One thing we can say about Wilson and the Romanovs is that it was a whole lot easier for Wilson to justify the entry of the United States into World War I *after* Tsar Nicholas II abdicated.
Many nations criticized the US's failure to join the fight, but failed to understand that the diversity of the US's population made consensus almost impossible in the early years of the war. The warring parties all had contributed immigrants to the United States, and these immigrants retained many loyalties despite their new home in America. As the US is (re-) learning now, it is very difficult to wage a winning fight without overwhelming support at home.
Also, as you may recall, World War I was the last great fight of Europe's great monarchies. As a constitutional democratic republic founded expressly rejecting monarchy, it was exceptionally difficult for Americans to support either side, as both were led by monarchies.
The US, in my opinion, found it much easier to join the war once several events had take place:
1. the revelation of the Zimmerman note in which the Kaiser offered Mexico the return of its provinces lost in the Mexican War (Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, and parts of Nevada, Colorado, and Utah.)
2. the resumption of unrestricted submarine warfare in violation of the Kaiser's express promise in the Essex Pledge
3. the abdication of the Tsar, which meant to the US that she would no longer fight on the side of an absolute monarch. (Remember, the US entered after the abdication but BEFORE the Bolshevik revolution. From the US perspective, it may have appeared briefly that Russia might become a species of democracy.)
Peace
Nadezhda