Why did Richard Nixon win Wisconsin in 1960 and 1968?

[Mr.Phips]

This always seemed quite odd to me both years as he lost the similar states of Minnesota, Michigan, and Pennsylvania both times.  1968 was even more surprising given Humphrey’s close proximity to the state as Minnesota’s Senator.

[Alben Barkley]

What makes it especially strange is Wisconsin voted far to the left of the nation in 1972, and for Carter in 1976 even as the Midwesterner Ford won his home state of Michigan and Illinois.

[WalterWhite]

What makes it especially strange is Wisconsin voted far to the left of the nation in 1972, and for Carter in 1976 even as the Midwesterner Ford won his home state of Michigan and Illinois.

It might have been the Mondale Effect, as Minnesota borders Wisconsin.

[TDAS04]

What makes it especially strange is Wisconsin voted far to the left of the nation in 1972, and for Carter in 1976 even as the Midwesterner Ford won his home state of Michigan and Illinois.

Wisconsin had some the same anti-war streak found in such states as Iowa and Oregon, also states where Nixon’s improvements from his 1960 and 1968 performances were small.

[Mr. Smith]

Nixon won Ohio both times too, and Carter won it '76, and it was leftwards of the nation.

It's really more curious how Dukakis couldn't win Ohio at all while easily taking Wisconsin.

[Mr.Phips]

Nixon won Ohio both times too, and Carter won it '76, and it was leftwards of the nation.

It's really more curious how Dukakis couldn't win Ohio at all while easily taking Wisconsin.

Ohio is really more like Indiana than the other Great Lakes states. 

[Podgy the Bear]

1968 seems somewhat understandable--the split in the Democratic Party was magnified in Wisconsin with the left (McCarthy) and the right (Wallace) against the center (LBJ/Humphrey).  Eugene McCarthy crushed LBJ in the Wisconsin primary that year, and George Wallace always did well in the Democratic primaries he ran (1964, 1972, 1976 where he came in third with 13% of the vote in a campaign where he was a minimal factor).  And in the 1968 general, the Wallace independent vote likely came from traditional Democrats.  In the end, Humphrey couldn't come back fast enough to take the state.

For 1960, it's somewhat of a puzzle.  Even though Wisconsin has a substantial Catholic population, there was probably a significant anti-Catholic sentiment with the Protestant voters of German origin.  And perhaps Nixon benefited from the fact that he was Eisenhower's VP--the Republicans did extraordinarily well in Wisconsin in 1952 and 1956.

Interesting to note that Richard Nixon won Wisconsin all five times he was on the ballot as President/VP.

[Sumner 1868]

Kennedy underperformed almost everywhere outside New England in 1960. Even Michigan and Minnesota were awfully close despite the huge labor presence in both states. The anti-Catholicism was very real.

[Mr. Smith]

Nixon won Ohio both times too, and Carter won it '76, and it was leftwards of the nation.

It's really more curious how Dukakis couldn't win Ohio at all while easily taking Wisconsin.

Ohio is really more like Indiana than the other Great Lakes states. 

Except Ohio tracks Wisconsin pretty much perfectly until '88. Far more sense to be had of that than Michigan or Pennsylvania or Minnesota.

[Blow by blow, the passion dies]

1960 was due to anti-Catholic sentiment among German-Americans, 1968 was due to the Democratic vote split and Nixon's law and order politics, and 1972 was due to WI having a great concentration of anti-war voters

[Alben Barkley]

What makes it especially strange is Wisconsin voted far to the left of the nation in 1972, and for Carter in 1976 even as the Midwesterner Ford won his home state of Michigan and Illinois.

It might have been the Mondale Effect, as Minnesota borders Wisconsin.

Well then how come Humphrey didn't win it? And how come Ford also being from a neighboring state didn't offset it, even as he managed to win Illinois?

[Alben Barkley]

1960 was due to anti-Catholic sentiment among German-Americans, 1968 was due to the Democratic vote split and Nixon's law and order politics, and 1972 was due to WI having a great concentration of anti-war voters

I don't think any of it is that simple. Wisconsin has always had a large Catholic population, including among German-Americans (Germans themselves are pretty evenly split between Catholics and Lutherans -- Catholics are actually the plurality in Germany itself today). Wallace probably took more votes from Nixon than Humphrey, and in any case he got more support in Michigan and Humphrey still won it. And what makes Wisconsin more "law and order" than Michigan anyway? Also where are all these anti-war voters in Wisconsin supposedly concentrated? It wasn't California. I mean which is it, they're a bunch of "law and order" right-wingers or a bunch of anti-war hippies?

