Separately elected Vice President

[Antonio the Sixth]

1932 : Garner (by a smaller margin than Roosevelt)
1936 : Garner (smaller margin)
1940 : Wallace (smaller margin)
1944 : Truman (similar margin)
1948 : Warren
1952 : Nixon (smaller margin)
1956 : Nixon (smaller margin)
1960 : Johnson (higher margin)
1964 : Humphrey (smaller margin)
1968 : Muskie
1972 : Agnew (smaller margin)
1976 : Mondale (smaller margin -and the election map would be extremely different than for Presidential election)
1980 : Bush (smaller margin)
1984 : Bush (higher margin)
1988 : Bentsen
1992 : Gore (higher margin)
1996 : Gore (similar margin)
2000 : Lieberman
2004 : Edwards
2008 : Biden (higher margin)

I'll do maps later if I have the time.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Here is for 1932 :

Garner : 53%
Curtis : 44%

Garner does better in the South and worse everywhaere else.

[Antonio the Sixth]

1948 :

Warren : 49%
Barkley : 46%
Thurmond : 2%

[Antonio the Sixth]

1952 :

Nixon : 52%
Sparkman : 46%

Kal : sorry, I was just inattentive.

[Antonio the Sixth]

1960 :

Johnson : 53%
Lodge : 47%

I realized just after finishing the map that it looked incredibly like the 1976 one, though it was totally causal...

[Antonio the Sixth]

1964 :

Humphrey : 56%
Miller : 43%

[Antonio the Sixth]

1968 :

Muskie : 46%
Agnew : 42%
LeMay : 11%

There's no electoral majority, so the vote goes to the Senate were Muskie wins.

[Antonio the Sixth]

1976 :

Mondale : 50%
Dole : 49%

Extremely close election, with a totally different map than the Presidential one.

[Antonio the Sixth]

1988 :

Bentsen : 54%
Quayle : 45%

[Antonio the Sixth]

1988 :

Bentsen : 54%
Quayle : 45%

Bentsen would carry Texas against Quayle.

Regarding 1976 map, Mondale would defeat Dole by even bigger margin then Carter beat Ford. Dole campaigning in 1976 was really horrible.

You probably know that better than me. I hesitated about Texas, so yes, it could make sense since we all know which sort of campaigner Quayle was.
As for 1976, I don't know exactly about the campaign, but I thought Mondale wouldn't have been a great campaigner. Plus, Dole's conservatism could have mobilizer better the emerging "conservative grassroots".

1948 :

Warren : 49%
Barkley : 46%
Thurmond : 2%

Thurmond was a Dixiecrat nominee for President. Governor Fielding Wright of Mississippi was nominated for veep.

I think Barkley will win all the states Truman won minus CA (since Warren was from there). Public dissatisfaction over the GOP Congress led to Dewey's loss despite the fact that he was more moderate and not associated with Congressional Republicans--why wouldn't it lead to Warren's loss? Was Warren a phenomenal campaigner, because I've never heard that?

Truman's victory over Dewey was considered the upset of the century, and everybody was sure that republicans were going to take back the White House. Since Barkley hasn't Truman's charisma and that Warren was quite popular at the time, I'd say Warren would win easily.

[Antonio the Sixth]

As for 1976, I don't know exactly about the campaign, but I thought Mondale wouldn't have been a great campaigner. Plus, Dole's conservatism could have mobilizer better the emerging "conservative grassroots".

In 1976 Dole was a very bad vice presidential candidate. See Mondale-Dole debate for example.

I'm forced to believe you since my knowledges on this domain are pretty limited.