Why Did LBJ win Florida, the Upper South, and Idaho in 1964?

[Calthrina950]

My question is as in the title. Why did Johnson win these particular states over Barry Goldwater, considering the relative closeness of the margins (especially in Idaho and Florida)? Why was there not the backlash in the other Southern States that might have given Goldwater more electoral and popular votes?

[Calthrina950]

In reality, there was a backlash in the upper southern states against the Democrats. It just wasn't nearly as strong in these regions to flip them to Goldwater.

How much of a backlash was there? What were Johnson's margins among white voters in those upper states. How did he manage to win Florida, considering that backlash and the fact that Goldwater won more counties than him? Also, the closeness in Idaho?

[Calthrina950]

But what about Idaho? Why was the margin between Goldwater and Johnson so close? And why wasn't white backlash enough in the Upper South to flip it to Goldwater?

[Calthrina950]

And why wasn't white backlash enough in the Upper South to flip it to Goldwater?

The Upper South was not pro-civil rights, but it wasn't as an important issue as it was in the Deep South.  Also, the fact that LBJ was a Southerner (a Texan) may have helped.

Upper South also had far less African-americans. Theres maps of the white vote for the Obama and Clinton which showed that whites who lived close to regions with more african americans tend to vote more Republican than whites who live in Southern areas with far lower numbers of African americans.  Also the War on Poverty programs might of convinced those upper south areas to stay for LBJ considering the region was still poorer on average.

Touching upon that, I've seen articles saying that Goldwater won the white vote in some of the states carried by Johnson. Would you happen to know then, how Johnson won those states? And exactly in which ones did Goldwater win the white vote?

[Calthrina950]

And why wasn't white backlash enough in the Upper South to flip it to Goldwater?

The Upper South was not pro-civil rights, but it wasn't as an important issue as it was in the Deep South.  Also, the fact that LBJ was a Southerner (a Texan) may have helped.

Upper South also had far less African-americans. Theres maps of the white vote for the Obama and Clinton which showed that whites who lived close to regions with more african americans tend to vote more Republican than whites who live in Southern areas with far lower numbers of African americans.  Also the War on Poverty programs might of convinced those upper south areas to stay for LBJ considering the region was still poorer on average.

Touching upon that, I've seen articles saying that Goldwater won the white vote in some of the states carried by Johnson. Would you happen to know then, how Johnson won those states? And exactly in which ones did Goldwater win the white vote?

Florida wouldn't have been won without the black vote because the margins were so close there. And for Virginia, LBJ would of won that state without the black vote but only with a margin of perhaps 1-2% without the black vote.

For Florida, LBJ won the Urban vote, Goldwater won the rural vote in the state. Without the black vote in Florida then Goldwater would of won that state by 1-3%. What made the state close was Goldwater being a lot stronger than LBJ in the Suburban vote where he won Orange, Palm Beach, Broward, Seminole, Marion, Polk, metro Jacksonville. While LBJ won Miami-dade, Pinellas, Hillsborough, Voulsia, Brevard, Port Lucie.

Why did Florida and Virginia vote for Johnson? I would have imagined that the anti-civil rights backlash in those states might have given them to Goldwater.

[Calthrina950]

Cause Florida is really not a "Southern" state, plus the GOP/Dixiecrats were not strong enough in the non-Panhandle region to flip it to Goldwater.

Miami-Dade and West-Central Florida saved Johnson in the state.

I also find it astonishing that the pattern of Democrats winning states with only a few select counties was already beginning to establish itself by 1964.

[Calthrina950]

Cause Florida is really not a "Southern" state, plus the GOP/Dixiecrats were not strong enough in the non-Panhandle region to flip it to Goldwater.

Miami-Dade and West-Central Florida saved Johnson in the state.

I also find it astonishing that the pattern of Democrats winning states with only a few select counties was already beginning to establish itself by 1964.

Bumping this up considerably, but wanted to provide more insight on this. Florida was one of two states that Johnson carried where he won fewer counties than Goldwater-Nebraska was the other. He did manage to carry the majority in Idaho, Virginia, Kansas, and Utah, the other states that he won by single digit margins. Nevertheless, what I said here was still holding true. In 1960, for example, John F. Kennedy became the first Democrat ever to win a presidential election while carrying fewer counties than his primary opponent (this counts Democrats prior to the emergence of the Republican Party as well). There were many states where this was true-Missouri, Michigan, Pennsylvania, New York, Maryland, Minnesota, Illinois, and New Jersey are particularly stark examples.

