United States presidential election, 1892

United States presidential election, 1892
United States
November 8, 1892
All 444 electoral votes of the Electoral College
223 electoral votes needed to win
Turnout 74.7%[1] Decrease 4.6 pp
 
Nominee Grover Cleveland Benjamin Harrison James B. Weaver
Party Democratic Republican Populist
Home state New York Indiana Iowa
Running mate Adlai Stevenson I Whitelaw Reid James G. Field
Electoral vote 277 145 22
States carried 23 16 5
Popular vote 5,556,918 5,176,108 1,041,028
Percentage 46.0% 43.0% 8.5%

Presidential election results map. Red denotes states won by Harrison/Reid, blue denotes those won by Cleveland/Stevenson light green denotes those won by Weaver/Field. Numbers indicate the number of electoral votes allotted to each state.
President before election

Benjamin Harrison
Republican

 Elected President

Grover Cleveland
Democratic

The United States presidential election of 1892 was the 27th quadrennial presidential election, held on Tuesday, November 8, 1892. It witnessed a re-match of the closely contested presidential election in 1888. Former Democratic President Grover Cleveland and incumbent Republican President Benjamin Harrison both ran for election to a second term. In 1888, Cleveland won the popular vote over Harrison, but lost in the electoral college. In a re-match, Cleveland won both the popular and electoral vote, thus becoming the first and to date only person in American history to be elected to a second, non-consecutive presidential term (and is also the only person to win a rematch against an incumbent President). The new Populist Party, formed by groups from The Grange, the Farmers' Alliances, and the Knights of Labor, also fielded a ticket; they polled best in the West, winning in five states and taking a total of 22 electoral votes.

The campaign centered mainly on economic issues, especially the concept of a sound currency. Cleveland was a proponent of the gold standard, while the Republicans and Populists both supported bimetalism. Cleveland also ran on a platform of lowering tariffs (the Republicans were strongly protectionist) and opposed the Republicans' 1890 voting rights proposal.

As of 1892, Cleveland was one of only two people (the other being Andrew Jackson) to win the popular vote in three U.S. presidential elections. In the twentieth century Franklin Delano Roosevelt eventually exceeded this distinction by winning the popular vote in four consecutive elections, as of 1944. Cleveland also became the first Democrat to be nominated by his party three times, a distinction matched later only by William Jennings Bryan and exceeded by Roosevelt.

Nominations

Republican Party nomination

Harrison/Reid campaign poster

Benjamin Harrison's administration was widely viewed as unsuccessful, and as a result, Thomas C. Platt (a political boss in New York) and other disaffected party leaders mounted a dump-Harrison movement coalescing around veteran candidate James G. Blaine from Maine, a favorite of Republican party regulars. Blaine had been the Republican nominee in 1884 when he was beaten by Democrat Grover Cleveland. Privately, Harrison did not want to be re-nominated for the presidency, but he remained opposed to the nomination going to Blaine, who he was convinced intended to run, and thought himself the only candidate capable of preventing such an occurrence. Blaine, however, did not want another fight for the nomination and a re-match against Cleveland at the general election. His health had begun to fail, and three of his children had recently died (Walker and Alice in 1890, and Emmons in 1892). Blaine refused to run actively, but the cryptic nature of his responses to a draft effort fueled speculation that he was not averse to such a movement. For his part, Benjamin Harrison curtly demanded that he either renounce his supporters or resign his position as Secretary of State, with Blaine choosing the latter a scant three days before the National Convention. A boom began to build around the "draft Blaine" effort with supporters hoping to cause a break towards their candidate.[2]

Senator John Sherman from Ohio, who had been the leading candidate for the nomination at the 1888 Republican Convention before Harrison actually won it, was also brought up again as a possible challenger. Like Blaine, however, he was averse to another bitter battle for the nomination and "like the rebels down South, want to be let alone." This inevitably turned attention to Ohio's Governor William McKinley, who was indecisive as to his intentions in spite his ill feelings toward Harrison and popularity among the Republican base. He was not averse to receiving the nomination, but did not expect to win it either. However, should Blaine and Harrison fail to attain the nomination after a number of ballots, he felt he could be brought forth as a harmony candidate. Despite the urging of Republican powerbroker Mark Hanna, McKinley would not openly put himself out as a potential candidate, afraid of offending Harrison and Blaine's supporters, while also feeling that the coming elections would not favor the Republicans.[3]

In any case, the president's forces had the nomination locked up by the time delegates met in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on June 7–10, 1892. Richard Thomas from Indiana delivered Harrison's nominating speech. Harrison was nominated on the first ballot with 535.17 votes to 182.83 for Blaine, 182 for McKinley, and the rest scattered. McKinley protested when the Ohio delegation threw its entire vote in his name, despite not being formally nominated, but Joseph Foraker, who headed the delegation, managed to silence him on a point of order.[4] With the ballots counted, many observers were surprised at the strength of the McKinley vote, which nearly overtook Blaine. Whitelaw Reid from New York, editor of the New York Tribune and recent United States Ambassador to France, was nominated for vice-president. The incumbent Vice President, Levi Morton, was supported by many at the convention, including Reid himself, but he did not wish to serve another term.[4] Harrison also did not want to have Morton on the ticket.

