Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Would Huey Long have been America's Greatest or Worst President?

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Orinsul

Orinsul

Absent Minded
116 Badges
Feb 7, 2008
9.116
5.010
  • Victoria 2: Heart of Darkness
  • Stellaris
  • Cities: Skylines - Snowfall
  • 500k Club
  • Crusader Kings II: Monks and Mystics
  • Crusader Kings II: Holy Knight (pre-order)
  • Europa Universalis IV: El Dorado
  • Europa Universalis IV: Pre-order
  • Crusader Kings II: Way of Life
  • Europa Universalis IV: Common Sense
  • Crusader Kings II: Horse Lords
  • Cities: Skylines - After Dark
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cossacks
  • Crusader Kings II: Conclave
  • Stellaris: Distant Stars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mare Nostrum
  • Stellaris Sign-up
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Cadet
  • Crusader Kings II: Reapers Due
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rights of Man
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Tyranny: Archon Edition
  • Stellaris: Digital Anniversary Edition
  • Stellaris: Leviathans Story Pack
  • Cities: Skylines - Natural Disasters
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Together for Victory
  • Europa Universalis IV: Art of War
  • Crusader Kings II: Jade Dragon
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
  • Stellaris: Humanoids Species Pack
  • Stellaris: Apocalypse
  • Europa Universalis IV: Rule Britannia
  • Surviving Mars: Digital Deluxe Edition
  • BATTLETECH - Digital Deluxe Edition
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife Pre-Order
  • Cities: Skylines - Green Cities
  • Europa Universalis IV: Dharma
  • Cities: Skylines - Mass Transit
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Europa Universalis IV: Cradle of Civilization
  • Europa Universalis IV: Mandate of Heaven
  • Europa Universalis IV: Wealth of Nations
  • Europa Universalis IV: Call to arms event
  • Europa Universalis IV: Third Rome
  • Hearts of Iron 4: Arms Against Tyranny
  • Surviving Mars
  • Europa Universalis IV: Res Publica
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Death or Dishonor
  • Cities: Skylines - Parklife
  • Hearts of Iron IV: Expansion Pass
Just say Long hadn't died, but had instead become president.
Would the necessities of office and the lack of his established power structure have just made him Roosevelt MKII with slightly less regard for constitutional role?
Might he have become a great dictator? Or a great Reformer? Made every man a king but been remembered as a corrupt criminal or an eternal, lincolnesque hero?

And would the World be different? Had the US been lead in WW2 by a populist proclaiming progressivism, fighting the totalitarians but imitating their methods to control the banks and old money?
Might jim crow have been abolished sooner? or might socialist be a compliment rather than a curse in todays america? Or an even worse insult for carrying the stain of Long's shadow?

Anyway, what do you think about Long, and what do you think he might have been for the world?
 
dunno about the economy, but it's hard to imagine that anyone could have been a better president during ww2 than FDR.
 
Historically, Long was assassinated in autumn 1935. Let´s assume that he survives this incident intact.

FDR was also very popular president. Both FDR and Long were democrats. It is probably safe to assume that the democratic party would choose to support FDR because of his popularity and the fact that he didn´t screw up his first presidential term. Now, Long could choose to run for the president as an independent candidate or he could choose to wait for a better opportunity. I suspect that in 1936, Long would have been too young to be considered to become a vice president for FDR and his relations to FDR may have worsened as well. Ultimately, FDR was probably too difficult to beat in party politics or in elections by Long.

The real question for Long would have been how to deal with FDR´s historical death in 1945 and the elections in 1948. I think that the elections in 1948 would have been his best opportunity to become president. The Democratic party doesn´t have a clear successor for FDR. They need to decide their new candidate among their leaders like Harry S. Truman and Mr. Long. For any democrat candidate the elections of 1948 would ave been an uphill battle. Against the predictions, Truman was able to beat Dewey narrowly. It is very unclear how Long would have managed that situation.

