’d have had problems with the Northern & Liberal Dems. Then again, Sam Rayburn managed to navigate that minefield in the House to retain the Speakership (except for the 2 times when the GOP held it) until his death in 1961. If Garner had similar nimbleness and offered a bone to the libs for a VP nominee, he might’ve pulled it off.
I can’t say for sure how he would’ve operated as President, though. Obviously he would’ve bombed Japan as Truman did (as any sane President would’ve done, with perhaps the exception of Henry Wallace, but I think even he would’ve faced overwhelming pressure not to). The bigger question would’ve been how he would’ve dealt with Labor and gov’t expansion. Would he have been firm and supported measures pushed by Sen. Taft ?
What would he have done on Communist infiltration of the government ? Truman’s measures to identify and combat it really seemed desultory at best, little more than probably quiet firings, reassignments or “urged” retirements (and Ike wasn’t much better, preferring not to air dirty government laundry and turned the spotlight on criticizing whistleblower McCarthy).
Would Garner have given Gen. MacArthur carte blanche in Asia to drive the Communists out of North Korea, but to defeat Mao’s forces in Red China ? Had those regimes been defeated, we’d have a Democratic United Korea today along with a Nationalist China under Chiang, and that alone would’ve probably stopped SE Asian misadventures (Ho would never have received the support to launch a war in Vietnam, et al). The Soviets would’ve been isolated.
Perhaps I’m tying too many hopes to Garner, but clearly in that era, after defeating one evil of Naziism on the left, we went soft on its other opposite prong of the left, Communism, and “liberals” who were highly sympathetic for either a fast or slow march to the disaster we find ourselves in today, politically, morally, culturally, socially.
“...we went soft on its other opposite prong of the left, Communism, and “liberals” who were highly sympathetic for either a fast or slow march to the disaster we find ourselves in today, politically, morally, culturally, socially.”
Perfectly stated!
Truman was a human steak fart. We needed a leader at that critical time in history.
Not familiar with that term, but I’ll go with it.
Steak fart? I heard someone say it, they are supposed to be especially bad.
Ok then!
fart or not, we still need to drag GOPster to NH for Cruz ... just so he can take notes and blog about it!!!
Milford is good? or Seabrook?
I cannot tell you how sick I am of the whole right-wing political scene in CT ... and how I want to resettle in the western territories.
campaignPete hates campaigns ... which means I am self-loathing. How do I change my log in name?
It can’t be changed. You must embrace who you are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.