Greatest Election Night in the Democratic Party's History?

[dw93]

Which of these elections was the greatest election night for the Democrats? Feel free to mention another Midterm or Presidential election I forgot to add.

[twenty42]

This is a tough one, but I’d have to say 2008. It was a very decisive victory despite all the drama the party had undergone that year, and watching states like IN, VA, and NC go blue must have been crazy.

Excitement was tempered in 1992 by the popular vote totals...the map itself was very blue, but Dems knew they didn’t exactly have a mandate with 43% of the vote. I wouldn’t say 1976 was that great of a night for Dems...they had blown a double-digit lead in the last couple months, and Carter only squeaked by with a 2004-style victory despite massive Republican unpopularity. I also understand that 1964 was pretty anti-climactic in real time...most Dems knew going in that the election was basically going to be a memorial to JFK, and were already looking ahead to 1968 despite the impending landslide.

[bagelman]

1932 by a massive landslide worthy of FDR.

[JGibson]

Either 2008 or 1932.

[OSR stands with Israel]

1932 as it was one of the rare elections that totally realigned the electorate in one election.


Presidential Elections went from Likely GOP to Likely Dem in just one election.

[Podgy the Bear]

1932--it was a major transformation for the American political system at so many levels.

I am sure that many thought that 2008 could have the greatest night--because it looked like the Democrats were headed for a long term domination politically.  But it didn't turn out that way. 

[OSR stands with Israel]

1932--it was a major transformation for the American political system at so many levels.

I am sure that many thought that 2008 could have the greatest night--because it looked like the Democrats were headed for a long term domination politically.  But it didn't turn out that way.  

In that case 1932 resulted in the Democrats dominating American Politics for far longer than even people expected the Democrats to dominate after 2008.


After 1932 :


The Democrats Held the Presidency for 20 years and 28 of the next 36 years(and the only GOP President in that Period was a War Hero and had more common with the Democrats on Domestic Issue than the Pre 1932 GOP and the Post 1968 GOP ).


The Democrats Held the House for 58 of the next 62 years and the Senate for 52 of the next 62 years. Also with the exception of 1972-194, and 1980-1986 those majorities were massive.



2008 at best was expected to be a reverse 1980 while 1932 was much bigger of a realignment than 1980 was.

[SingingAnalyst]

1964. Not only did the Dems sweep the Presidency and Congress, but records were set: greatest PV% for a Presidential candidate of all time (albeit by a small margin); VT voting Dem for the first time in its history and sending a Dem to the US Senate (Patrick Leahy) for the first time in its history.

This was also the beginning of the Dems' lock on the Black vote at the Presidential level: in 1960, Atlanta's Black areas had voted for Nixon.

In 1992, Clinton's PV% was down from Dukakis' 1988 PV% and the Dems actually lost seats in the House.

[MarkD]

1964. Not only did the Dems sweep the Presidency and Congress, but records were set: greatest PV% for a Presidential candidate of all time (albeit by a small margin); VT voting Dem for the first time in its history and sending a Dem to the US Senate (Patrick Leahy) for the first time in its history.

This was also the beginning of the Dems' lock on the Black vote at the Presidential level: in 1960, Atlanta's Black areas had voted for Nixon.

In 1992, Clinton's PV% was down from Dukakis' 1988 PV% and the Dems actually lost seats in the House.

(Psst, ... Leahy's first election to the Senate was 1974, not 1964. Just thought I'd let you know.)

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

1964 was so good of an election for the Democrats, that they lost Georgia for the first time ever, and three other states for the first time in nearly a century, losing every single county in one of them!

[Metalhead123]

I'd say the elections in 1932, 1934, and 1936 were the best elections for democrats because they were able to pick up a lot of seats in three consecutive elections.

[King Lear]

1932 by far, anyone that says otherwise doesn’t know American History. As I’m sure most here understand, 1932 started the New Deal era which would see the Democratic Party create the Social Saftey net, end the Great Depression, and save the world from Fascism, it also would see Democrats hold the White House for 20 years straight (1933-1953), and 32 out of the next 48 years. 1964 may have been a big landslide, but it also was the first election where Democrats lost the Deep South (LA, MS, AL, GA, and SC) and had to face a Far-Right Conservative Republican (Barry Goldwater), this would foreshadow the 1980 realignment where Ronald Reagan won his first Landslide largely on the back of winning formerly Democratic states throughout the south, which soon would become the base region of the Republican Party (it still is today for those who are wondering). 2008 on the other hand probably seemed like a Democratic realignment when it happened in real time, However, as we all know to well, the election of Barack Obama produced a massive backlash from White Conservatives that lead to Democrats losing the House in 2010, the Senate In 2014, and the election of Donald Trump in 2016. And, to make matters worse, Democrats didn’t pass any major Liberal legislation when they had full control of the federal government from 2009-2011 to compensate for these devastating loses (I don’t consider the ACA Liberal legislation because it was largely based on the healthcare plan the Conservative heritage foundation created as an alternative to Hillarycare in the 1990s). Finally, we really don’t know yet which way the country is heading politically, if the results of 2010, 2014, and 2016 are any indication then it looks like the election of Barack Obama has prolonged any potential Democratic realignment for at least another 20 to 30 years, due to the massive increase in Racial, Religious, and Age-based Polarization that has ensued since 2008 (The Republicans have become heavily reliant on Old, White, and Christian voters, while Democrats have become heavily reliant on Young, Nonwhite, and Nonchristian voters), which has caused the Rust Belt to trend Republican at the speed of light, while the Sun Belt has trended Democratic at a snails pace. However, theirs still the possibility that some Black Swan event could happen in the next couple years that could bring on a Democratic realignment much faster the expected.