In 1952, he would have to deal with the popular General Dwight D. Eisenhower in elections. Long was probably seen as an average politician while Ike was a renown general. In both 1952 and 1956 Ike would be the clear favorite. In 1961, he would have to deal with the new rising democratic star, John F. Kennedy. I suspect that after 1961 he was becoming to old to be a good candidate for presidency. In 1961, he would have been almost 70 years old and his health would become more and more question mark.

My assumption is that FDR was too difficult for Long to beat. However, if he would have been able to become the president in 1948 then his role would have been a lot different than in 1930s. In 1930s, US foreign policy was still based on the isolation and the Monroe Doctrine. How would he deal with domestic problems and growing militarism in nations like Germany, Japan, Italy and Soviet Union? In 1948, he would have become the leader of the free world. His main challenge abroad would be to contain Communism as well as possible.
 
Let's just assume the Kingfish gets elected, he'd be a terrible president. He comes out of Louisiana, by far the most corrupt state in the Union where it is par for the course for Governors to routinely be tried for corruption, and even then they get re-elected a few cycles later. His popular appeal in his home state would get him a base of support, but never enough to truly form enough of a political mandate to try and do what he would want to do to make 'every man a king'. His complete and total manipulation of politics when he was in the Senate and still controlling Louisiana on a puppet string is an indication of how his presidency would have gone.

I'm not a big believer in assassination to solve problems, but there is a reason the guy was shot.
 
I honestly can't see how he could possibly have won a popular nationwide election. His appeal was based entirely on local small scale special projects designed to support his constituents against otuer citizens. I see him as America's Hugo Chavez. The sort of man who can ruin a country and its people economically, and morally while still doing well in the polls. Louisiana is just now getting rid of the last evil vestiges of the horrific political machine and economic conditions he created and fostered. On a national level his brand of politics would be apocalyptic.
 
gagenater said:
I honestly can't see how he could possibly have won a popular nationwide election. His appeal was based entirely on local small scale special projects designed to support his constituents against otuer citizens. I see him as America's Hugo Chavez. The sort of man who can ruin a country and its people economically, and morally while still doing well in the polls. Louisiana is just now getting rid of the last evil vestiges of the horrific political machine and economic conditions he created and fostered. On a national level his brand of politics would be apocalyptic.
Click to expand...

He was a populist, and he had a record for success.
He appealed to the poor, but also 'the blacks' and women. He sold himself to the disenfranchised.
In the run up to his death, he started to prove popularity and success in other states, pop in appearances from him being enough for a female candidate who was going to lose hands down before his rally, going to the senate and etc.
His appeal was based on his brilliance at winning over the poor to his personality cult.
As while he was a horrible person, he was a genius and he devoted everything to his ambition.

But the thing about Long is, he didn't just create corruption and dictatorship, he used it to push through the revolutionary reforms and policies he needed to gain more power. Because of him Louisiana got bridges and schools and the basic infrastructure that while taken for granted, were not there before Long.
On a national level, would he have been able to use illegality and corruption to push through reforms on a national level? Yes, he would have likely left a legacy and precedent for dictatorship in America, but might he have given his supporters, the poor, black and disenfranchised in America what he gave them in Louisiana?
And might he have done to the rich, what he wanted to do to the rich in louisiana? broken their power and scattered their wealth to the people (and likely a good share down his own pockets) and brought 'progressive' change to America to reshape the country for ever?

Also, I just found this [video=youtube_share;mdzAbxsjPRA]http://youtu.be/mdzAbxsjPRA[/video]
 
Did somebody say Huey Long?
 
