When did Democrats lose Roosevelt-Willkie voters?

[Alben Barkley]

Considering a disproportionate number were in the (heavily German) Midwest and the (heavily isolationist) Plains, the obvious answer is when war with Germany seemed more likely and FDR was moving in that direction with things like a peacetime draft.

Still, FDR went from getting borderline Kim Jong-un numbers in some states in 1936 to losing them outright or coming close to it in 1940. Was anything more going on? Maybe just some reversion to the mean after the 1936 massacre?

Bonus: What about when Democrats lost Roosevelt-Dewey voters in 1944? (Or gained some back in some states like Michigan?)

And then what about the Dewey 1944-Truman 1948 voters?

[Schiff for Senate]

1. When WWII started, when it began to heat up, and when Roosevelt began helping the UK.
2. As the Great Depression improved, I feel like it's possible that voters who didn't rely as much on FDR and the New Deal reverted to Republicanism (which wouldn't make much logical sense, but whatever).

And then what about the Dewey 1944-Truman 1948 voters?

Lazy answer: Missourians.

[Liminal Trans Girl]

1. When WWII started, when it began to heat up, and when Roosevelt began helping the UK.
2. As the Great Depression improved, I feel like it's possible that voters who didn't rely as much on FDR and the New Deal reverted to Republicanism (which wouldn't make much logical sense, but whatever).

And then what about the Dewey 1944-Truman 1948 voters?

Lazy answer: Missourians.

Kentuckians as well

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

1. Germans, Italians and Irish because of the oncoming war
2. A number of voters were angry because of the double dip in 1937-1938
3. Running for a third term
4. Court Packing

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

1. When WWII started, when it began to heat up, and when Roosevelt began helping the UK.
2. As the Great Depression improved, I feel like it's possible that voters who didn't rely as much on FDR and the New Deal reverted to Republicanism (which wouldn't make much logical sense, but whatever).

And then what about the Dewey 1944-Truman 1948 voters?

Lazy answer: Missourians.

Kentuckians as well

Isolationist Mountain Vote more generally reverting to the norm after 1944.

[Fuzzy Says: "Abolish NPR!"]

Two (2) terms for the President was a deeply held tradition from the early days of our Constitutional Republic.  That tradition, more than health, is what kept Wilson from running a 3rd time.  It's why Teddy Roosevelt was not the GOP pick in 1912.  It's why a draft had to be fashioned for FDR in 1940.

Had there been no WWII, there'd have been no 4th term.  Had FDR ran for a 4th term he'd have been defeated, either at the DNC or at the polls.

[One Term Floridian]

Two (2) terms for the President was a deeply held tradition from the early days of our Constitutional Republic.  That tradition, more than health, is what kept Wilson from running a 3rd time.  It's why Teddy Roosevelt was not the GOP pick in 1912.  It's why a draft had to be fashioned for FDR in 1940.

Had there been no WWII, there'd have been no 4th term.  Had FDR ran for a 4th term he'd have been defeated, either at the DNC or at the polls.

This. Honestly, it's stunning that FDR managed to exceed 400 electoral votes in both his third and fourth terms. However, it's very telling that FDR's popular vote margin was reduced to Obama 2008 (53% to 46%) levels in 1944. Of course, this margin looks great today but this is a far cry from what FDR had gotten in 1936 (61% to 37%), which is utterly impossible today. Had he been healthy, a fifth run for the White House in 1948 would have probably failed or come very close to failing.

[lfromnj]

Two (2) terms for the President was a deeply held tradition from the early days of our Constitutional Republic.  That tradition, more than health, is what kept Wilson from running a 3rd time.  It's why Teddy Roosevelt was not the GOP pick in 1912.  It's why a draft had to be fashioned for FDR in 1940.

Had there been no WWII, there'd have been no 4th term.  Had FDR ran for a 4th term he'd have been defeated, either at the DNC or at the polls.

This. Honestly, it's stunning that FDR managed to exceed 400 electoral votes in both his third and fourth terms. However, it's very telling that FDR's popular vote margin was reduced to Obama 2008 (53% to 46%) levels in 1944. Of course, this margin looks great today but this is a far cry from what FDR had gotten in 1936 (61% to 37%), which is utterly impossible today. Had he been healthy, a fifth run for the White House in 1948 would have probably failed or come very close to failing.

He would have been an absolute disaster against Stalin and just been bullied by him at every turn. Very fortunate he died when he did, Truman was much better on foreign policy once the issue of fascism was over.

[One Term Floridian]

Two (2) terms for the President was a deeply held tradition from the early days of our Constitutional Republic.  That tradition, more than health, is what kept Wilson from running a 3rd time.  It's why Teddy Roosevelt was not the GOP pick in 1912.  It's why a draft had to be fashioned for FDR in 1940.

Had there been no WWII, there'd have been no 4th term.  Had FDR ran for a 4th term he'd have been defeated, either at the DNC or at the polls.

This. Honestly, it's stunning that FDR managed to exceed 400 electoral votes in both his third and fourth terms. However, it's very telling that FDR's popular vote margin was reduced to Obama 2008 (53% to 46%) levels in 1944. Of course, this margin looks great today but this is a far cry from what FDR had gotten in 1936 (61% to 37%), which is utterly impossible today. Had he been healthy, a fifth run for the White House in 1948 would have probably failed or come very close to failing.

He would have been an absolute disaster against Stalin and just been bullied by him at every turn. Very fortunate he died when he did, Truman was much better on foreign policy once the issue of fascism was over.

A Cold War might not have happened, for good or for bad...if FDR lived out his 4th term and especially if he somehow lived/won a 5th in '48.

[Skill and Chance]

In addition to the isolationists, there was also a significant single-issue farm/ag vote back then.  They were ancestrally Republican but could abruptly swing left for a cycle or two when their livelihoods seemed to be at risk.  This was the case with the Dust Bowl in 1932 and you can see it as late as 1988 with the massive swing to Dukakis in the Plains states during the farm crisis.  Note that these were never really cultural Dems in the long run.  Heck, most of the Plains states swung back right in 1936 as the rest of the country was still moving left.

[Skill and Chance]

1. When WWII started, when it began to heat up, and when Roosevelt began helping the UK.
2. As the Great Depression improved, I feel like it's possible that voters who didn't rely as much on FDR and the New Deal reverted to Republicanism (which wouldn't make much logical sense, but whatever).

And then what about the Dewey 1944-Truman 1948 voters?

Lazy answer: Missourians.

Kentuckians as well

Isolationist Mountain Vote more generally reverting to the norm after 1944.

Interestingly, Kentucky was never all that into FDR.  It was only a couple % more Dem than the nation in all of the FDR elections despite staying Dem in the 1920 landslide and only barely going R in the 1924 landslide.  After FDR, it went right back to being very Dem until 1960.

California was the opposite of this- very into FDR and voting more Dem than the nation in all of his runs, but Lean R for decades before and after him!