Why did Jimmy Carter underperform in Massachusetts in 1976? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 06:16:39 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)
  Why did Jimmy Carter underperform in Massachusetts in 1976? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why did Jimmy Carter underperform in Massachusetts in 1976?  (Read 6656 times)
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
« on: January 29, 2012, 10:33:56 AM »

In 1976 the Democrats made significant gains nationwide on the electoral map due to wide voter anger against the post-Watergate GOP.  Gains were especially strong in the South, where the favorite son candidate Jimmy Carter swung pretty much the entire Confederacy (minus Virginia) back to the Democratic column and pretty much reversed the Nixon landslides in Arkansas and Georgia that happened four years previous.  In addition Carter also brought down the margins in some more traditional GOP states like Maine, getting very close to winning the state by a less than 1% margin.  Hell, Carter was a Crow's Breath away from taking Oklahoma, a state that went 73% F***ING PERCENT NIXON in 1972.
I could write a college essay about the amount of gains the Democrats made in 1976.  Which is why it's shocking to me that Carter only did 1.91% better in Massachusetts than George Friggin McGovern did four years earlier.  And I've got to wonder, if Massachusetts was willing to go to McGovern with 55% of the popular vote (emphasis), why in an almost exponentially better national environment it went to Carter by a non-noticeable percent better?  I mean this state voted for Humphrey with 63% of the vote in '68!  That's more than Kerry did in 2004!
So this brings up a few questions:
Did the moderate WASP Republican brigade decide to show up in full force that day?
Was there something about Carter that Massachussites just didn't like?
Did Carter's "Born Again" image rub off the wrong way on Massachusetts liberal intellectuals?
Did Catholics feel put off by a Baptist running for President?

Seriously help me here people.
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
« Reply #1 on: February 13, 2012, 01:42:11 PM »
« Edited: February 13, 2012, 01:49:40 PM by MechaRepublican »

Cope wins the thread.

The rest of you can go home now.
Logged
Mechaman
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,791
Jamaica
« Reply #2 on: February 20, 2012, 07:09:04 PM »
« Edited: February 20, 2012, 07:11:43 PM by MechaRepublican »

Talking about Massachusetts as some super-duper-liberal-paradise can me misguiding. After all, remember good Wallace's performance there during primary?

But what about as some super-duper-Democratic state?

Jimmy Carter was a way less liberal candidate and he only did less than 2% better than McGovern did.

And then four years later they voted for super conservative hero Ronald Reagan for President over moderate hero Jimmy Carter.

Man, they be weird.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.019 seconds with 12 queries.