Why did Thurmond do so poorly in Georgia in 1948?

[Stranger in a strange land]

He won the rest of the Deep South by wide margins, yet barely broke 20% in Georgia. Was Truman especially popular there for some reason? Were Blacks allowed to vote in Georgia by that point? The latter seems unlikely because their congressional delegation almost unanimously opposed the Civil Rights Act. Was it due to ballot-stuffing and/or machine politics? Most Southern Elections before the 1960s probably wouldn't be considered free or fair today because of various types of shenanigans and eligibility requirements that most Blacks and even many Whites couldn't meet. Was it some other factor?

[Хahar 🤔]

I believe the Georgia machine was behind Truman.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

I believe the Georgia machine was behind Truman.

Yup.  Russell supported Truman that year; had he supported Thurmond, Strom would've won.

[Hash]

The Party supported Truman. I think the Party remained behind the national Party for quite some time.

[Stranger in a strange land]

The Party supported Truman. I think the Party remained behind the national Party for quite some time.

Well they voted for Goldwater in 64 and Wallace in 68, so the 1948 result jumped out as odd to me.

[King]

The Party supported Truman. I think the Party remained behind the national Party for quite some time.

Well they voted for Goldwater in 64 and Wallace in 68, so the 1948 result jumped out as odd to me.

64 and 68 were post-Civil Rights act.  The machine was dead and the Republican conversion began.  Unfortunately, the Jimmy Carter anomaly doesn't make this clear on paper.

[Stranger in a strange land]

The Party supported Truman. I think the Party remained behind the national Party for quite some time.

Well they voted for Goldwater in 64 and Wallace in 68, so the 1948 result jumped out as odd to me.

64 and 68 were post-Civil Rights act.  The machine was dead and the Republican conversion began.  Unfortunately, the Jimmy Carter anomaly doesn't make this clear on paper.

Clinton won it in 1992, and only lost it by 1.2% in 1996. Georgia didn't flip at the state and local level until the early 2000s, well after most of the rest of the South.

[minionofmidas]

The Party supported Truman. I think the Party remained behind the national Party for quite some time.

Well they voted for Goldwater in 64 and Wallace in 68, so the 1948 result jumped out as odd to me.

But Kennedy also had machine support in Georgia in 1960, where there actually was a primary challenge by an unpledged slate just as in Alabama, but fell flat after Governor Vandiver (a Conservative) personally headed the Kennedy slate IIRC.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Thurmond won severeal southern states so eaisly because in most of them he was the only on the ballot, as official Democratic nominee

Yes, his popular vote was not impressive, but turnout was low in the south in general at this time, as nearly everyone votes for official (in this case) Democratic nominee

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Thurmond won severeal southern states so eaisly because in most of them he was the only on the ballot, as official Democratic nominee

He was only the official nominee, I believe, in South Carolina, Alabama, and Mississippi; Truman was kept off the ballot entirely in Alabama.  In every other Southern state, he had to compete with Truman, which is why he only received 49% of the vote in Louisiana, and under 20% in every other Southern state.

[Hash]

Atlas only has Thurmond on the Democratic ballot line in MS and AL. In SC, LA he was on the States' Rights line.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Atlas only has Thurmond on the Democratic ballot line in MS and AL. In SC, LA he was on the States' Rights line.

Thanks for the correction.

[12th Doctor]

The Party supported Truman. I think the Party remained behind the national Party for quite some time.

Well they voted for Goldwater in 64 and Wallace in 68, so the 1948 result jumped out as odd to me.

64 and 68 were post-Civil Rights act.  The machine was dead and the Republican conversion began.  Unfortunately, the Jimmy Carter anomaly doesn't make this clear on paper.

Or you could explain it as the fact that segregation was no longer a viable political force, which has the added virtue of being true.

[Antonio the Sixth]

The Party supported Truman. I think the Party remained behind the national Party for quite some time.

Well they voted for Goldwater in 64 and Wallace in 68, so the 1948 result jumped out as odd to me.

64 and 68 were post-Civil Rights act.  The machine was dead and the Republican conversion began.  Unfortunately, the Jimmy Carter anomaly doesn't make this clear on paper.

Or you could explain it as the fact that segregation was no longer a viable political force, which has the added virtue of being true.

You're right, but 20 years later Wallace won Georgia, as well as Arkansas, both states lost by Thurmond.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Atlas only has Thurmond on the Democratic ballot line in MS and AL. In SC, LA he was on the States' Rights line.

Thanks for the correction.

Was Truman on the SC ballot? I know he was not in AL at all and in Louisiana he was put only after Allen Elleeder direct intervention.

Well, who would dixiecrats vote instead? Dewey? Wallace? That's why Thurmond does so well.

[Hash]

Atlas only has Thurmond on the Democratic ballot line in MS and AL. In SC, LA he was on the States' Rights line.

Thanks for the correction.

Was Truman on the SC ballot?

Yes, he was, as a Democrat - Thurmond was on States' Rights line. Alabama was the only state where he wasn't on the ballot.

[Хahar 🤔]

Incidentally, Dewey performed amazingly well in Alabama.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Incidentally, Dewey performed amazingly well in Alabama.

Not really.  He only got 19%; he got 18% in 1944.

[Хahar 🤔]

Incidentally, Dewey performed amazingly well in Alabama.

Not really.  He only got 19%; he got 18% in 1944.

I meant that in comparison to neighboring states. Hoover very nearly won Alabama, for that matter.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Incidentally, Dewey performed amazingly well in Alabama.

Not really.  He only got 19%; he got 18% in 1944.

I meant that in comparison to neighboring states. Hoover very nearly won Alabama, for that matter.

He actually did poorly; only in MS did he get under 17% of the vote, and did better in FL and TN, while basically tying in GA.

[Хahar 🤔]

Incidentally, Dewey performed amazingly well in Alabama.

Not really.  He only got 19%; he got 18% in 1944.

I meant that in comparison to neighboring states. Hoover very nearly won Alabama, for that matter.

He actually did poorly; only in MS did he get under 17% of the vote, and did better in FL and TN, while basically tying in GA.

Alabama can only really be compared to Mississippi and South Carolina.