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

[darklordoftech]

?

[SevenEleven]

It probably goes as follows:

1936
1972
1920
1984
1932

[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.

[America Needs a 13-6 Progressive SCOTUS]

Even including the solid south, Harding won the NPV by a wider margin than literally anyone else in US History.

[Calthrina950]

Even including the solid south, Harding won the NPV by a wider margin than literally anyone else in US History.

This is true, but of course the third-party vote in 1920 was significantly higher than in other landslide years. In 1964 and 1984, for example, the third-party vote was very small (less than 1% in both elections). In 1920, it was around 5.5%. And as I said above, Cox did significantly worse in the large-population states than other landslide losers.

[Podgy the Bear]

1920 was (outside the Solid South) the biggest national Republican landslide up and down the slate.  Harding's margins were astonishing and not at all expected.  For NY, the most optimistic Republican margin was 500,000.  Harding won by 1.1 million, largely because of his greater than 2:1 victory in NYC.  He absolutely decimated Cox in the Midwest (case in point, Wilson won ND in 1916 by a small margin.  Harding won nearly 80% in 1920).

Even in the South (with an exclusively white electorate), Harding picked up close to 40% of the vote.

 

[Orser67]

Yeah, the Republican ceiling in 1920 (outside of the South) was far higher than in the 1970s and 1980s. In particular, Harding was able to win the kinds of heavily-populated urban areas (NYC, Philadelphia, Boston, etc.) that Nixon and Reagan didn't.

[Orser67]

Also, pursuant to the point made earlier about coattails, check out these maps of House control after 1920, 1972, and 1984. I'm not sure that it's entirely fair to compare coattails, since Nixon and Reagan both won at the possibly the high point of ticket-splitting in U.S. history, but these maps certainly show the extent to which the GOP dominated the North in 1920. Kind of like in 1894, Democrats were almost completely wiped out in the House outside of the South in 1920, whereas they still had a very strong presence after 1972 and 1984.

Edit: here's post-1952 as well.

[Orwell]

I feel bad for Cox he didn't do anything wrong he was actually a really good nominee

[morgankingsley]

Let's also not forget Harding won Tennessee, the first time a Republican win any confederate state since 1876. So even in the south, the democrats did not prove to be the force they should. Even John Davis, doing 6 percent worse nationally, had that state return

[Podgy the Bear]

I feel bad for Cox he didn't do anything wrong he was actually a really good nominee

I wouldn't feel so bad for him.  He bought additional newspapers (one of which is now the Atlanta Journal Constitution) and went heavily into radio and later television.  He went on to build a massive media conglomerate (which is now Cox Enterprises), and his family members are great benefactors for charitable causes in and around the Atlanta area.   

[Mr. Smith]

Let's also not forget Harding won Tennessee, the first time a Republican win any confederate state since 1876. So even in the south, the democrats did not prove to be the force they should. Even John Davis, doing 6 percent worse nationally, had that state return

But he lost Kentucky in the process.

[Podgy the Bear]

Let's also not forget Harding won Tennessee, the first time a Republican win any confederate state since 1876. So even in the south, the democrats did not prove to be the force they should. Even John Davis, doing 6 percent worse nationally, had that state return

Davis was running in a 3 way race in which the third party candidate received nearly 17 percent of the national vote.  Of course, Davis's overall performance in 1924 was dismal--in some states, he received no more than 5-8 percent of the vote.  But he ran much better than Cox did in the South and carried all of the old Confederate states rather comfortably.

For Tennessee in 1920, it's thought that there was an unusually large turnout in the highly Republican counties in the eastern part of the state that the major factor for Harding's win.  Another reason was that the relatively sizable African-American population in Tennessee was less disenfranchised than other parts of the South.  Harding's popularity with the African-American community created an almost unanimous vote for him and was also a factor for the Republican win in Tennessee.

[morgankingsley]

Let's also not forget Harding won Tennessee, the first time a Republican win any confederate state since 1876. So even in the south, the democrats did not prove to be the force they should. Even John Davis, doing 6 percent worse nationally, had that state return

But he lost Kentucky in the process.

Kentucky wasn't a confederate state so it doesnt count for my comparison

[morgankingsley]

Let's also not forget Harding won Tennessee, the first time a Republican win any confederate state since 1876. So even in the south, the democrats did not prove to be the force they should. Even John Davis, doing 6 percent worse nationally, had that state return

Davis was running in a 3 way race in which the third party candidate received nearly 17 percent of the national vote.  Of course, Davis's overall performance in 1924 was dismal--in some states, he received no more than 5-8 percent of the vote.  But he ran much better than Cox did in the South and carried all of the old Confederate states rather comfortably.

For Tennessee in 1920, it's thought that there was an unusually large turnout in the highly Republican counties in the eastern part of the state that the major factor for Harding's win.  Another reason was that the relatively sizable African-American population in Tennessee was less disenfranchised than other parts of the South.  Harding's popularity with the African-American community created an almost unanimous vote for him and was also a factor for the Republican win in Tennessee.

