Ignoring the Solid South, was 1920 a bigger landslide than 1972 or 1984?

[One Term Floridian]

?

Yes. In contrast to 1972 and 1984, the 1920 landslide brought with it massive Republican gains in Congress and at the state level. Republicans gained 10 Senate seats, 63 House seats, and 7 governorships. In 1972, they gained 12 House seats but lost a governorship and two Senate seats. And in 1984, they gained 16 House seats and 1 governorship but lost two Senate seats. 1920 gave Republicans a supermajority in the House of Representatives, placing them at over 300 seats, a benchmark which they have never gained since.

Moreover, if you look at the county level, 1920 was (outside of the South) as thorough as 1972 and 1984 were. Harding won every county in New England, New York, New Jersey, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, the Dakotas, Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and California. He won dozens of counties (i.e. Schoharie County, New York; Warren, Sussex, and Hunterdon Counties, New Jersey, to provide some examples) that had never voted Republican before. Harding also swept virtually all urban areas, winning such long-time Democratic strongholds as New York City and Boston. And in many of the large, populous states-i.e. California, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Michigan-Cox reached lows that were not reached by even Hoover, Landon, Goldwater, McGovern, or Mondale.

It's amazing that FDR's career recovered after being on a ticket like that.

The 1920 election made Roosevelt a national figure, and established the foundations for his later runs as Governor of New York, and ultimately, President. He wasn't hurt by Cox's landslide defeat at all. Cox, on the other hand, never ran for political office after this, and faded into relative obscurity until he died in 1957, focusing on his business interests and quietly supporting Roosevelt throughout his Presidency. This did place him in contrast with John W. Davis and Al Smith, the two other Democratic landslide losers of the 1920s who later turned against Roosevelt.

This tells me JFK would have recovered from being on a losing ticket in 1956 (he placed second on the VP ballot), just probably not by 1960. I could see him running in 1968 instead then

[Calthrina950]

?

Yes. In contrast to 1972 and 1984, the 1920 landslide brought with it massive Republican gains in Congress and at the state level. Republicans gained 10 Senate seats, 63 House seats, and 7 governorships. In 1972, they gained 12 House seats but lost a governorship and two Senate seats. And in 1984, they gained 16 House seats and 1 governorship but lost two Senate seats. 1920 gave Republicans a supermajority in the House of Representatives, placing them at over 300 seats, a benchmark which they have never gained since.

Moreover, if you look at the county level, 1920 was (outside of the South) as thorough as 1972 and 1984 were. Harding won every county in New England, New York, New Jersey, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, the Dakotas, Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and California. He won dozens of counties (i.e. Schoharie County, New York; Warren, Sussex, and Hunterdon Counties, New Jersey, to provide some examples) that had never voted Republican before. Harding also swept virtually all urban areas, winning such long-time Democratic strongholds as New York City and Boston. And in many of the large, populous states-i.e. California, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Michigan-Cox reached lows that were not reached by even Hoover, Landon, Goldwater, McGovern, or Mondale.

It's amazing that FDR's career recovered after being on a ticket like that.

The 1920 election made Roosevelt a national figure, and established the foundations for his later runs as Governor of New York, and ultimately, President. He wasn't hurt by Cox's landslide defeat at all. Cox, on the other hand, never ran for political office after this, and faded into relative obscurity until he died in 1957, focusing on his business interests and quietly supporting Roosevelt throughout his Presidency. This did place him in contrast with John W. Davis and Al Smith, the two other Democratic landslide losers of the 1920s who later turned against Roosevelt.

This tells me JFK would have recovered from being on a losing ticket in 1956 (he placed second on the VP ballot), just probably not by 1960. I could see him running in 1968 instead then

I would agree, and Roosevelt's 1932 landslide was 12 years after Cox's landslide defeat.

[Calthrina950]

Going back to Kentucky's results, I've read the 1920 article on the election there at Wikipedia, which was recently updated. According to that article, Billy Kair, who was the Democratic political boss of Fayette County (Lexington), and apparently a very powerful figure in Kentucky at that time, strongly supported Cox and campaigned on his behalf. That, and the fact that Cox was from Butler County, right across from Kentucky, is why he was able to narrowly hold the state that year. Kentucky and North Carolina were the two states in 1920 that had the weakest swings towards Harding and the Republicans. Nevertheless, given that Republicans had managed to carry Kentucky in 1896, and given Harding's strength in ancestral Republican strongholds everywhere that year (such as in Appalachian Kentucky and Tennessee), it's surprising that he wasn't able to win the state.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

Going back to Kentucky's results, I've read the 1920 article on the election there at Wikipedia, which was recently updated. According to that article, Billy Kair, who was the Democratic political boss of Fayette County (Lexington), and apparently a very powerful figure in Kentucky at that time, strongly supported Cox and campaigned on his behalf. That, and the fact that Cox was from Butler County, right across from Kentucky, is why he was able to narrowly hold the state that year. Kentucky and North Carolina were the two states in 1920 that had the weakest swings towards Harding and the Republicans. Nevertheless, given that Republicans had managed to carry Kentucky in 1896, and given Harding's strength in ancestral Republican strongholds everywhere that year (such as in Appalachian Kentucky and Tennessee), it's surprising that he wasn't able to win the state.

