1932 Democratic National Convention 1st Ballot
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 03, 2024, 06:51:21 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  1932 Democratic National Convention 1st Ballot		 « previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Every ballot will result with one candidate with the lowest amount of votes being eliminated until there are 2 left, or one reaches the 50% threshold.
#1
Gov. Franklin D. Roosevelt(NY)		  
#2
Former Gov. Al Smith(NY)		  
#3
Speaker of the House John N. Garner(TX)		  
#4
Gov. Albert Ritchie(MD)		  
#5
Former Gov. Harry F. Byrd(VA)		  
#6
Gov. William "Alfalfa Bill" Murray(OK)		  
#7
Former War Secretary Newton D. Baker(OH)		  
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results
Total Voters: 49

Author Topic: 1932 Democratic National Convention 1st Ballot  (Read 921 times)
Incipimus iterum
1236
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,096
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: February 19, 2017, 12:16:49 PM »
3 Day's.
Logged
Bigby
Mod_Libertarian_GOPer
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,164
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.52, S: 3.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: February 19, 2017, 12:41:49 PM »
Garner, so he's worth more than a bucket of your choice of human body fluid.
Logged
Lechasseur
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,802


Political Matrix
E: -0.52, S: 3.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: February 19, 2017, 01:47:41 PM »
« Edited: February 19, 2017, 01:49:22 PM by Lechasseur »
I voted for Speaker of the House John N. Garner (TX). My second choice would be Governor Franklin Roosevelt (NY).
Logged
SATW
SunriseAroundTheWorld
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,463
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: February 19, 2017, 02:55:20 PM »
Garner, with Smith as a 2nd choice.
Logged
(Still) muted by Kalwejt until March 31
Eharding
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,934


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: February 19, 2017, 03:14:24 PM »
Smith, with Byrd as a second choice.
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: February 19, 2017, 03:40:28 PM »
Always FDR
Logged
mencken
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,222
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: February 19, 2017, 05:29:45 PM »
My username basically obligates me to choose Ritchie.
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,456
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2017, 05:42:11 PM »
Smith, albeit reluctantly.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: February 19, 2017, 06:03:21 PM »
Voted for Baker, but I forgot to look at the options and would've chosen Smith. Smith/Baker '32!
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,456
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2017, 10:56:38 PM »
Quote from: Cathcon on February 19, 2017, 06:03:21 PM
Voted for Baker, but I forgot to look at the options and would've chosen Smith. Smith/Baker '32!

I'd considered Baker, but I wasn't quite sure if he definitively more economically progressive [which here means, most Wilsonian] than anyone else in this sorry sorry lot.
Logged
FEMA Camp Administrator
Cathcon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2017, 10:58:23 PM »
Quote from: L.D. Smith on February 19, 2017, 10:56:38 PM
Quote from: Cathcon on February 19, 2017, 06:03:21 PM
Voted for Baker, but I forgot to look at the options and would've chosen Smith. Smith/Baker '32!

I'd considered Baker, but I wasn't quite sure if he definitively more economically progressive [which here means, most Wilsonian] than anyone else in this sorry sorry lot.

I don't believe so. I recall thinking that he ironically seemed to match up with boilerplate impressions of "conservatives" today--per my reading of him several years ago on Wikipedia, he was relatively conservative on economics and hawkish (if such a word could be used at the time).
Logged
Incipimus iterum
1236
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,096
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: February 21, 2017, 09:30:01 AM »
Quote from: Cathcon on February 19, 2017, 10:58:23 PM
Quote from: L.D. Smith on February 19, 2017, 10:56:38 PM
Quote from: Cathcon on February 19, 2017, 06:03:21 PM
Voted for Baker, but I forgot to look at the options and would've chosen Smith. Smith/Baker '32!

I'd considered Baker, but I wasn't quite sure if he definitively more economically progressive [which here means, most Wilsonian] than anyone else in this sorry sorry lot.

I don't believe so. I recall thinking that he ironically seemed to match up with boilerplate impressions of "conservatives" today--per my reading of him several years ago on Wikipedia, he was relatively conservative on economics and hawkish (if such a word could be used at the time).
It's kinda interesting and suprising that Wilson even viewed Baker as the successor to his political legacy rather then his own son-in-law McAdoo.
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: February 21, 2017, 05:17:32 PM »
The nominee is supposed to have to get 2/3s of the delegates.

"Prior to 1936, nomination for president was required, not merely by a majority, but by two-thirds of the total number of delegates."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Convention#Candidate_nomination (Second paragraph, first sentence)
Logged
Incipimus iterum
1236
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,096
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: February 21, 2017, 06:01:31 PM »
Quote from: Kingpoleon, Never The Best/Worst Poster on February 21, 2017, 05:17:32 PM
The nominee is supposed to have to get 2/3s of the delegates.

"Prior to 1936, nomination for president was required, not merely by a majority, but by two-thirds of the total number of delegates."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Convention#Candidate_nomination (Second paragraph, first sentence)
Oh I know that I wanted to make this have a 50% threshold. If enough people want a 2/3rds rule I might do that.
Logged
Mr. Smith
MormDem
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 33,456
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: February 21, 2017, 06:05:46 PM »
Quote from: IBDD on February 21, 2017, 06:01:31 PM
Quote from: Kingpoleon, Never The Best/Worst Poster on February 21, 2017, 05:17:32 PM
The nominee is supposed to have to get 2/3s of the delegates.

"Prior to 1936, nomination for president was required, not merely by a majority, but by two-thirds of the total number of delegates."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Convention#Candidate_nomination (Second paragraph, first sentence)
Oh I know that I wanted to make this have a 50% threshold. If enough people want a 2/3rds rule I might do that.

That's your prerogative, but FDR makes the first ballot with these rules.
Logged
Kingpoleon
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,144
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: February 21, 2017, 06:10:23 PM »
Quote from: L.D. Smith on February 21, 2017, 06:05:46 PM
Quote from: IBDD on February 21, 2017, 06:01:31 PM
Quote from: Kingpoleon, Never The Best/Worst Poster on February 21, 2017, 05:17:32 PM
The nominee is supposed to have to get 2/3s of the delegates.

"Prior to 1936, nomination for president was required, not merely by a majority, but by two-thirds of the total number of delegates."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_National_Convention#Candidate_nomination (Second paragraph, first sentence)
Oh I know that I wanted to make this have a 50% threshold. If enough people want a 2/3rds rule I might do that.

That's your prerogative, but FDR makes the first ballot with these rules.

Yeah. It would be more interesting with the 2/3 rule.
Logged
Shameless Lefty Hack
Chickenhawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,178


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: February 22, 2017, 12:35:00 AM »
Oh man, who in this day and age is voting for Alfalfa Bill?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.242 seconds with 12 queries.