I understand why both these events with Davis and Cox happened, I was just stating a statistical fact when you look at things from face value

[longtimelurker]

Let's also not forget Harding won Tennessee, the first time a Republican win any confederate state since 1876. So even in the south, the democrats did not prove to be the force they should. Even John Davis, doing 6 percent worse nationally, had that state return

Davis was running in a 3 way race in which the third party candidate received nearly 17 percent of the national vote.  Of course, Davis's overall performance in 1924 was dismal--in some states, he received no more than 5-8 percent of the vote.  But he ran much better than Cox did in the South and carried all of the old Confederate states rather comfortably.

For Tennessee in 1920, it's thought that there was an unusually large turnout in the highly Republican counties in the eastern part of the state that the major factor for Harding's win.  Another reason was that the relatively sizable African-American population in Tennessee was less disenfranchised than other parts of the South.  Harding's popularity with the African-American community created an almost unanimous vote for him and was also a factor for the Republican win in Tennessee.

Look at the raw vote totals in southern states 1920 vs. 1916.  The number of votes cast went down.  A lot of isolationist Dems probably decided not to cast a vote as an anti-Wilson anti-League of Nations protest (yes, I know Wilson wasn't running, but a lot of conservative Dems bolted the party over his last two years in office).

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

I have read somewhere on this forum that Harding won among Jews in 1920 and that he is the only Republican to do so in the last 100 years. He was aided by a strong Debs performance among Jewish voters, but that alone signals "crazy landslide".
Also:
He won by the largest popular vote margin ever.
He is one of a handful of people to win more than 60% of the vote.
He managed to get 35% of the vote as a Republican in the former Confederacy, which is pretty nutty considering we are talking about long before the Civil Rights Movement (and he wasn't running against a wet Catholic).
He won by 32 POINTS outside of the former Confederacy (63 - 31), which is literally a 2-to-1 margin.
If my maths is right, he lost exactly 69 counties outside of the South as defined by the US Census, and many of them were in the Southern-leaning state of Missouri. Even McGovern won more non-Southern counties than Cox, even excluding Alaska and Hawaii (I think he won 93).
He won every single county in 23 states, that is basically half the states, which is more than even Nixon in 1972 did.
He destroyed Cox in such Democratic cities as New York and Boston (again, with aid by Debs).
He had huge coattails in the Senate, with Republicans winning every seat up for re-election outside of the former Confederacy, which amounted to a gain of 10 seats*.
He had huge coattails in the House, with Republicans gaining more than 60 seats, ending up with more than 300 Representatives including about 90% of non-Southern ones. This included a lot of nutty things like: defeating the Democratic leader; controlling Missouri's delegation, Oklahoma's delegation and even reducing Tennessee's delegation to an even split; gaining a seat in Texas; gaining FOUR seats in Manhattan; leaving Democrats with no Representatives in more than half the states (25).

*it should be noted that Reagan in 1980 had bigger coattails despite winning "only" by 9 points the presidential election

[SenatorCouzens]

Yes because the Republicans solidly got Congress as well, and for that matter the Supreme Court was in conservative hands (though the picks weren't always chosen in a careful way be today's standards, as on occasion they were nonideological or old or chosen mainly because of the region they came from). The 1920s was the golden age of American conservatism in many ways... of course it all fell apart in 1929 with the Great Depression.

[Calthrina950]

Let's also not forget Harding won Tennessee, the first time a Republican win any confederate state since 1876. So even in the south, the democrats did not prove to be the force they should. Even John Davis, doing 6 percent worse nationally, had that state return

But he lost Kentucky in the process.

Kentucky's results in 1920 are perplexing. Cox held the state by 0.43%, and Kentucky was less Democratic in 1916 then Tennessee (which Harding won) had been. Wilson had won Kentucky 51.9-46.5% against Hughes, while carrying Tennessee 56.3-42.7%. Maryland is another Southern State where Wilson did better than in Kentucky, but which flipped in 1920 to Harding (he won Maryland 52.8-44.8%). Kentucky also gave narrow plurality wins to Alton B. Parker in 1904 and Adlai Stevenson in 1952, who lost by landslide margins to Theodore Roosevelt and Dwight D. Eisenhower.

In 1924, Kentucky flipped to Calvin Coolidge, the only state not carried by Harding that he won. So this goes to show that there is no such thing as a universal swing, and it seems that even in landslide years, Kentucky's Democratic strongholds in coal country were able to narrowly outvote the "Mountain Republican" strongholds in Southern and Central Kentucky.

[morgankingsley]

Let's also not forget Harding won Tennessee, the first time a Republican win any confederate state since 1876. So even in the south, the democrats did not prove to be the force they should. Even John Davis, doing 6 percent worse nationally, had that state return

But he lost Kentucky in the process.