Orinsul. All you are doing is breaking down in detail what I said earlier. He was very popular. His 'headline' accomplishments of infrastructure and education pale in comparison to the godawful hideous graft and corruption that he engaged in personally and encouraged in others. It's because of him that Louisiana has a reputation for lawlessness and corruption. It's also because of this that Louisiana has had until recently such a poor showing compared to its neighbors with respect to education and the overall economy. In my experience it wasn't until the early 90's that the awful things started by Long finally faded away. The destruction of government accountability and trust lasted much longer and did far more damage than any of the physical structures he stuck his name on like some Egyptian pharaoh trying to achieve immortality. He only looks good from a distance. Study his legacy close up in the place where he built it and it's hard to find anyone with something good to say about it. He was a nearly unmitigated disaster for the state he ruled and we can all thank our lucky stars he never got the chance to smash the rest of the country the same way. Louisiana today could easily be as successful as Texas is now of not for his monumental stupidity. He doomed a good 3 generations of louisianians to some of the worst backwardness and poverty in the United States. Louisiana was one of the most prosperous states in the union before he fucked everything up.
 
and also, as far was "worst" president goes, it is hard to beat Buchanan, Pierce, and Andrew Johnson.
 
I will base my opinion from Kaiserreich onto this, and put in a tentative 'no'.
 
Finnish Dragon said:
Historically, Long was assassinated in autumn 1935. Let´s assume that he survives this incident intact.

FDR was also very popular president. Both FDR and Long were democrats. It is probably safe to assume that the democratic party would choose to support FDR because of his popularity and the fact that he didn´t screw up his first presidential term. Now, Long could choose to run for the president as an independent candidate or he could choose to wait for a better opportunity. I suspect that in 1936, Long would have been too young to be considered to become a vice president for FDR and his relations to FDR may have worsened as well. Ultimately, FDR was probably too difficult to beat in party politics or in elections by Long.

The real question for Long would have been how to deal with FDR´s historical death in 1945 and the elections in 1948. I think that the elections in 1948 would have been his best opportunity to become president. The Democratic party doesn´t have a clear successor for FDR. They need to decide their new candidate among their leaders like Harry S. Truman and Mr. Long. For any democrat candidate the elections of 1948 would ave been an uphill battle. Against the predictions, Truman was able to beat Dewey narrowly. It is very unclear how Long would have managed that situation.

In 1952, he would have to deal with the popular General Dwight D. Eisenhower in elections. Long was probably seen as an average politician while Ike was a renown general. In both 1952 and 1956 Ike would be the clear favorite. In 1961, he would have to deal with the new rising democratic star, John F. Kennedy. I suspect that after 1961 he was becoming to old to be a good candidate for presidency. In 1961, he would have been almost 70 years old and his health would become more and more question mark.

My assumption is that FDR was too difficult for Long to beat. However, if he would have been able to become the president in 1948 then his role would have been a lot different than in 1930s. In 1930s, US foreign policy was still based on the isolation and the Monroe Doctrine. How would he deal with domestic problems and growing militarism in nations like Germany, Japan, Italy and Soviet Union? In 1948, he would have become the leader of the free world. His main challenge abroad would be to contain Communism as well as possible.
Click to expand...
Very nice analysis. You missed just one option: FDR could have picked Long over Truman as VP in 1944. It would be quite ironic as Truman was selected for his fight against corruption. Actually, make that a double irony: he would have replaced Henry Wallace who was seen as too leftist. Still, I consider this more likely than any of the other scenarios.
 
Barsoom said:
Very nice analysis. You missed just one option: FDR could have picked Long over Truman as VP in 1944. It would be quite ironic as Truman was selected for his fight against corruption. Actually, make that a double irony: he would have replaced Henry Wallace who was seen as too leftist. Still, I consider this more likely than any of the other scenarios.
Click to expand...

I don´t think neither FDR nor the Democratic party leadership would have accepted Long as FDR´s VP. It seems to be that FDR´s health was in decline in 1944 and this made the party leader worry that if FDR dies then who would follow him. Truman seems to be one person who was acceptable for both the president and to the party leadership.

