States with 90+% for one candidate?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:14:36 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Presidential Election Trends (Moderator: 15 Down, 35 To Go)
  States with 90+% for one candidate?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Like the early part of the 19th Century. Will we ever see states giving 90+% to one candidate?
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
#3
Maybe
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 57

Author Topic: States with 90+% for one candidate?  (Read 9217 times)
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 04, 2004, 01:31:25 AM »

its your choose... Wink


Edit : I meant to say the early part of the 20th Century!
DOH!
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 04, 2004, 01:48:29 AM »

Probably one day
Logged
Gabu
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,388
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -4.32, S: -6.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 04, 2004, 01:55:16 AM »

Yes, but it would have to be an extremely good politician like Reagan or FDR (and even they didn't achieve that, to my recollection) and the country would have to be less polarized on isses.  When half of the country disagrees with the other half, 90% voting in one direction in any large area is unlikely.
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 04, 2004, 01:56:26 AM »

Yes, but it would have to be an extremely good politician like Reagan or FDR (and even they didn't achieve that, to my recollection) and the country would have to be less polarized on isses.  When half of the country disagrees with the other half, 90% voting in one direction in any large area is unlikely.


The south was pretty polarized from the north from 1865-1960.
Logged
Gabu
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,388
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -4.32, S: -6.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 04, 2004, 01:58:13 AM »

Yes, but it would have to be an extremely good politician like Reagan or FDR (and even they didn't achieve that, to my recollection) and the country would have to be less polarized on isses.  When half of the country disagrees with the other half, 90% voting in one direction in any large area is unlikely.


The south was pretty polarized from the north from 1865-1960.

Yes, but that's one region disagreeing with the other.  Currently the disagreement is more widespread and is not localized as one region against another, although certain regions are more tilted to one end than others.
Logged
Nym90
nym90
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,260
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -2.96

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 04, 2004, 07:50:20 AM »

Yes, but it would have to be an extremely good politician like Reagan or FDR (and even they didn't achieve that, to my recollection) and the country would have to be less polarized on isses.  When half of the country disagrees with the other half, 90% voting in one direction in any large area is unlikely.

FDR got over 90% in some Southern states.
Logged
Donovan
Rookie
**
Posts: 235


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 05, 2004, 03:17:29 AM »

If Washington DC becomes a State the Democrats will get 90% of the vote in that state.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 05, 2004, 11:56:18 AM »

Washington DC will not become a state
Logged
minionofmidas
Lewis Trondheim
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,207
India


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 05, 2004, 12:27:44 PM »

A dem polling 53%+ nationally would likely get 90% in DC.
Otherwise, not in the foreseeable future.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 05, 2004, 12:30:05 PM »

DC is not a state
Logged
Redefeatbush04
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,504


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 09, 2004, 02:08:05 PM »

It would have to be someone moderate, like McCain. Or perhaps someone who is strong on defense, an environmentalist, fairly liberal on social issues....yet religious, supports tax cuts, and has no congressional record to defend.....a governor would be best.
Logged
7,052,770
Harry
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,217
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 09, 2004, 02:15:42 PM »

maybe a reknowned governor of a state like MA or UT...
Logged
Schmitz in 1972
Liberty
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,317
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 09, 2004, 05:31:31 PM »

It didn't matter if it was FDR in 1936 or Cox in 1920, South Carolina was always giving the Democrat about 95% of its vote. I don't think a Republican party even existed in the state until the 1950s. For all the talk of polarization that's going around, I don't see a state ever being as one sided as  South Carolina was for all those years.
Logged
Redefeatbush04
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,504


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 09, 2004, 09:58:58 PM »

If McCain ran for president ..... he would probablly win all but Rhode Island and D.C, I'd be willing to bet Utah is somewhere around 85%. That's close enough.
Logged
Redefeatbush04
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,504


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 09, 2004, 10:00:55 PM »

South Carolina is still pretty one sided. The reason it is now running around 60% is because blacks can, and do, vote.
Logged
??????????
StatesRights
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,126
Political Matrix
E: 7.61, S: 0.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 10, 2004, 12:12:26 AM »

South Carolina is still pretty one sided. The reason it is now running around 60% is because blacks can, and do, vote.


Very true. But beware because I believe National Democrats should start worrying. Blacks are starting to swing Republican here in the south. I believe Bush will improve his %'s among black southerners. As black southerners realize their conservative social views fit better w/Republicans then I believe their vote will follow.

And welcome to the forum ReDefeat. Nice to see you finally step out of the prediction section and into the real world. Smiley
Logged
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,239


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 10, 2004, 12:15:29 AM »

I am more sure Bush will improve with black voters than I am sure he will win the election. Then again, hard not to improve after 2000.

A governor of Kansas or Utah or something could get up to 75% maybe, but not 90.
Logged
Redefeatbush04
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,504


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: October 11, 2004, 07:40:41 PM »
« Edited: March 21, 2005, 10:40:48 PM by Redefeatbush04 »

thanks statesrights
Logged
DC Al Fine
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,085
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: January 18, 2013, 09:24:13 AM »

If Washington DC becomes a State the Democrats will get 90% of the vote in that state.
Logged
soniquemd21921
Rookie
**
Posts: 137
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: January 18, 2013, 11:00:17 AM »

It didn't matter if it was FDR in 1936 or Cox in 1920, South Carolina was always giving the Democrat about 95% of its vote. I don't think a Republican party even existed in the state until the 1950s. For all the talk of polarization that's going around, I don't see a state ever being as one sided as  South Carolina was for all those years.

Don't forget Mississippi. Between 1896 and 1948, the GOP broke 10 percent in Mississippi only twice: in 1920 (14 percent) and 1928 (18 percent).

Even Vermont was never as one-sided as Mississippi and South Carolina when it was Republican. The highest percentage any GOP presidential candidate got in VT was when McKinley got 80% in 1896, followed by Coolidge's 78% in 1924.


Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.048 seconds with 14 queries.