Who was the last Republican to win the black vote?

[RINO Tom]

I started a thread on this a while back.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=221358.0

Regarding a few comments above, Eisenhower never won the Black vote (even with having a pretty good civil rights record and a segregationist on the other ticket ... I think that should remind people that Black voters abandoned the GOP LONG before any perceived REAL courting of the South by the GOP), and Hoover almost certainly beat FDR among Black voters in 1932, while losing the group in 1936.  Here is everything I could find:

2016 - 89% DEM, 8% GOP
2012 - 93% DEM, 6% GOP
2008 - 95% DEM, 4% GOP
2004 - 88% DEM, 11% GOP
2000 - 90% DEM, 9% GOP
1996 - 84% DEM, 12% GOP
1992 - 83% DEM, 10% GOP
1988 - 89% DEM, 11% GOP
1984 - 91% DEM, 9% GOP
1980 - 83% DEM, 14% GOP
1976 - 83% DEM, 17% GOP
1972 - 87% DEM, 13% GOP
1968 - 85% DEM, 15% GOP
1964 - 94% DEM, 6% GOP
1960 - 68% DEM, 32% GOP
1956 - 61% DEM, 39% GOP
1952 - 76% DEM, 24% GOP
1948 - 77% DEM, 23% GOP
1944 - 68% DEM, 32% GOP
1940 - 67% DEM, 32% GOP
1936 - 71% DEM, 28% GOP
1932 - 77% GOP, 23% DEM

The following (http://www.blacksandpresidency.com/herberthoover.php) are the results of just one subset, the Black wards of Harlem:

1928 - 78% GOP, 28% DEM
1924 - 78% GOP, 28% DEM
1920 - 97% GOP, 3% DEM

It is also estimated (http://www.blacksandpresidency.com/herberthoover.php) that Wilson won about 5-7% of the Black vote in 1912.

For much more, we'd need to purchase some well-written books.

[RINO Tom]

What caused that monumental swing from 1932 to 1936? The New Deal?

I'd guess more and more Black voters were starting to move toward Democrats (as they had been throughout the 1920s), and the New Deal accelerated it, but I think the biggest reason is that the NAACP actually endorsed a Democrat for the first time in 1936, and I think it had a huge effect on Black voters' willingness to vote for the Democratic ticket.

[RINO Tom]

According to Henry Fairlie, Black wards in Cleveland gave the following percentages:

1928 - Smith - 30%
1932 - FDR - 24%
1936 - FDR - 49%

So I'd say 1932, Hoover.

I wonder what was so different about 1932/1936 as far as having numbers on nationwide Black voting trends.  Everything before seems to be restricted to various numbers related only to specific wards, which I assume varied significantly by location.

[RINO Tom]

I started a thread on this a while back.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=221358.0

Regarding a few comments above, Eisenhower never won the Black vote (even with having a pretty good civil rights record and a segregationist on the other ticket ... I think that should remind people that Black voters abandoned the GOP LONG before any perceived REAL courting of the South by the GOP), and Hoover almost certainly beat FDR among Black voters in 1932, while losing the group in 1936.  Here is everything I could find:

2016 - 89% DEM, 8% GOP
2012 - 93% DEM, 6% GOP
2008 - 95% DEM, 4% GOP
2004 - 88% DEM, 11% GOP
2000 - 90% DEM, 9% GOP
1996 - 84% DEM, 12% GOP
1992 - 83% DEM, 10% GOP
1988 - 89% DEM, 11% GOP
1984 - 91% DEM, 9% GOP
1980 - 83% DEM, 14% GOP
1976 - 83% DEM, 17% GOP
1972 - 87% DEM, 13% GOP
1968 - 85% DEM, 15% GOP
1964 - 94% DEM, 6% GOP
1960 - 68% DEM, 32% GOP
1956 - 61% DEM, 39% GOP
1952 - 76% DEM, 24% GOP
1948 - 77% DEM, 23% GOP
1944 - 68% DEM, 32% GOP
1940 - 67% DEM, 32% GOP
1936 - 71% DEM, 28% GOP
1932 - 77% GOP, 23% DEM

The following (http://www.blacksandpresidency.com/herberthoover.php) are the results of just one subset, the Black wards of Harlem:

1928 - 78% GOP, 28% DEM
1924 - 78% GOP, 28% DEM
1920 - 97% GOP, 3% DEM

It is also estimated (http://www.blacksandpresidency.com/herberthoover.php) that Wilson won about 5-7% of the Black vote in 1912.

For much more, we'd need to purchase some well-written books.

Bumping an old thread with a quibble, but it looks like Robert Caro came up with some different numbers for this (though I haven't found where he sourced them from):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

^ Interesting.  I have read quite a bit that 1948 was the first election that Democrats really realized that they "needed" the Black vote to win (whereas before 1948, they were content with using Black votes to prop up their urban machines but certainly saw other coalition groups - specifically White Southerners - as much more important to their success).  I'd love to see the numbers these historians have access to.

[RINO Tom]

According to Henry Fairlie, Black wards in Cleveland gave the following percentages:

1928 - Smith - 30%
1932 - FDR - 24%
1936 - FDR - 49%

So I'd say 1932, Hoover.

It's ironic that Hoover won the black vote considering he was a virulent racist himself. He opposed anti-lynching bills and was also a fervent supporter of the Lily White Policy. He intentionally did his best to drive blacks from the Republican Party by segregated them and refusing to be photographed with any black leaders. The GOP was never really the party of Civil Rights...even Taft was a racist who sought to remove blacks from the party.

Neither has ever been, hate to break it to you.  Republican attitudes of the mid-Twentieth Century, for example, were the Democrats have been talking out of both sides of their mouths on civil rights for decades, so why can't we?  Then, they were understandably very bitter when this was painted as any more "anti-civil rights" than the 1960s Democratic Party was.

[RINO Tom]

^ Yeah, even when the GOP was opposed to slavery's expansion, it could be argued that the true "moral crusaders" behind abolition were but a faction of the party; I think you had just as many Republicans who opposed it for reasons that didn't even kind of involve sympathy for Black Americans.  The GOP and Black voters was always a strange marriage, if you ask me, and the "We're the Party of Lincoln!" and "What, are you really going to vote for the party of the KKK and Confederacy??" lines had lost most of their weight by the 1920s.  Obviously, this is simplifying it to near-Old School Republican/ERM64man levels, but fast forward to the 1950s and you pretty much have an indifferent GOP (that would show up to vote "Yea" in huge numbers on civil rights legislation that A) had been watered down enough to appease business interests and their suburban constituents and B) focused almost exclusively on the South, where the GOP had almost no constituents) that could pretty much claim the equivalent of "plausible deniability" on civil rights and a Democratic Party deeply divided between a Southern wing that opposed civil rights for obvious reasons and a Northern wing that was increasingly reliant on Black votes.  From a purely historical perspective, it was one of our most interesting political eras, IMO.

[RINO Tom]

One should keep in mind that both parties were "big tents" at times in their history. For example, Nelson Rockefeller and Barry Goldwater were both Republicans at the same time while Hubert Humphrey and Strom Thurmond were both Democrats at the same time.

I mean, that is an indisputable fact.  However, I think people use that "fact" to fit their agendas, and they end up saying something like Nelson Rockefeller was more liberal than Robert Byrd because of civil rights alone, which is absurd.