Why Did Eisenhower Carry LA in 1956?

[Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey]

Any ideas? Why did Eisenhower carry that solidly Democratic state for the first time since Reconstruction?

[Bo]

LA was close in 1952, and thus when the country swung to Ike, LA swung with it. Keep in mind that without an option for "Upledged", Ike would have won LA by a narrow 53-47 margin, rather than the 53-40-7 margin he won in RL. As for why LA was close initially (in 1952), I'd guess that Stevenson was too much of a Northern liberal for many Louisana voters and also many normally Democratic voters admired Ike for his war hero status and thus voted for him. Han, do you have any guesses for my question about Michigan's results in 1884? The thread is a couple threads below this one.

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

LA was close in 1952, and thus when the country swung to Ike, LA swung with it. Keep in mind that without an option for "Upledged", Ike would have won LA by a narrow 53-47 margin, rather than the 53-40-7 margin he won in RL. As for why LA was close initially (in 1952), I'd guess that Stevenson was too much of a Northern liberal for many Louisana voters and also many normally Democratic voters admired Ike for his war hero status and thus voted for him. Han, do you have any guesses for my question about Michigan's results in 1884? The thread is a couple threads below this one.

How do you know 100% of "Unpledged" would have gone to Stevenson?

[Barnes]

LA was close in 1952, and thus when the country swung to Ike, LA swung with it. Keep in mind that without an option for "Upledged", Ike would have won LA by a narrow 53-47 margin, rather than the 53-40-7 margin he won in RL. As for why LA was close initially (in 1952), I'd guess that Stevenson was too much of a Northern liberal for many Louisana voters and also many normally Democratic voters admired Ike for his war hero status and thus voted for him. Han, do you have any guesses for my question about Michigan's results in 1884? The thread is a couple threads below this one.

Then why wasn't he too northern for Georgia, Alabama, or Mississippi?

[Derek]

LA was close in 1952, and thus when the country swung to Ike, LA swung with it. Keep in mind that without an option for "Upledged", Ike would have won LA by a narrow 53-47 margin, rather than the 53-40-7 margin he won in RL. As for why LA was close initially (in 1952), I'd guess that Stevenson was too much of a Northern liberal for many Louisana voters and also many normally Democratic voters admired Ike for his war hero status and thus voted for him. Han, do you have any guesses for my question about Michigan's results in 1884? The thread is a couple threads below this one.

Then why wasn't he too northern for Georgia, Alabama, or Mississippi?

LA is further out than those states. It's thet deep south but is it as culturally influenced? Minorities voted GOP back then.

[Barnes]

LA was close in 1952, and thus when the country swung to Ike, LA swung with it. Keep in mind that without an option for "Upledged", Ike would have won LA by a narrow 53-47 margin, rather than the 53-40-7 margin he won in RL. As for why LA was close initially (in 1952), I'd guess that Stevenson was too much of a Northern liberal for many Louisana voters and also many normally Democratic voters admired Ike for his war hero status and thus voted for him. Han, do you have any guesses for my question about Michigan's results in 1884? The thread is a couple threads below this one.

Then why wasn't he too northern for Georgia, Alabama, or Mississippi?

LA is further out than those states. It's thet deep south but is it as culturally influenced? Minorities voted GOP back then.

According to the 1950 Census, Louisiana was 69% white.

[Mr.Phips]

I would actually like see a map of Louisiana in 1956.  I would bet Ike actually carried the now heavily Democratic Orleans parish and lost the rural parishes.

[Barnes]

I would actually like see a map of Louisiana in 1956.  I would bet Ike actually carried the now heavily Democratic Orleans parish and lost the rural parishes.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f5/1956prescountymap.PNG

[Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey]

One other thing I never understood was why the South all of a sudden became much closer in the 50s when compared to election maps in the 40s. Any ideas?

[Obnoxiously Slutty Girly Girl]

One other thing I never understood was why the South all of a sudden became much closer in the 50s when compared to election maps in the 40s. Any ideas?

Well the Solid South had already fallen apart for the Democrats in 1948 over racial issues. A good Republican candidate probably could have carried Virginia, Tennessee and Florida in 48, but not a boring loser like Dewey.

[minionofmidas]

Louisiana (and Texas) had some areas where Blacks voted in that period (while early in the solid south period, it's North Carolina that has the Black voters.)

[The Mikado]

Libertas, for once, is 100% correct.  By the 1950s, the transition of party support bases associated with the 60s was already well underway (indeed, one could argue that the transition had been slowly occurring since the death of FDR).

Louisiana (and Texas) had some areas where Blacks voted in that period (while early in the solid south period, it's North Carolina that has the Black voters.)

This is also true, and Eisenhower did fairly well among Northern Blacks.  Had the GOP played its cards differently in that era, it could've been the party that ended up getting 90% of the black vote every Presidential election.

[minionofmidas]

Libertas, for once, is 100% correct.  By the 1950s, the transition of party support bases associated with the 60s was already well underway (indeed, one could argue that the transition had been slowly occurring since the death of FDR).

If not since the intra-Democratic Civil War between Good Ole Boys and New Dealers that many Southern states witnessed in the late 30s and early 40s; and the unionization attempts of the late 30s, which frequently carried a pro-integration ethos (but were perfectly willing to compromise on the issue).

[Bo]

LA was close in 1952, and thus when the country swung to Ike, LA swung with it. Keep in mind that without an option for "Upledged", Ike would have won LA by a narrow 53-47 margin, rather than the 53-40-7 margin he won in RL. As for why LA was close initially (in 1952), I'd guess that Stevenson was too much of a Northern liberal for many Louisana voters and also many normally Democratic voters admired Ike for his war hero status and thus voted for him. Han, do you have any guesses for my question about Michigan's results in 1884? The thread is a couple threads below this one.

How do you know 100% of "Unpledged" would have gone to Stevenson?

Just a guess, since the Democratic machine was very strong in LA back then. Even though I was estimating and probably being too generous.

[Bo]

LA was close in 1952, and thus when the country swung to Ike, LA swung with it. Keep in mind that without an option for "Upledged", Ike would have won LA by a narrow 53-47 margin, rather than the 53-40-7 margin he won in RL. As for why LA was close initially (in 1952), I'd guess that Stevenson was too much of a Northern liberal for many Louisana voters and also many normally Democratic voters admired Ike for his war hero status and thus voted for him. Han, do you have any guesses for my question about Michigan's results in 1884? The thread is a couple threads below this one.

Then why wasn't he too northern for Georgia, Alabama, or Mississippi?

LA was a little less Democratic than those states. Also, Stevenson had a Southern VP, which helped.

[Hash]

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=94805.0

It offers much better analysis and answers than Rochambeau's pathetically mundane and stupid answers.