1956: Why did so many Western and Midwestern states swing against Ike?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 01:26:36 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)
  1956: Why did so many Western and Midwestern states swing against Ike?
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: 1956: Why did so many Western and Midwestern states swing against Ike?  (Read 739 times)
E-Dawg 🇺🇦🇦🇲
Guy
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 545
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: August 16, 2020, 12:26:05 PM »

Although Ike did better in the nationwide popular vote in 1956 compared to 1952, most of this was due to gains in the East and South. In the Midwest and West, Eisenhower lost ground to Stevenson in most states, some by significant margins. The states that swung this way were California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, and Missouri (which actually flipped from Ike to Stevenson!)  Mississippi and South Carolina in the South did as well, but those are self-explanatory (Dixiecrats who supported Ike in 52 swung against him and to the unpledged ticket due to his pro-civil rights record). What in Ike's presidency caused him to lose ground in such a large part of the country? Did it have anything to do with farm issues? I haven't been able to get an answer for this yet.
Logged
Alcibiades
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,851
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -4.39, S: -6.96

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: August 16, 2020, 12:30:47 PM »

I think there was quite severe drought.
Logged
Podgy the Bear
mollybecky
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,968


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: August 16, 2020, 01:20:43 PM »

Dropping farm prices in the 1950s and lack of support. 

1952 resulted in a substantial swing from the Democrats to Eisenhower for several reasons, not the least were his personality and high regard.     These positive feelings were somewhat dissipated by 1956 in these states, and the margins were reduced somewhat (though Eisenhower won most of them by comfortable margins).  But low farm prices cost the Republicans heavily in the 1958 midterms, and they remained in a significant minority in Congress for years to come.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: August 17, 2020, 11:37:24 PM »

A similar thing happened to Republicans in the 1980's.

Low commodity prices cause rural areas to look to the Government for support. Republicans at the time found their based with suburban ficons who opposed government intervention and wanted to cut gov't spending. This was true in the 1950s as much as it was in the 1980s, though the geography would shift some, the same dynamic was in play. At the same time Republicans campaign as a "western/cowboyish" Party with Westerners on the ticket and this meant that they would do relatively well in the West as both Ike and Reagan did, but down ballot they would get butchered, especially in the midterms.

Logged
mianfei
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 322
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: September 16, 2020, 01:01:39 AM »

I think there was quite severe drought.
More severe in fact than in the 1988 election, and much more persistent. The whole of Eisenhower’s first term was affected by drought in the Plains and parts of the West.
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 0.026 seconds with 11 queries.