One interesting thing about Harding's win in Tennessee is that he won three of the five McGovern counties. In two of them he was the only Republican winner in a century. The third (Lewis County) is the master of weirdness: always D / Hughes / Harding / always D / Reagan '84 / Dukakis / Clinton / Clinton / Gore / always R

I don't think Harding was able to pull similar aces in Kentucky.

In any case, the non-swing in Kentucky is simply stunning, considering every other state (bar the Carolinas) swung at least 11 points and most swung more than double of that.

[MT Treasurer]

Off-topic, but what’s the story behind Harding's underwhelming win in IN (and even OH, to a lesser extent)?

[WD]

Off-topic, but what’s the story behind Harding's underwhelming win in IN (and even OH, to a lesser extent)?

My best guess is that there are some parts of IN and OH that are culturally southern, so that could explain why. Cox won and did decently in many counties in the southern parts of IN and OH near the Ohio river and Cincinnati.

Cox did really good in Northern KY so that performance might have spilled over.

[Calthrina950]

Off-topic, but what’s the story behind Harding's underwhelming win in IN (and even OH, to a lesser extent)?

Ohio is interesting, given that it was (as you know) the home state of both Harding, who was then its junior Senator, and Cox, who was its Governor. Perhaps it was an example of "native-son" statuses canceling each other out? Cox did hold most of the ancestrally Democratic counties in the state that year.

[mianfei]

In point form I will give my assessment of key issues:

• 1920 was the greatest national presidential landslide in history, followed by 1972
• Outside the antebellum slave states and Oklahoma, Cox won only 41 counties out of about 1,630 – about one in forty! That would be equivalent to winning only 76 counties nationwide, vis-à-vis 130 by McGovern in 1972.
• Apart from Mineral County, Montana – where he won with 40 percent due to a 20 percent vote for Parley Christensen – Cox did not carry a single county that was not Southern or Southern-settled
• As Lewis County, Tennessee – and the unpledged Progressive vote in parts of Acadiana – showed, there was dissatisfaction with Wilson in the South during his first term, which was to deepen
• Regarding the Wikipedia articles on the 1920 election in Tennessee and Kentucky, I wrote them myself. There is no doubt that Cox’s local popularity helped in Kentucky and Ohio, and in 1924 declining turnout and a substantial shift to La Follette in Kenton and Campbell Counties (in Kenton Cox won 56 percent but Davis only 26 percent) was what turned Kentucky to Coolidge
• North Carolina – alongside Virginia, Maryland and Delaware – have always been the most interventionist and least isolationist states (I find it interesting that when the 50 states are listed in alphabetical order the least isolationist and most isolationist states are next to each other!) That is why they swung against Cox less, as can be seen from the 1916 to 1920 trend map below

[Calthrina950]

In point form I will give my assessment of key issues:

• 1920 was the greatest national presidential landslide in history, followed by 1972
• Outside the antebellum slave states and Oklahoma, Cox won only 41 counties out of about 1,630 – about one in forty! That would be equivalent to winning only 76 counties nationwide, vis-à-vis 130 by McGovern in 1972.
• Apart from Mineral County, Montana – where he won with 40 percent due to a 20 percent vote for Parley Christensen – Cox did not carry a single county that was not Southern or Southern-settled
• As Lewis County, Tennessee – and the unpledged Progressive vote in parts of Acadiana – showed, there was dissatisfaction with Wilson in the South during his first term, which was to deepen
• Regarding the Wikipedia articles on the 1920 election in Tennessee and Kentucky, I wrote them myself. There is no doubt that Cox’s local popularity helped in Kentucky and Ohio, and in 1924 declining turnout and a substantial shift to La Follette in Kenton and Campbell Counties (in Kenton Cox won 56 percent but Davis only 26 percent) was what turned Kentucky to Coolidge
• North Carolina – alongside Virginia, Maryland and Delaware – have always been the most interventionist and least isolationist states (I find it interesting that when the 50 states are listed in alphabetical order the least isolationist and most isolationist states are next to each other!) That is why they swung against Cox less, as can be seen from the 1916 to 1920 trend map below

I've noticed that many of the elections articles on Wikipedia have been expanded in recent months, with the addition of not only background information, but also county maps and election results by county tables. Thank you for your contributions! Do you plan on adding additional detail to the articles on the 1964 election in the future? I'd be interested to see your thoughts on Johnson's performance in states like Colorado and Nebraska, to give a few examples.