1932: George Norris (R) vs. John Nance Garner (D)

[Robespierre's Jaw]

NOTE: I know a scenario involving progressive Senator George Norris of Nebraska and the conservative Speaker of the House John Nance Garner of Texas in 1932 would be highly unlikely, but I just thought I'd see how you'd think such an election would turn play out.

How would the 1932 Presidential Election turn out if these were the tickets?

Republican

Senator George Norris of Nebraska
Senator John J. Blaine of Wisconsin

Democratic

Speaker John Nance Garner of Texas
Governor Albert Ritchie of Maryland

Discuss with maps.

[CPT MikeyMike]

Very interesting match-up Connor.

Nevertheless ANY Democrat wins in 1932. The Depression was (unfairly) blamed on the Republicans and any Republican running that year was almost sure to lose. Norris may do better in some progressive states but still loses by a wide margin. Plus Norris' age (71 years old) doesn't help him either.

I think I may be too generous to Norris but what the heck...

Garner: 380
Norris: 151

[PBrunsel]

This race is one I have pondered myself, and I believe that Senator Norris could have done far better than any Republican that year, especially the unpopular incumbent. Speaker Garner was, as FDR once said, "A cranky, protestant dry Southern mule," and I can assure you that is how Irish Catholic voters would have seen him. On the other hand, Norris was very popular amongst Catholics, "wets" and reformers, which would make him a strong candidate in the East and the Midwest, but not at all in the Mountain West and the South. I see the man who took down Foul Mouth Joe Cannon as a strong man for the White House, but not enough of one to win it for the party blamed for the greatest economic crisis to date.

John Garner/Albert Ritchie (D): 321 EV
George Norris/John Blaine (R): 210 EV

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Garner: 282 EV
Norris: 249 EV