Kentucky's results in 1920 are perplexing. Cox held the state by 0.43%, and Kentucky was less Democratic in 1916 then Tennessee (which Harding won) had been. Wilson had won Kentucky 51.9-46.5% against Hughes, while carrying Tennessee 56.3-42.7%. Maryland is another Southern State where Wilson did better than in Kentucky, but which flipped in 1920 to Harding (he won Maryland 52.8-44.8%). Kentucky also gave narrow plurality wins to Alton B. Parker in 1904 and Adlai Stevenson in 1952, who lost by landslide margins to Theodore Roosevelt and Dwight D. Eisenhower.

In 1924, Kentucky flipped to Calvin Coolidge, the only state not carried by Harding that he won. So this goes to show that there is no such thing as a universal swing, and it seems that even in landslide years, Kentucky's Democratic strongholds in coal country were able to narrowly outvote the "Mountain Republican" strongholds in Southern and Central Kentucky.

I never unironically believed in universal swing as that would factor out so many important pieces of every state of every election. It however is something I sometimes use as a way to have a good starting point

[DINGO Joe]

Let's also not forget Harding won Tennessee, the first time a Republican win any confederate state since 1876. So even in the south, the democrats did not prove to be the force they should. Even John Davis, doing 6 percent worse nationally, had that state return

But he lost Kentucky in the process.

Kentucky's results in 1920 are perplexing. Cox held the state by 0.43%, and Kentucky was less Democratic in 1916 then Tennessee (which Harding won) had been. Wilson had won Kentucky 51.9-46.5% against Hughes, while carrying Tennessee 56.3-42.7%. Maryland is another Southern State where Wilson did better than in Kentucky, but which flipped in 1920 to Harding (he won Maryland 52.8-44.8%). Kentucky also gave narrow plurality wins to Alton B. Parker in 1904 and Adlai Stevenson in 1952, who lost by landslide margins to Theodore Roosevelt and Dwight D. Eisenhower.

In 1924, Kentucky flipped to Calvin Coolidge, the only state not carried by Harding that he won. So this goes to show that there is no such thing as a universal swing, and it seems that even in landslide years, Kentucky's Democratic strongholds in coal country were able to narrowly outvote the "Mountain Republican" strongholds in Southern and Central Kentucky.

You should look at a county map, as in the Fourth Party System, there was no large block of coal county votes for the Ds.

[Calthrina950]

Let's also not forget Harding won Tennessee, the first time a Republican win any confederate state since 1876. So even in the south, the democrats did not prove to be the force they should. Even John Davis, doing 6 percent worse nationally, had that state return

But he lost Kentucky in the process.

Kentucky's results in 1920 are perplexing. Cox held the state by 0.43%, and Kentucky was less Democratic in 1916 then Tennessee (which Harding won) had been. Wilson had won Kentucky 51.9-46.5% against Hughes, while carrying Tennessee 56.3-42.7%. Maryland is another Southern State where Wilson did better than in Kentucky, but which flipped in 1920 to Harding (he won Maryland 52.8-44.8%). Kentucky also gave narrow plurality wins to Alton B. Parker in 1904 and Adlai Stevenson in 1952, who lost by landslide margins to Theodore Roosevelt and Dwight D. Eisenhower.

In 1924, Kentucky flipped to Calvin Coolidge, the only state not carried by Harding that he won. So this goes to show that there is no such thing as a universal swing, and it seems that even in landslide years, Kentucky's Democratic strongholds in coal country were able to narrowly outvote the "Mountain Republican" strongholds in Southern and Central Kentucky.

You should look at a county map, as in the Fourth Party System, there was no large block of coal county votes for the Ds.

I'd probably should have used more specific terminology. What I was meaning to say is that the ancestrally Democratic counties in Eastern Kentucky-like Elliott and Floyd-and in far Western Kentucky, were able to narrowly outvote the Republican strongholds in Southern Kentucky. Many of these counties are indeed located in Coal Country, though I'll concede your point that Coal Country wasn't a cohesive Democratic voting bloc back then like it became after the New Deal.

[KYRockefeller]

?

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.

[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.

[DINGO Joe]

Spent a little more time looking at Kentucky in this era and while there were the notable (and rather tiny) exceptions, Eastern KY was about as R as the South Central part.  Even with the explosion of the coal industry in Harlan and Letcher (Harlan went from 10K to 30K in population from 1910 to 1920 on it's way to 75K by 1940  and Letcher wasn't far behind) this was rock ribbed R territory with Harlan voting 80% and letcher pushing 70%.  The real D strength was in the Far West Pennyrile and the bluegrass in North Central KY.

Eastern Kentucky did have a rather colorful Republican Congressman in this time (or rather husband and wife duo) in "Pork Barrel John" Langley who ultimately went to jail in the 20s for making money hand over fist thanks to Prohibition and was then ultimately replaced in Congress by .... his wife. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_W._Langley