[Sumner 1868]

Also where are all these anti-war voters in Wisconsin supposedly concentrated? It wasn't California. I mean which is it, they're a bunch of "law and order" right-wingers or a bunch of anti-war hippies?

1972 had a large expansion of the electorate with Boomers entering the electorate and the 26th Amendment. University of Wisconsin-Madison was a particularly notorious center of anti-war activities.

[Alben Barkley]

Also where are all these anti-war voters in Wisconsin supposedly concentrated? It wasn't California. I mean which is it, they're a bunch of "law and order" right-wingers or a bunch of anti-war hippies?

1972 had a large expansion of the electorate with Boomers entering the electorate and the 26th Amendment. University of Wisconsin-Madison was a particularly notorious center of anti-war activities.

But was Dane County alone really enough to explain why Wisconsin voted 13.5 points to the left of the nation? Let alone when the state voted to the RIGHT of the nation for Nixon the previous two times he ran? Then flipped to Carter in a much closer election despite Ford being a seemingly perfect fit for the state and region and Carter... not so much?

It's not like Wisconsin was the only state with college towns or the only state affected by Boomers (who did not show up for McGovern in any case as many expected; at best, it seems their vote was pretty evenly split) entering the electorate, after all.

Let's face it: Wisconsin is just a weird state that often defies explanation. Or at least simple, clean cut explanations. It's a state that's always had a lot of contradictions and strange political patterns. As has been pointed out on this secular blog before, if its rurals/whites voted like Missouri rurals/whites, it would vote to the right of Missouri! Which has a larger share of voters living in a major metro area! Instead, however, we're talking about a state that had some of the strongest white support for Obama in the nation in both his elections, then flipped to Trump (barely) against all polls, then back to Biden (also barely and after he led by 17 points in a late high quality poll). Then had a split governor/senate result in 2022 (the senate result, despite a loss for the Democrat, being to the left of many's expectations and to the left of the 2016 result when the Republican was running against a stronger candidate on paper), and manages to have both one of the most left-wing and one of the most right-wing senators in the country at the same time as a result. And has some of the most staunchly, stubbornly right-wing suburbs in the country in WOW, yet some of the LEAST right-wing rurals! And has a gerrymandered, deeply Republican legislature yet voted double digits for a liberal state Supreme Court justice this year, right after it voted again for Ron Johnson.

I could go on!

The state is just a mess that defies all expectations and clean simple narratives, and has been for a long time. That's why I won't be surprised if it surprises again.

[TheTide]

For what it's worth, it is mentioned on the NBC election night coverage that Wisconsin voted for Nixon "thanks to Henry Cabot Lodge". I don't know what they meant by that.

[oldtimer]

For what it's worth, it is mentioned on the NBC election night coverage that Wisconsin voted for Nixon "thanks to Henry Cabot Lodge". I don't know what they meant by that.

Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. was Nixon's VP in 1960, though he was a Massachusetts Liberal.

[TheTide]

For what it's worth, it is mentioned on the NBC election night coverage that Wisconsin voted for Nixon "thanks to Henry Cabot Lodge". I don't know what they meant by that.

Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. was Nixon's VP in 1960, though he was a Massachusetts Liberal.

I know who he was, I just don't know how he could have been the main reason, as suggested above, for Nixon winning Wisconsin. A New England liberal Republican isn't likely to be particularly appealing to Wisconsin, and I don't think that Lodge was known for being an especially charismatic campaigner.

[TDAS04]

Anti-Catholicism definitely played a role in the Midwest. Look at those Norwegian farming communities in and around Minnesota, even those that Kennedy still won. See the 1956-1960 swings.

Wisconsin actually swung more than Minnesota in 1960. Wisconsin has more Catholics.

[Senator Incitatus]

For what it's worth, it is mentioned on the NBC election night coverage that Wisconsin voted for Nixon "thanks to Henry Cabot Lodge". I don't know what they meant by that.

Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. was Nixon's VP in 1960, though he was a Massachusetts Liberal.

I know who he was, I just don't know how he could have been the main reason, as suggested above, for Nixon winning Wisconsin. A New England liberal Republican isn't likely to be particularly appealing to Wisconsin, and I don't think that Lodge was known for being an especially charismatic campaigner.

Lodge did make multiple trips to Wisconsin in September and October. That's the only thing I can find directly related to the campaign.

Conjecture here, but it's possible that Lodge also did something particularly favored by Scandinavians at the United Nations?

[junior chįmp]

because 1964 was a landslide

[Republican Party Stalwart]

Nixon won Ohio both times too, and Carter won it '76, and it was leftwards of the nation.

It's really more curious how Dukakis couldn't win Ohio at all while easily taking Wisconsin.

Ohio is really more like Indiana than the other Great Lakes states. 

Except Ohio tracks Wisconsin pretty much perfectly until '88. Far more sense to be had of that than Michigan or Pennsylvania or Minnesota.

1856, 1892, 1896, 1900, 1916, 1924, 1928, and 1972 all quickly come to mind proving that wrong.

[DS0816]

This always seemed quite odd to me both years as he lost the similar states of Minnesota, Michigan, and Pennsylvania both times.  1968 was even more surprising given Humphrey’s close proximity to the state as Minnesota’s Senator.

At this particular point, every prevailing Republican, with exception of Calvin Coolidge in 1924, carried the state of Wisconsin. (The state’s own Robert La Follete, the Progressive Party nominee, carried it in 1924. The former governor and U.S. senator died the next year.)

This helps to explain a 1968 Richard Nixon.

Elections 1960 and 1968 were party switches for the White House.

A 1960 Democratic pickup winner John Kennedy barely pulled through; meaning, his U.S. Popular Vote percentage-points margin was a bare +0.17.

Kennedy carried eight of the nation’s Top 10 populous states. Historically, every candidate—incumbent or otherwise—who carried seven or more of the Top 10 states won that given election. (The two Top 10 states not carried by Kennedy: California and Ohio.)

Since 1960, but with exception of 1992 Bill Clinton, all winning Democrats have carried +21 or +22 states in excess of their U.S. Popular Vote percentage-points margin.

Kennedy won nationally by +0.17 and carried 22 states. He won five of the seven states in the 1956 Democratic column for Adlai Stevenson: Arkansas, Georgia, Missouri, North Carolina, and South Carolina. Kennedy carried a first-time participating Hawaii. Then, following a 1956 Stevenson’s U.S. Popular Vote margin of –15.40 percentage points with that 1960 Democratic pickup-winning +0.17—a national margin shift of +15.57—Kennedy flipped from the 1956 Republican [Dwight Eisenhower] to the 1960 Democratic column: New York; Pennsylvania; Illinois; Texas; Michigan; Massachusetts; New Jersey; Minnesota; Louisiana; Maryland; Connecticut; West Virginia; New Mexico; Rhode Island; Delaware; and Nevada.

Of the states in the 1960 Republican column, as 1956-to-1960 GOP holds, Wisconsin was six states following the Democrats’s cut-off. They were (from Democratic-to-Republican): California; a first-time participating Alaska; Washington; Montana; Florida; and Wisconsin. The margin in Wisconsin, for Richard Nixon, was +3.72 percentage points.

An interesting result with Election 1968, for a Republican pickup winner Richard Nixon, is this: He became the first winner of his party to not carry Pennsylvania or Michigan. Same is true with Minnesota. It should be noted that, from 1964 to 1984, but with exception in 1972, the Democrats had a Minnesotan on the Democratic ticket. Since after the 1950s, only with a 49-state re-elected Richard Nixon, in 1972, has the Republican Party carried Minnesota for U.S. President.

1968’s losing Democratic nominee Hubert Humphrey was fortunate to not lose even more states—he held 13 of the 44 carried by a 1964 full-term-elected Lyndon Johnson—and that this is more surprising. Wisconsin, as a 1968 Republican pickup, was Nixon’s No. 25 best-performed state. He carried 32. Of the states not carried, mentioned in this thread topic, Pennsylvania was No. 36; Michigan was No. 39; and Minnesota was No. 44.

In the most recent election cycles, dating back to 2004, Minnesota and New Hampshire have been voting alike. In Elections 2004 and 2016, the last two cycles lost by the Democratic Party, they slotted five consecutive numbers (the 2004 Democrats’s Nos. 15 to 19; the 2016 Democrats’s Nos. 19 to 23). This is why I think that with the next winning Republican map, likely due to a Republican pickup of the presidency, and given their proximity, all five will carry. (Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin are nowadays the nation’s top bellwether states.)

[Alcibiades]

Because Wisconsin was a generally Republican-leaning state in this period. This is not surprising considering its demographics; comparing it to its neighbours, it was more German and less Scandinavian than Minnesota, and less industrial and urban than Michigan. Wisconsin would not vote consistently more Democratic than the nation as a whole until the Farm Crisis of the 80s, which had the effect of shifting the hitherto mostly Republican Driftless region into the Democratic column.

In this light, then, the real outlier is Carter winning it in 1976 (in large part as a result of a very strong performance in the northwest of the state), which was widely considered the biggest individual state result shock at the time. 1972 is also interesting, though perhaps more explicable: states do weird things in their lean relative to the national vote share during landslides, and in general Wisconsin had more of the demographics that McGovern held up well with and even gained among — rural Upper Midwesterners as well as maybe something of a Dane County effect — while relatively lacking the traditional Democratic groups he slid most among.