Georgia 48' and SC 68'
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 09:23:31 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)
  Georgia 48' and SC 68'
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Georgia 48' and SC 68'  (Read 5482 times)
dunn
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,053


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: March 09, 2004, 06:23:22 AM »

why Geogia - unlike rest of the deep - didn't vot for Thrumond, it was 60% Truman. And why SC of all did not vote Wallace in 68'
Logged
zachman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,096


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2004, 03:41:00 PM »

Georgia 48' probably had something to do with old fashioned media coverage. Back in that time and before, the local media was what told people whom the candidates were. Maybe it was because they didn't consider Thurmond to be the true democrat.

As for 68' South Carolina had probably moved our of the deep south. Maybe Humphrey campaigned there.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,779


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2004, 04:07:08 PM »

Nixon only won SC by 6%, 38-32, so it was fairly narrow. Similar to Wallace's margin of victory in Arkansas, for example. But it seems SC was closer to TN and other Upper South states in that election.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2004, 04:13:06 PM »

Georgia's always been more loyal than AL and MS... And SC is about 30% Piedmont
Logged
ncjake
Rookie
**
Posts: 125


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: March 09, 2004, 05:39:19 PM »

South Carolina used to be the model for what southern democrats were. Thats why the primary there was so important. It actually gave the Democrats an idea of who could win in the region. Now South Carolina is one of the most Republican of the southern states. It no longer represents southern democrats, I believe that title has moved to Louisiana. Its like the other deep south states. The only people there that vote Democrat are African Americans and your usual assortment of teachers, librarians, journalists, and social workers.
Logged
WalterMitty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,572


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: March 09, 2004, 09:37:46 PM »

strom thurmond endorsed nixon in 68.  that explains why sc went to nixon.
Logged
dunn
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,053


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: March 10, 2004, 04:32:02 AM »

strom thurmond endorsed nixon in 68.  that explains why sc went to nixon.
That is an explanation.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,713
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: March 10, 2004, 08:35:53 AM »

South Carolina used to be the model for what southern democrats were. Thats why the primary there was so important. It actually gave the Democrats an idea of who could win in the region. Now South Carolina is one of the most Republican of the southern states. It no longer represents southern democrats, I believe that title has moved to Louisiana. Its like the other deep south states. The only people there that vote Democrat are African Americans and your usual assortment of teachers, librarians, journalists, and social workers.

Not true this year... trust me on this, Bush's numbers will go down in SC... and if he takes a strong free trade position he could lose it.
Not saying he will, just that he might.
Logged
zachman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,096


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: March 10, 2004, 06:16:54 PM »

I'd say Mississippi and Alabama have the most Southern voting record, and will continue to. Neither went for Clinton ever, and the two have voted identically except for 1840.
Logged
dunn
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,053


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: March 10, 2004, 06:20:41 PM »

I'd say Mississippi and Alabama have the most Southern voting record, and will continue to. Neither went for Clinton ever, and the two have voted identically except for 1840.

not in 1868....
geuss why?
Logged
zachman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,096


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: March 10, 2004, 06:23:52 PM »

Mississippi wasn't readmitted. That doesn't really count though, the two states will always vote identically.
Logged
dunn
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,053


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: March 10, 2004, 06:24:56 PM »

Mississippi wasn't readmitted. That doesn't really count though, the two states will always vote identically.

true, I was checking on you
Logged
7,052,770
Harry
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,423
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: March 10, 2004, 10:15:56 PM »

I'd say Mississippi and Alabama have the most Southern voting record, and will continue to. Neither went for Clinton ever, and the two have voted identically except for 1840.

Yeah. . . . . ! . . . Roll Eyes . . Wink
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
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 0.036 seconds with 11 queries.