1932 Democratic Presidential Primary Elections
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 02:23:29 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  1932 Democratic Presidential Primary Elections
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 1932 Democratic Presidential Primary Elections  (Read 13291 times)
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 10, 2009, 04:01:23 PM »
« edited: August 10, 2009, 08:56:03 PM by Wyatt Chеsney »

Roosevelt in red, Smith in blue, Garner in green, favorite sons in yellow.

Roosevelt contested AL, CA, GA, MA, NE, NH, NY, ND, OR, PA, SD, WV, and WI. Smith contested AL, MA, NH, NJ, NY, PA, and WI. Garner contested only CA.

Logged
Landslide Lyndon
px75
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,624
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 10, 2009, 04:20:25 PM »

How come Garner defeated FDR in California?

And why Smith even contested the Alabama primary?
Did he really believe that he could beat a WASP in KKK's heartland?
Logged
Stranger in a strange land
strangeland
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,139
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 10, 2009, 04:33:31 PM »

How come Garner defeated FDR in California?

And why Smith even contested the Alabama primary?
Did he really believe that he could beat a WASP in KKK's heartland?

Why did Smith even try at all after the thumping he got in 1928? That would have been like Dukakis running in the 1992 Primary.
Logged
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,717


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 10, 2009, 04:40:42 PM »

Some statewide totals: (missing AL, GA, NH, NY, and SD)

California:
John Nance Garner: 41.27%
Franklin Roosevelt: 32.47%
Alfred Smith: 26.26%

Florida
Franklin Roosevelt: 87.71%
William H. Murray: 10.72%
Leo Chassee: 1.57%

Illinois
James Hamilton Lewis: 99.76%

Massachusetts
Alfred Smith: 73.11%
Franklin Roosevelt: 26.89%

Nebraska
Franklin Roosevelt: 63.48%
John Nance Garner: 19.00%
William H. Murray: 17.51%

New Jersey
Alfred Smith: 58.97%
Franklin Roosevelt: 36.27%
John Nance Garner: 1.56%
Albert Richie: 1.56%

North Dakota
Franklin Roosevelt: 61.91%
William H. Murray: 38.10%

Ohio
William H. Murray: 96.45%
Franklin Roosevelt: 1.71%

Oregon
Franklin Roosevelt: 78.62%
William H. Murray: 19.52%

Pennsylvania
Franklin Roosevelt: 56.65%
Alfred Smith: 43.11%

Wisconsin
Franklin Roosevelt: 98.57%
Alfred Smith: 1.43%

West Virginia
Franklin Roosevelt: 90.32%
William H. Murray: 8.15%
Leo Chassee: 1.53%
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: August 10, 2009, 05:41:59 PM »

How come Garner defeated FDR in California?

California's Role in the Nomination of Franklin D. Roosevelt

Great article, if you have a JSTOR account. But, concisely, Hearst and McAdoo (both conservative Democrats) were behind Garner, and Roosevelt and Smith split the liberal wet vote in Northern California.

And why Smith even contested the Alabama primary?
Did he really believe that he could beat a WASP in KKK's heartland?

Your guess is as good as mine, but Smith lost by a considerable margin (though I don't know how much exactly).

How come Garner defeated FDR in California?

And why Smith even contested the Alabama primary?
Did he really believe that he could beat a WASP in KKK's heartland?

Why did Smith even try at all after the thumping he got in 1928? That would have been like Dukakis running in the 1992 Primary.

Yes, if Dukakis was black. There was a substantial portion of the electorate that wanted to see a Catholic president in 1932. Smith could have won if he hadn't let much of his base slip away to FDR while he was deciding whether to run.
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: August 10, 2009, 06:38:18 PM »

NY is surprising, considering FDR was the state's governor at the time. Seems like he would have been able to deliver the state for himself.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: August 10, 2009, 07:12:03 PM »

NY is surprising, considering FDR was the state's governor at the time. Seems like he would have been able to deliver the state for himself.

