Talk Elections

Unlikely and unrealistic scenario. In 1888, Frederick Douglass became the first African-American to speak before a major party convention. As well, one delegate cast a vote for him. Let's say, for some reason or another, he wins and becomes a presidential candidate. How's it go? (we're looking specifically for maps here, folks!)

We would have a new civil war if that happened.

Cleveland wins everything except maybe the deepest Republican states (Vermont, Maine, Michigan?)

I like both of them, but I lean Cleveland.

Cleveland would probably win, in that time period I could not see a black man winning.

How do you think the West would go, which had been traditionally Republican by then, would go?

377-24
()

Given the real life results for Grover Cleveland, even in New England and the Plains states, I fail to see how Douglass wins any state besides Vermont.

Really.

Here's my map:

()

370-31

Being REALLY generous to Douglass here.  After all, we're talking about a black man as a Presidential candidate.  IN 1888.

Basically 1936. Dem wins everything except VT and ME.

I'd vote for Douglass enthusiastically.

()
361-40

Massachusetts?

Seriously?

Yes - there's a long history of support for racial equality there.

Douglas/Cleveland.

All my admiration for Douglass aside, I'd have to vote for Cleveland. He's one of my favorite, most underrated Presidents.

Cleveland would win in a landslide, naturally. Just the times. A few northern states might go for Douglass, but that's not a sure thing. Very much like 1928, the country wouldn't be ready yet.

As strongly as I'd have supported Douglass, he would be destroyed.

Douglass wouldn't even win Vermont...

401 - 0

Who are we kidding here?

I'd be fine with either, though I'd lean towards Douglass. Cleveland would win easily, of course.

Yes, and they would vote for a black man?  In 1888?

This is a state that was full of people who were barely okay with competing with Irish immigration, I doubt they would choose a black Republican over a reform minded white Democrat who ran on a platform many describe as it could've been written by the Republican Convention.

Supporting voting rights for a group doesn't mean one thinks about voting one for president.

Douglass/Cleveland, of course.  As for a map:

()
Grover Cleveland (D)- 224
Frederick Douglass (R)- 177

West Virginia?  It didn't even vote for Benjamin Harrison IRL.  Why would it have supported Douglass?

Anyway, Douglass/Cleveland.

()

Cleveland:  370
Douglass:  31

Unfortunately, racial equality was quite a radical notion in 1888.  Douglass would have made a great President.

I'm imagining the coded racism in today's political rhetoric, and remembering the very racist things I've read politicians say in the mid 19th c, specifically a shocking Lincoln excerpt, and I'm surprised anybody thinks Douglass would have won any state in 1888.

Grover Cleveland

Talk about a conspiracy theory!
West Virginia split off from Virginia during the Civil War out of loyalty to the Union, so I would think they would be more friendly to a black presidential candidate.

I'm not talking about a conspiracy theory?

()

That is the 2004 to 2008 swing map. West Virginia would be one of five states where Obama actually did worse than Kerry, despite every non-racial factor suggesting a far better performance.

Not true.  Much of SW Virginia voted for Doug Wilder for governor in 1989 as well.

Uh dude, I'm not saying I agree with Oldiesfreak's map (in fact I think it's ridiculous) but this isn't good logic.  You're comparing elections that are 120 years apart.

But oh god, oh god, what he said is way stupider.

Why do you bring up competition with immigrants? 
I don't any longer think MA would have voted for Douglass in 88 (I was being super generous like with your map), but it'd give him 3rd or 4th highest among all states. 

Admittedly, it wasn't a perfect analogy comparing the plight of immigrant laborers with former black slaves, but I belive it is relevant in establishing an idea of what society was like back then.  I do realize that in states like MA this would be kind of inaccurate, given that the nativists tended to be Republicans out of natural fact of Democrats being overwhelmingly white immigrant class (who were more likely to be anti-black (at least up North) due to nature of economically competing with black laborers) so I do admit that my premise was somewhat flawed.  Really though, I figure that the base Democratic vote in Mass plus Cleveland "mugwumps" plus the more racialist Republicans would deny Douglass the state.  I figured that only extremely hackish Republican states (like in the Plains) would hold for Douglass, plus Vermont, with votes being driven down by larger than average third party participation.