Hmm. The issue is more that the AFP is largely a cult of personality around Long whereas Reed's SPA is far more issue-focused. The best angle I can come up with is just following the usual "Garner compromises with Long" pathway, and including a message near the end where you discuss Reed with Hoover, and Hoover will mention that his intelligence claims that Jack Reed is the only thing holding the feuding AFL and IWW together, giving you the option to assassinate Reed so the AFL and IWW will be too focused on scrambling to fill the power vacuum caused by Reed's death to oppose Garner directly.

As for focus tree ideas, borrowing some names from Long's own economic plans would work well. Include things like "Every Man a King!" "Support Religious Charities" "The Housing Guarantee" "Maximum Wage Act" "Prosperity for all" "Support the Little Guy" along with something like "Restrict the Unions" and "Propaganda against the Klan".

But the question is wether Garner would just use Share our Wealth policies since he is much more conservative...

perhaps maybe a compromise instead of using the democrat use the republican they are the balancing act between both the more left leaning social democrats and the more conservative democrats.

It may be better to keep Olson as the negotiator; he represent's the "Unity" coalition- which is made up of everything from liberal republicans to conservative democrats. Changing who Olson's running mate is could play into it. Olson could perhaps use the republican half of the coalition to negotiate with Reed, or use the Democrat half of the coalition to negotiate with Long, depending if he had Roosevelt or another VP who was democratic. Assuming Long was negotiated with, and some of his policies were implemented, assassinating Reed would fracture the SPA, and the AFL and IWW wouldn't be able to rally the workers whom are beginning to be appeased by Long's economic ideas. Their demands wouldn't be satisfied, and because they are far more issue-oriented than the AFP, perhaps there would need to be some focuses to continue to deal with them.

Although it'd be alot of work, the focus tree could change depending on who Olson compromised with. One tree for a Reed-compromise largely similar to the current one, but with added emphasis around dealing with the disgruntled capitalist class and their (market liberal / social conservative) democratic representatives (market liberal/ social conservative).

Another tree with a Long-compromise, putting emphasis on reinforcing the Business-tolerable Long policies, and defanging the AFL and IWW. Echoing Long's stance of "Share your wealth is the only defense against socialism", generous welfare policies would be implemented, but Unions would be smashed, the right to protest, assemble, ect. would be curtailed.

Olson would still retire after one term, and either Roosevelt or Olson's Democrat VP could carry on his mantle. Assuming Olson had a democrat VP, Long would be content to not run for the presidency assured he had a friendly face as the former Democrat VP would be the Democratic nominee. Similar, Reed would be content with the worker-friendly Roosevelt as the Republican nominee, and decline to run. Whomever Olson had as VP, it would be incredibly difficult not to see them being elected- they would be the second half of perhaps one of the most important presidents in KR-timeline history.

Also, the US army/airforce/navy/foreign policy tree would atleast need to be rewritten, if not redone. Most of the focuses reference/exists because of the 2ACW.

That are some pretty good ideas!

how about electing Landon or Garner and shoot both Long and Reed like a chad and adding a HUGE debuff for a year or two?

For Macky:

You could push out Long and Reed by returning A Day In September but modifying it to be a response to a Reichstag fire-type scenario. You compromise with the War Powers Committee to shoot Long, be ruthless enough to capture Reed (with some temporary debuffs), and voila. This would require a new dynamic tree to be made, however.