Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 25, 2020, 02:40:43 pm
News: 2020 U.S. Senate Predictions are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderators: Torie, Senator ON Progressive)
  Why did New York County vote for Warren Harding?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: Why did New York County vote for Warren Harding?  (Read 1775 times)
A18
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 23,808
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: May 22, 2005, 02:03:26 pm »

It gave him 60% of the vote.
Logged
Rob
Bob
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6,282
United States
Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -9.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: May 22, 2005, 02:11:58 pm »

Politically, it was very different back then. New York City had been solidly Democratic until 1896, when McKinley carried it over the agrarian Bryan. After that, it returned to the Democratic fold, but not overwhelmingly.

The GOP was strong across the board in cities, and New York was no different. Anti-Wilson Democrats joined with the sizable GOP base to give Harding the victory. It then voted barely for Coolidge over Davis, but returned to the Democrats for good when Al Smith ran in 1928.
Logged
Beet
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 25,258


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: May 22, 2005, 11:42:20 pm »

Its ironic that 1920 was the biggest landslide of the 20th century yet produced the worst president of the century.
Logged
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58,239
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: May 23, 2005, 06:12:15 am »

How far back does the Atlas include Manhattan city data?
I once saw popular vote totals for NY boroughs and their predecessors back to the 1830s. Unfortunately they included only major parties  - and while most strong third parties were up, Martin Van Buren's 1848 freesoil candidacy was not. As the Whig+Democrat total in 1848 was way lower than in 1844, I suppose Van Buren did very well in NYC, but I'd like to know how well.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 62,943
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 23, 2005, 06:13:59 am »

County data goes back to 1892 on the Atlas IIRC
Logged
skybridge
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,919
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 23, 2005, 07:03:28 am »

Its ironic that 1920 was the biggest landslide of the 20th century yet produced the worst president of the century.

Yeah, that one served as a great lesson for Republicans.

But to answer the question: Harding was popular as hell!
Logged
A18
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 23,808
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: May 23, 2005, 09:30:44 am »

Its ironic that 1920 was the biggest landslide of the 20th century yet produced the worst president of the century.

Going by popular vote, 1936, 1964, and 1972 were larger.

Going by electoral vote, even 1988 was bigger.
Logged
True Democrat
true democrat
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 7,369
United States


Political Matrix
E: 1.10, S: -2.87

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 23, 2005, 09:10:26 pm »

Its ironic that 1920 was the biggest landslide of the 20th century yet produced the worst president of the century.

Going by popular vote, 1936, 1964, and 1972 were larger.

Going by electoral vote, even 1988 was bigger.

No, by popular vote, 1920 was the largest:

Margin in %:

1920: 26.17%
1936: 24.26%
1964: 22.58%
1972: 23.15%
Logged
A18
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 23,808
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: May 23, 2005, 09:19:43 pm »

Margin of victory isn't really a good indicator. That would make 1912 a landslide.
Logged
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58,239
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: May 24, 2005, 03:25:47 am »

Margin of victory isn't really a good indicator. That would make 1912 a landslide.
...and so would the EC...well landslidish anyways.
Of course an easy win with well over 50% of the vote over a rather evenly divided opposition is a landslide. (Not referring to Wilson - he only got 40%)
Logged
○∙◄☻tπ[╪AV┼cV└
jfern
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 47,001


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: May 24, 2005, 03:37:02 am »

It was actually a swing bellweahter Democrat/Whig county in the 1840s.
Logged
A18
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 23,808
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: May 24, 2005, 03:53:21 am »

Margin of victory isn't really a good indicator. That would make 1912 a landslide.
...and so would the EC...well landslidish anyways.
Of course an easy win with well over 50% of the vote over a rather evenly divided opposition is a landslide. (Not referring to Wilson - he only got 40%)


The point is margin of victory is a bad measure. EC measures how spread out your support is more than anything else...you could win every state plus DC with 20% of the vote. Unless you're a Republican, in which case getting 20% of the vote is out of the question in DC.
Logged
minionofmidas - supplemental forum account
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58,239
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: May 24, 2005, 04:18:46 am »

It was actually a swing bellweahter Democrat/Whig county in the 1840s.
...when Free Soil split the vote.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC