Why did Thurmond do so poorly in Georgia in 1948? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 10, 2024, 07:39:27 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  U.S. Presidential Election Results (Moderator: Dereich)
  Why did Thurmond do so poorly in Georgia in 1948? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why did Thurmond do so poorly in Georgia in 1948?  (Read 3567 times)
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,434
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
« on: July 28, 2009, 07:33:03 AM »

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.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
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 0.017 seconds with 11 queries.