Al Smith was from NYC. Tammany Hall was behind him.
Logged
hcallega
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.10, S: -3.90

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: August 10, 2009, 07:42:21 PM »

What do you guys think would have happened if Smith or Garner had won the nomination?
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: August 10, 2009, 08:01:50 PM »

I'm surprised Garner stayed out of the South.  He'd have won all three primaries easily.
Logged
Barnes
Roy Barnes 2010
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,556


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: August 10, 2009, 08:17:58 PM »

Was Garner's plan kind of like Johnson's in 1960? Where he wouldn't really contest the primaries, and wait till the Convention?
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: August 10, 2009, 08:32:16 PM »

Who won VA?
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: August 10, 2009, 08:51:13 PM »

I'm surprised Garner stayed out of the South.  He'd have won all three primaries easily.

California was the last primary. I don't believe he was a candidate prior to that.

Was Garner's plan kind of like Johnson's in 1960? Where he wouldn't really contest the primaries, and wait till the Convention?

You could say that, but I don't think he ever had any hope of winning, dark horse or not, which is why he and none of the other minor candidates decided to swing votes to Roosevelt. The whole campaign was largely the brainchild of William Randolph Hearst, the newspaperman (and a Californian).


No primary.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: August 10, 2009, 08:52:03 PM »

Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: August 10, 2009, 08:56:15 PM »


Typo, my mistake.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: August 11, 2009, 07:17:56 AM »

What do you guys think would have happened if Smith or Garner had won the nomination?

Catastrophe, since both were blind economic coservatives and would have committed the same errors that Hoover. Probably, in 1936, a progressive republican cliches the nomination and destroys Smith. Then, republicans would become the party of Civil Right and Welfare State, whereas democrats will turn into southern reactionaries in the late Sixties ( I see a Rockefeller/Wallace race in 1968 ). Reagan and Dubya would be democrats, Mondale and Kerry would be republicans.
Logged
hcallega
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.10, S: -3.90

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: August 11, 2009, 09:22:12 AM »

What do you guys think would have happened if Smith or Garner had won the nomination?

Catastrophe, since both were blind economic coservatives and would have committed the same errors that Hoover. Probably, in 1936, a progressive republican cliches the nomination and destroys Smith. Then, republicans would become the party of Civil Right and Welfare State, whereas democrats will turn into southern reactionaries in the late Sixties ( I see a Rockefeller/Wallace race in 1968 ). Reagan and Dubya would be democrats, Mondale and Kerry would be republicans.

Smith wasn't a conservative. He was a buisness-progressive. Essentially this was what Hoover was, beliving that working with buisness to create voluntary measures to revive the depression. Garner was a conservative though.
Logged
Хahar 🤔
Xahar
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 41,731
Bangladesh


Political Matrix
E: -6.77, S: 0.61

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: August 11, 2009, 12:03:09 PM »

What do you guys think would have happened if Smith or Garner had won the nomination?

Catastrophe, since both were blind economic coservatives and would have committed the same errors that Hoover. Probably, in 1936, a progressive republican cliches the nomination and destroys Smith. Then, republicans would become the party of Civil Right and Welfare State, whereas democrats will turn into southern reactionaries in the late Sixties ( I see a Rockefeller/Wallace race in 1968 ). Reagan and Dubya would be democrats, Mondale and Kerry would be republicans.

Smith wasn't a conservative. He was a buisness-progressive. Essentially this was what Hoover was, beliving that working with buisness to create voluntary measures to revive the depression. Garner was a conservative though.

Smith did become a conservative by the late 1930s.
Logged
hcallega
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,523
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.10, S: -3.90

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: August 12, 2009, 08:12:06 AM »

What do you guys think would have happened if Smith or Garner had won the nomination?

Catastrophe, since both were blind economic coservatives and would have committed the same errors that Hoover. Probably, in 1936, a progressive republican cliches the nomination and destroys Smith. Then, republicans would become the party of Civil Right and Welfare State, whereas democrats will turn into southern reactionaries in the late Sixties ( I see a Rockefeller/Wallace race in 1968 ). Reagan and Dubya would be democrats, Mondale and Kerry would be republicans.

Smith wasn't a conservative. He was a buisness-progressive. Essentially this was what Hoover was, beliving that working with buisness to create voluntary measures to revive the depression. Garner was a conservative though.

Smith did become a conservative by the late 1930s.

But a lot of that was more personal, due to his dislike of Roosevelt for beating him in 1932. He also thought that FDR took a lot of credit from him for his actions as Governor of New York
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 0.044 seconds with 12 queries.