The One-Term Caucus? Top House Targets in 2016

Roll Call Politics ^ | November 18, 2014 | Emily Cahn

[AuH2ORepublican]

Warren County, MS is like half black, and I think that more important than the increase in the black population since 2004 has been the much higher turnout among blacks in MS (and in most of the country, FWIW).

Even if Haywood was black-majority back in the early 1960s (which I’m not sure that it was), blacks cast votes at a much lower percentage than did whites prior to the Voting Rights Act.

[campaignPete R-CT]

yes, Romney-Ryan got no response in New England ... I cannot fully understand it.

-no Irish Catholic interest in Ryan.
-Romney got crushed by McCain in CT 2008 primary
-Romney had no campaign in New England outside of NH, due to conceding to 00. Not sure if he did anything in ME-2.

-New England is xenophobic ... southerners do poorly here. Maybe the Mormonism was a similar turnoff amongst the Congregationalists, etc.

Tolland & Litchfield Counties shifted: stronger for Romney than for McCain. That could simply be the white rural reaction to Obama and have nothing to do with their border on Mass.

[Impy]

It was a great question, I was surprised. I didn't know Ford did so well in Southern cities.

The only county Ford did better in MS was next door Rankin.

Looks like Hinds voted for Ike in 52, Stevenson in 56 thanks to to the split with dixiecrat electors taking votes from Ike. Nixon, Goldwater, Wallace in 68, Ford, Reagan twice, Bush twice, not till 1996 did it go (regular) rat for the first time since 1944. And now thanks to hyper Black turnout not even 30% GOP. Pretty much the entire state swung to Obama in 2012.

Paul Ryan, upon reflection, not a great VP choice. Didn't do any harm but, meh.

[Impy]

not till 1996 did it go (regular) rat for the first time since 1944

Rat majority for the first time since 1944, rather. Stevenson won by less than 100 votes, 35%, near 3 way tie in 1956.

[AuH2ORepublican]

My favorite part of that question is that the two counties in question could not be more different demographically.

Similarly, I like to ask “strange bedfellows” questions about state votes in presidential elections. For example:

What is the only state to have voted the same as New York in every presidential election from 1972 onwards?

What two states voted for Humphrey in 1968 and Carter in 1976 but for Reagan in 1980 and Bush in 1988?

What two states voted for Alfred Smith in 1928 and Jimmy Carter in 1980?

What three states voted for Charles Evans Hughes in 1916 and George W. Bush in 2000?

[fieldmarshaldj]

"What is the only state to have voted the same as New York in every presidential election from 1972 onwards?"

Wisconsin.

"What two states voted for Humphrey in 1968 and Carter in 1976 but for Reagan in 1980 and Bush in 1988?"

Pennsylvania & Texas.

"What two states voted for Alfred Smith in 1928 and Jimmy Carter in 1980?"

Georgia & Rhode Island.

"What three states voted for Charles Evans Hughes in 1916 and George W. Bush in 2000?"

Indiana, South Dakota & West Virginia.

[AuH2ORepublican]

Correct on all counts. Pretty strange bedfellows, huh?

[fieldmarshaldj]

I’d be curious to see a county-by-county map breakdown for the 1928 results (at least in the South) to see how that compared to today. Unfortunately, a lot of it was simply an anti-Catholic backlash (just as MA & RI voted opposite their usual GOP leanings to support a Catholic, though as with most of the South, didn’t translate downballot as the GOP still prevailed in those two, but Dem in the South, except KY).

That had to have also been embarrassing for Vice-President Tom Marshall not to have carried Indiana for the Dem ticket in 1916. If Hughes had only done better just in California, it would’ve been enough to put him over the top (even if he failed to get a majority of the vote, like Benjamin Harrison in 1888). The country would’ve been spared the embarrassment of Wilson’s 2nd term (or rather, that of his 2nd wife’s term).

Then again, had Hughes won, we’d have not had Harding & Coolidge as President — although Hughes’s VP, Charles Fairbanks, making a return to that office, died in 1918, so it would be pure speculation as to whom Hughes would’ve chose as his 1920 running mate. Might very well have been Coolidge or (more troublesome), the execrable left-wing Hiram Johnson of CA.

[AuH2ORepublican]

Given how Hiram Johnson backstabbed Hughes in 1916 (Johnson’s lack of support cost Hughes CA, and thus the presidency), I don’t think that Hughes would even consider picking Johnson for VP in his second term. Coolidge would have been the obvious choice after breaking the police strike in 1919.

[fieldmarshaldj]

In which case, Johnson probably would’ve gone for the Presidency in 1924. Given that Hughes’s election in ‘16 would’ve changed how things unfolded from that point on (including quite possibly staying out of WW1), there’s no telling if Coolidge would’ve had to face a police strike. I was speculating that a Midwesterner or Westerner would’ve been chosen for VP - perhaps it would’ve been Sen. Harding, who like Fairbanks would’ve also died in office and would’ve left ‘24 a wide-open race.

[AuH2ORepublican]

Regarding your quest for a county-by-county breakdown of the 1928 presidential elections, in Dave Leip’s U.S. Election Atlas you can go to 1928 and click on most states (including FL, SC, NC, KY, MS, LA and OK) and get a clickable county map for such election.

In the case of states whose 1928 page does not include the county map (including VA, TN, GA, AL, AR and TX), you can click on “Compare State Data by Year (Table)” and you’ll get a chart with the state’s presidential results from 2012 down to 1856 or so, and in the case of elections as early as 1928 (and in many cases even older elections) there will be a small county map on the left-hand corner with Republican counties in blue and Democrat counties in red (with counties carried with over 50%, over 60%, over 70%, etc. being progressively darker). As for the actual voting results for each county, you can go to an election in which the state page includes a county map (such as 1952, or one of the recent ones) and then click on the county for which you want to see the 1928 results, and then click on “Compare County Data by Year (Table),” where you’ll see the county’s presidential results for every election for which Leip has county results (which includes 1928 for every county then in existence).

BTW, I’m a member of Leip’s website, and it’s possible that some of the maps and data that I told you about are not available to users of the free site; membership is $28 a year, and I’ve found it to be worthwhile, but if you can access the 1928 county data without a membership then you can save the $28.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Yeah, other than statewide results, you can’t access any county maps prior to 1960 without a subscription.

[campaignPete R-CT]

I got my Elise Stefanik NY21 Christmas Card except it isn’t a Christmas Card. Just a card that said, “we made history” ... “we couldn’t have done it without you.”

not even Happy Holidays.

I am disappearing now into the abyss of rank n file nobody that I’ve been all along ... except I am going willingly.

[Impy]

Here are some similar bedfellows. Perhaps you already know the answer.

Arthur County NE and Loving County TX were the only 2 counties where this happened in a certain election.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Related to Presidential ? I’m stumped. I know Loving went for Wallace in ‘68 and Perot in ‘92. Fewest votes for a Dem nominee in any county in recent elections ?

[Impy]

Well Arthur and Loving were indeed the counties that gave Clinton the smallest actual number of votes both times, and Arthur was his worst by % both times.

That’s not quite what I was driving at, but it’s relevant. They did something no other counties did in the year in question.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Counties like those have little use for corrupt Stalinists far, far away.

[AuH2ORepublican]

Those were the only two counties in which Clinton placed third in 1996 (both were carried by Dole with Perot in second place).

[fieldmarshaldj]

Interesting. Didn’t know that.

[Impy]

You got it.

In tiny Loving Perot edged Clinton by 1 vote.

In Arthur Clinton got under 10%.

Interestingly, neither was in Perot’s top 5 counties by % of the vote.