[Calthrina950]

The Upper South was not pro-civil rights, but it wasn't as an important issue as it was in the Deep South.  Also, the fact that LBJ was a Southerner (a Texan) may have helped.

There was very little difference in views on civil rights in Texas, Florida, Virginia, etc. compared to the Deep South. However, as mentioned before, the Thurmond machines didn’t have nearly as much power in the Upper South and Florida.

There's also the fact that black voters were registered at higher rates in the Outer South than in the Deep South. I've read numerous sources that have stated that the black vote was critical to Johnson's victories in Florida and Virginia, and that he would have lost those states without it. That of course, was discussed earlier on this thread. I think it is likely that Johnson would have carried Georgia, and possibly Louisiana and South Carolina, if black voters had been registered at similar rates to those in Florida and Virginia. He still managed to get over 40% of the vote in those three states with disenfranchisement still being as pervasive as it was.

[Calthrina950]

Cause Florida is really not a "Southern" state, plus the GOP/Dixiecrats were not strong enough in the non-Panhandle region to flip it to Goldwater.

Miami-Dade and West-Central Florida saved Johnson in the state.

Funny to see how counties switched from 1960.



Also, I'm kind of surprised LBJ won Bradford and Union counties.

The Florida Panhandle shifted heavily to Goldwater, obviously because of civil rights. Conversely, Johnson picked up Pinellas, Alachua, Charlotte, Brevard, Volusia, and St. Lucie Counties (and did significantly better in Monroe and Miami-Dade than Kennedy), because of the defection of traditionally Republican suburbanites, retirees, and Northern transplants, who disagreed strongly with Goldwater about Social Security and his other policies. The Nixon-Johnson vote was larger than the Kennedy-Goldwater vote; hence, why Johnson won the state, but the margin remained close, as in 1960.

As for Bradford and Union, Johnson did do much worse in those counties than Kennedy had four years prior. There were other counties (i.e. Dixie, Levy Counties), where Johnson's support fell compared to Kennedy's, but that he still managed to hold narrowly.

[Calthrina950]

Also a bit funny that most Kennedy counties in Florida voted for George Wallace 8 years later.

Anyway, in addition to the Deep South/Upper South divide in 1964, there was a bit of a divide between states that seceded in the Civil War and those that did not.  LBJ took only 56% in Arkansas, Tennessee, and North Carolina, yet received a whopping 64% in Kentucky and 68% in West Virginia.  Kentucky and Tennessee rarely vote so differently.

This much is true. I've watched CBS's 1964 Election Night coverage on YouTube, and I remember how Kentucky was projected for Johnson as soon as the polls closed. Early returns from Tennessee, however, showed a tight race between him and Goldwater, with Johnson leading by a small margin. Of course, he ultimately went on to win the state by 11%. It was mentioned on here that the issue of TVA privatization is probably what cost Goldwater Tennessee, outweighing the civil rights backlash which might have otherwise handed the state to him.

Looking at the county map for that year, Goldwater held up in ancestrally Republican Eastern Tennessee, won both Knox and Hamilton Counties, and carried the block of Republican counties near Memphis. He also came within 5% in Shelby County, which was majority-white back then. Johnson, conversely, did exceptionally well in the traditionally Democratic rural areas of Central and Western Tennessee, almost certainly because of those TVA concerns:

[Calthrina950]

Also a bit funny that most Kennedy counties in Florida voted for George Wallace 8 years later.

Anyway, in addition to the Deep South/Upper South divide in 1964, there was a bit of a divide between states that seceded in the Civil War and those that did not.  LBJ took only 56% in Arkansas, Tennessee, and North Carolina, yet received a whopping 64% in Kentucky and 68% in West Virginia.  Kentucky and Tennessee rarely vote so differently.

This much is true. I've watched CBS's 1964 Election Night coverage on YouTube, and I remember how Kentucky was projected for Johnson as soon as the polls closed. Early returns from Tennessee, however, showed a tight race between him and Goldwater, with Johnson leading by a small margin. Of course, he ultimately went on to win the state by 11%. It was mentioned on here that the issue of TVA privatization is probably what cost Goldwater Tennessee, outweighing the civil rights backlash which might have otherwise handed the state to him.

