Alabama and Mississippi 1928

[OSR stands with Israel]

In Alabama Al Smith only won the State 51.3% to 48.5% while in Mississippi he won it 82.1% to 17.9%. Why was their such huge difference that year between the two states

[Mr. Smith]

Perhaps anti-Catholicism ran stronger in AL?

[darklordoftech]

I think voter suppression was stronger in Mississipi.

[twenty42]

Al Smith was a poor fit for AL in many regards. A lot of AL Dems who voted for John Davis in 1924 and FDR in 1932 voted R in this election, calling themselves “Hoovercrats.”

The Wikipedia page goes into more detail...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Alabama,_1928

[TDAS04]

For some reason, MS (& SC) were the most partisan states during the "Solid South" era and Republicans just couldn't crack 20% of the vote (or even 10% in SC).

Alabama, and to a lesser extent Georgia, had more Republicans and more room to increase the Republican vote under circumstances where the Democrat was Catholic or a bad fit for the South.  They had fewer blacks, I think, and areas in their northern regions voted more like the Upper South.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

I think voter suppression was stronger in Mississipi.

This is true. the "Solid South" wouldn't have been so solid if Democrats hadn't tried so hard to keep almost anyone who they thought wouldn't support them from voting.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Al Smith was a poor fit for AL in many regards. A lot of AL Dems who voted for John Davis in 1924 and FDR in 1932 voted R in this election, calling themselves “Hoovercrats.”

The Wikipedia page goes into more detail...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Alabama,_1928

why wasnt the same true for Mississippi then

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Lol from the Texas page:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Places where racism dominated, Smith held up. Places where anti-catholic bigotry dominated, is where the defections happened.

[RINO Tom]

^ Thanks, as always, for some actual contribution!

[Obama-Biden Democrat]

1928 was the great debate in Dixie about what was the greater enemy, blacks or Catholics?

[Podgy the Bear]

Agree that the diverging racist and religious issues made differences in Alabama and Mississippi. In Alabama, the anti-Catholicism against Smith was fired up by Sen. Thomas Heflin--who backed Hoover strenuously.    The influence of political figures that backed Hoover in North Carolina, Virginia, and Texas also made differences in those states.

There was no similar opposition in Missisippi, and Smith received significant support from the two leading political figures in 1928.  First, Pat Harrison--who had a strong friendship with VP nominee Joseph Robinson of Arkansas--backed Smith.    And Theodore Bilbo as governor--probably the racist of racists--went strongly against Hoover--claiming that Hoover had danced with a black woman "as black as the ace of spades".

[PragmaticPopulist]

1928 produced a lot of interesting results in the south due to anti-catholic bias. Here's a few maps to give you a visual. Here's Florida in 1924 (non-atlas colors):

This was pretty much the norm for Florida at the time, though migration from northeastern states had started to allow Republicans to make inroads into South Florida.

Now here's 1928:

Smith only won the places that had the most blacks, where he was seen as best for preserving white supremacy. Hoover made huge gains everywhere else, especially the western portion of the panhandle, which saw swings of over 100% for anti-catholic sentiment.

[Del Tachi]

Alabama north of Birmingham feels very much like Eastern Tennessee (especially at the time), Mississippi is much more dominated by "lowland" Southern culture. 

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Because in 1928 Alabama had more or less free and fair elections (well for whites.) Mississippi (and South Carolina and Georgia) didn't.

[twenty42]

I find 1928 NC to be an ever more curious case than 1928 AL. Hoover won it by nearly 10 points, despite John Davis winning it by 20 in 1924 and then FDR winning it by 40 in 1932. The 1932 swing is somewhat explainable with the realignment, but Hoover managed to swing it almost 30 points R in 1928 despite a 7.8-point national D swing.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Because in 1928 Alabama had more or less free and fair elections (well for whites.) Mississippi (and South Carolina and Georgia) didn't.

South Carolina was particulary (in)famous for their general elections featuring one candidate on the ballot, with just a friction bothering to vote, since it was already decided in Democratic primaries.

[Podgy the Bear]

I find 1928 NC to be an ever more curious case than 1928 AL. Hoover won it by nearly 10 points, despite John Davis winning it by 20 in 1924 and then FDR winning it by 40 in 1932. The 1932 swing is somewhat explainable with the realignment, but Hoover managed to swing it almost 30 points R in 1928 despite a 7.8-point national D swing.

Similar to Alabama (with Thomas Heflin), there was considerable anti-Smith sentiment at the high political levels in North Carolina.  Senator F.M. Simmons went hard against the Democrats (especially on the Prohibition issue), and other Democrats in the state openly endorsed Hoover. 

Interestingly, in 1930, both Simmons and Heflin lost re-election at the primary level--mainly for antagonizing the Democratic establishment in their respective states.