[SingingAnalyst]

1964. Not only did the Dems sweep the Presidency and Congress, but records were set: greatest PV% for a Presidential candidate of all time (albeit by a small margin); VT voting Dem for the first time in its history and sending a Dem to the US Senate (Patrick Leahy) for the first time in its history.

This was also the beginning of the Dems' lock on the Black vote at the Presidential level: in 1960, Atlanta's Black areas had voted for Nixon.

In 1992, Clinton's PV% was down from Dukakis' 1988 PV% and the Dems actually lost seats in the House.

(Psst, ... Leahy's first election to the Senate was 1974, not 1964. Just thought I'd let you know.)

Noted, thanks. I suppose 1932 in that case.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

1932, the 20s were disastrous for the party and if I lived back then, I'd probably think that they were on their last legs.  But then they made a quick turnaround and controlled the government for years.

[OSR stands with Israel]

1932, the 20s were disastrous for the party and if I lived back then, I'd probably think that they were on their last legs.  But then they made a quick turnaround and controlled the government for years.

The GOP total control(which meant large majorities in the house, filibuster-proof Senate majorities,and large majorities at the state level) for 10 years and unlike 1896-1910 the last time the GOP had total control for an extended period they weren't as divided  with the business-friendly conservative wing and progressive wing in the 1920s as they were from 1896-1910(by the 1920s the progressive wing had lost most of its influence in the GOP). So the period the Dems were out was not quick as the Conservative Wing of the GOP could do what ever they wanted for those 10 years and had basically no opposition in congress during those years.

[darklordoftech]

1932. The American School of economics was soundly rejected to the point that the GOP promptly abandoned it, the Democratic Party was transfomed from the party of "Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion" to "the party that has an answer to the Great Depression." New Deal politics were given a mandate and the GOP coalition that had been around since the Civil War was replaced by the New Deal coalition.

[Statilius the Epicurean]

1936.

[Mr.Phips]

Without question 1932.

[SingingAnalyst]

1932. The American School of economics was soundly rejected to the point that the GOP promptly abandoned it, the Democratic Party was transfomed from the party of "Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion" to "the party that has an answer to the Great Depression." New Deal politics were given a mandate and the GOP coalition that had been around since the Civil War was replaced by the New Deal coalition.

Good point; (I changed my vote) I think by 1940 the GOP basically embraced the New Deal (and even in 1936 they didn't support its repeal). Roosevelt's landslides were truly national, both in 1932 and 1936. It was at this time that northern Blacks began voting Democrat: according to Henry Fairlie (1924-1990) Cleveland's Black areas went from 30% and 24% Dem in 1928 and 1932, to 49% Dem in 1936.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Of these, 1932, since it was the beginning of the successful smear campaign that they continue to use successfully against Republicans (1964 a close second, for similar reasons).  Of all time, probably 1936; they carried all but two states and held the GOP to single digits in the EC.

[Oldiesfreak1854]

1932. The American School of economics was soundly rejected to the point that the GOP promptly abandoned it

A large number of conservative Republicans hung on tightly to laissez faire economics well after the Depression, and still do to this day.

[Unconditional Surrender Truman]

1932. The American School of economics was soundly rejected to the point that the GOP promptly abandoned it

A large number of conservative Republicans hung on tightly to laissez faire economics well after the Depression, and still do to this day.

. . . that's not what the American School is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_School_(economics)

[darklordoftech]

1932. The American School of economics was soundly rejected to the point that the GOP promptly abandoned it

A large number of conservative Republicans hung on tightly to laissez faire economics well after the Depression, and still do to this day.

. . . that's not what the American School is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_School_(economics)

I was referring to tariffs, which were the only remnant of the American School to survive WWI.

[Mr. Smith]

1932, with 1828 being in 2nd

[TDAS04]

1932, but 1948 was pretty good insofar as it was so unexpected.