Looking at the county map for that year, Goldwater held up in ancestrally Republican Eastern Tennessee, won both Knox and Hamilton Counties, and carried the block of Republican counties near Memphis. He also came within 5% in Shelby County, which was majority-white back then. Johnson, conversely, did exceptionally well in the traditionally Democratic rural areas of Central and Western Tennessee, almost certainly because of those TVA concerns:

Wait can you post a link to that 1964 coverage because I can’t seem to find it

Ditto on that.  I've seen only the initial CBS coverage from 1964 which shows Kentucky and that's all.

The tightness of the early returns in Tennessee was likely due to eastern Tennessee--traditionally Republican and in the eastern time zone.  In comparison to Kentucky, the civil rights issue had some impact in Tennessee (notably in the western part of the state) to reduce Johnson's percentages to the 50s.  But it was a comfortable victory for the Democrats in Tennessee--they won at the presidential level and also won two Senate races in 1964 by comfortable margins.  Not likely to happen again for the foreseeable future.

It's fascinating that Haywood County, one of only two majority-black counties in Tennessee (alongside Shelby County), actually voted for Goldwater. Obviously, blacks were still disenfranchised throughout much of rural Tennessee at that time. Haywood County had voted for Kennedy in 1960, and Goldwater gained about 16 percentage points there compared to Nixon. It's obvious that civil rights was the reason why he flipped the county.

Also a bit funny that most Kennedy counties in Florida voted for George Wallace 8 years later.

Anyway, in addition to the Deep South/Upper South divide in 1964, there was a bit of a divide between states that seceded in the Civil War and those that did not.  LBJ took only 56% in Arkansas, Tennessee, and North Carolina, yet received a whopping 64% in Kentucky and 68% in West Virginia.  Kentucky and Tennessee rarely vote so differently.

This much is true. I've watched CBS's 1964 Election Night coverage on YouTube, and I remember how Kentucky was projected for Johnson as soon as the polls closed. Early returns from Tennessee, however, showed a tight race between him and Goldwater, with Johnson leading by a small margin. Of course, he ultimately went on to win the state by 11%. It was mentioned on here that the issue of TVA privatization is probably what cost Goldwater Tennessee, outweighing the civil rights backlash which might have otherwise handed the state to him.

Looking at the county map for that year, Goldwater held up in ancestrally Republican Eastern Tennessee, won both Knox and Hamilton Counties, and carried the block of Republican counties near Memphis. He also came within 5% in Shelby County, which was majority-white back then. Johnson, conversely, did exceptionally well in the traditionally Democratic rural areas of Central and Western Tennessee, almost certainly because of those TVA concerns:

Wait can you post a link to that 1964 coverage because I can’t seem to find it

Here's a link to the 1964 coverage, such as it is, on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWulJlKqEEg&t=1006s. The video is about thirty minutes in length, and only covers the start of the election night. The rest of that night's coverage has never been posted online, so far as I know, and probably never will be, unfortunately. It's frustrating, given that much fuller coverage of the 1960 election is available on YouTube.

[Calthrina950]

LBJ did pretty good in Arkansas as well:

1964 was the 23rd, and last, consecutive time that Arkansas voted Democratic, extending all the way back to 1876. I've read the Wikipedia article on the 1964 election there, which states that white voters in the state struggled with their choices, due to their opposition to the Civil Rights Act and to Goldwater's policy proposals, particularly regarding the TVA, entitlements, and foreign policy. In the end, their policy disagreements with Goldwater won out, and Johnson carried the state by around 13%. However, the civil rights backlash, like in Tennessee, still played a role, and Goldwater flipped several counties in the southern, more diverse regions of the state that Kennedy had won in 1960.

This, however, was more then canceled out by Johnson regaining rural white counties in Central and Northern Arkansas that had defected to Nixon in 1960 because of anti-Catholicism, and that were more concerned by Goldwater's economic and foreign platform than about civil rights. Nevertheless, 1964 was the first election since Reconstruction that Arkansas voted more Republican than the national average, and was an indicator of the state's political future.

Really, if you think about it, Johnson's victories in every Southern state that he won, except for Texas, can be explained by objections to Goldwater's economic and foreign policies, which outweighed civil rights. Were it not for this, and were Goldwater an economically moderate, pro-New Deal Republican like Eisenhower-but with the same opposition to the Civil Rights Act as he had in OTL-he would have swept Tennessee, Arkansas, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina, and Oklahoma. In that instance, those states would have bolted over civil rights, since they wouldn't have had the other policy concerns.