I think Long´s Share Our Wealth movement destroyed any chances to have an alliance between him and FDR. It seems to be that FDR wanted to be quite moderate in order to maximize the votes for in the Presidential Elections of 1944. FDR needed to pick his VP candidate carefully because that would have an effect on his election and if he dies then that person would be the next president.

Dewey would have needed to win in all of the close states and in New York if he wanted to win the presidency. If FDR had a poor VP candidate in the public eyes in 1944 then that could have helped Dewey´s chances to win the presidency.
 
If nothing else, it would have led to a major upsurge in incredibly awkward musical performances:

[video=youtube;VzU0Cok3guQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzU0Cok3guQ&list=RDVzU0Cok3guQ[/video]
 
Andre Bolkonsky said:
I'm not a big believer in assassination to solve problems, but there is a reason the guy was shot.
Click to expand...
And that was because he was a progressive who had no time for the reactionary old guard who'd run the state into the ground for the previous several decades. They had no problem with the Old Regular machine of New Orleans but you start handing schools free textbooks and taking on Standard Oil and well...

Nor did Long differ significantly from his contemporaries nationally. This was an era of machine politics, after all. The Democratic nominee in 1928 was Al Smith, a man who'd risen through New York's Tammany Hall. Roosevelt himself understood perfectly well how patron/client networks worked; as President he made full use of access to federal funds to selectively undermine local opponents (including, unsuccessfully, Long and Robert Moses). During the New Deal years James Farley distributed patronage widely on FDR's behalf.

None of this means that Long would have made a good president: he consistently relied on a popular mandate in lieu of negotiations and deal-making, something he had limited (read: no) success with in the Senate. But as a politician he was no worse than any other machine politician, just a lot more successful.
 
The most likely reason for him to be shot was personal as much as political. But in fact he was shot (one hopes accidentally) by his own bodyguard, possibly from ricochets.
 
Orinsul said:
Just say Long hadn't died, but had instead become president.
Would the necessities of office and the lack of his established power structure have just made him Roosevelt MKII with slightly less regard for constitutional role?
Might he have become a great dictator? Or a great Reformer? Made every man a king but been remembered as a corrupt criminal or an eternal, lincolnesque hero?

And would the World be different? Had the US been lead in WW2 by a populist proclaiming progressivism, fighting the totalitarians but imitating their methods to control the banks and old money?
Might jim crow have been abolished sooner? or might socialist be a compliment rather than a curse in todays america? Or an even worse insult for carrying the stain of Long's shadow?

Anyway, what do you think about Long, and what do you think he might have been for the world?
Click to expand...

The Kingfish would not have been a great president. He would have been an incredibly polarizing individual who accumulated more and more and more power for himself for the purpose of acquiring power. He would have alienated huge chunks of the population and would have had no problem violently resolving any issues that challenged his own power.

Personally, I look at "Every Man A King" as I do Adolph Hitler's charismatic claims that he would gladly give his life dying for Germany; and we all remember the image of him hiding out in the bunker with Eva while children with panzerfaust's were sent out to stop Zhukov and the boys.
 
austrianemporer said:
Huey Long would have been America's first fascist president. His policies were very similar to Nazi Germany's (Read "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" and "An Introduction to Fascism".)
Click to expand...

Or read, It Couldn't Happen here, which is a book about a fascist dictatorship run by a fictional stand in for long written at the time. It makes the parallels better.
Also it's quite fun.

Anyway, had america had a fascist president during WW2 and had a fascist president either defeated the nazis or keep america out of the way by being tied up with an american civil war, the thing is, it wouldn't leave America fascist. Long style populism is all about short term tyranny, it would be over thrown by now.
But it would leave a completely different america, one that might not suffer any of it's modern ideologies. After being sold out by a populist, it might be a world where the super rich are not suffered to consolidate wealth and power, or it might be a world where promises of social justice are met with even greater cynicisim.
Maybe it's a world where communists played a crucial enough role in the liberation and were demonised enough by the hated regime that they end up politically credible in America.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back