Democratic Party nomination

Cleveland/Stevenson campaign poster

By the beginning of 1892, many Americans were ready to return to Cleveland's political policies. Although he was the clear frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination, he was far from the universal choice of the party's supporters; many, such as the journalists Henry Watterson and Charles Dana, thought that if he were to attain the nomination, their party would lose in November, but there were few capable of challenging him effectively. Though he had remained relatively quiet on the issue of silver versus gold, often deferring to bi-metallism, Senate Democrats in January 1891 voted for free coinage of silver. Furious, he sent a letter to Ellery Anderson, who headed the New York Reform Club, to condemn the party's apparent drift towards inflation and agrarian control, the "dangerous and reckless experiment of free, unlimited coinage of silver at our mints." Advisors warned that such statements might alienate potential supporters in the South and West and risk his chances for the nomination, but Cleveland felt that being right on the issue was more important than the nomination. After making his position clear, Cleveland worked to focus his campaign on tariff reform, hoping that the silver issue would dissipate.[5]

A challenger emerged in the form of David Hill, former Governor of and incumbent Senator from New York. In favor of bi-metallism and tariff reform, Hill hoped to make inroads with Cleveland's supporters while appealing to those in the South and Midwest that were not keen on nominating Cleveland for a third consecutive time. Hill had begun to run for the position of president unofficially as early as 1890, and he even offered former Postmaster General Donald Dickinson his support for the vice-presidential nomination. He was not able to escape his past association with Tammany Hall, however, which he supported along machine politics, and the lack of confidence in his ability to defeat Cleveland for the nomination kept Hill from attaining the support he needed. By the time of the convention, Cleveland could count on the support of majority of the state Democratic parties, though his native New York remained pledged to Senator Hill.[6]

In a narrow first-ballot victory, Cleveland received 617.33 votes, barely 10 more than needed, to 114 for Senator Hill from New York, 103 for Governor Horace Boies of Iowa, a populist and former Republican, and the rest scattered. Although the Cleveland forces preferred Isaac P. Gray from Indiana for vice-president, Cleveland directed his own support to the convention favorite, Adlai E. Stevenson from Illinois.[7] As a supporter of using paper greenbacks and free silver to inflate the currency and alleviate economic distress in rural districts, Stevenson balanced the ticket headed by Cleveland, who supported hard-money and the gold standard. At the same time, it was hoped that his nomination would represent a promise not to ignore regulars, and so potentially get Hill and Tammany Hall to support the Democratic ticket to their fullest in the coming election.[8][9]

People's Party nomination

Populist candidates:

Weaver/Field campaign poster

In 1891, the American farmers' alliances met with delegates from labor and reform groups in Cincinnati, Ohio, to discuss the formation of a new political party. They formed the People's Party, commonly known as the "Populists," a year later in St. Louis, Missouri.

Leonidas L. Polk was the initial frontrunner for the presidential nomination. He had been instrumental in the party's formation and held great appeal with its agrarian base, but he unexpectedly died while in Washington, D.C., on June 11. Another candidate mentioned frequently for the nomination was Walter Q. Gresham, an appellate judge who had made a number of rulings against the railroads that made him a favorite of some farmer and labor groups, and it was felt that his rather dignified image would make the Populists appear as more than a minor contender. Both Democrats and Republicans feared his nomination for this reason, and while Gresham toyed with the idea, he ultimately was not ready to make a complete break with the two parties, declining petitions for his nomination right up to and during the Populist Convention. Later he would endorse Grover Cleveland for the presidency.[10]

At the first Populist national convention in Omaha, Nebraska, in July 1892, James B. Weaver from Iowa was nominated for president on the first ballot, now lacking any serious opposition. While his nomination brought with him significant campaigning experience from over several decades, he also had a longer tract of history for which Republicans and Democrats could criticize him, and he also alienated many potential supporters in the South, having participated in Sherman's March to the Sea. James G. Field from Virginia was nominated for vice-president to try and rectify this problem while also attaining the regional balance often seen in Republican and Democratic tickets.[11]

Presidential Ballot Vice Presidential Ballot
Ballot1st 1st
James B. Weaver 995James G. Field 733
James H. Kyle 265Ben Stockton Terrell 554
Seymour F. Norton 1
Mann Page 1
Others 1

Source: US President – P Convention. Our Campaigns. (September 7, 2009). Source: US Vice President – P Convention. Our Campaigns. (September 7, 2009).

The Populist platform called for nationalization of the telegraph, telephone, and railroads, free coinage of silver, a graduated income tax, and creation of postal savings banks.

Prohibition Party nomination

Prohibition candidates:

National Prohibition Convention, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1892.

The sixth Prohibition Party National Convention assembled in Music Hall in Cincinnati, Ohio. There were 972 delegates present from all states except Louisiana and South Carolina.

Two major stories about the convention loomed before it assembled. In the first place, some members of the national committee sought to merge the Prohibition and Populist Parties. While there appeared a likelihood that the merger would materialize, it was clear that it was not going to happen by the time that the convention convened. Secondly, the southern states sent a number of black delegates. Cincinnati hotels refused to serve meals to blacks and whites at the same time, and several hotels refused service to the black delegates altogether.

The convention nominated John Bidwell from California for president on the first ballot. Prior to the convention, the race was thought to be close between Bidwell and William Jennings Demorest, but the New York delegation became irritated with Demorest and voted for Bidwell 73-7. James B. Cranfill from Texas was nominated for vice-president on the first ballot with 417 votes to 351 for Joshua Levering from Maryland and 45 for others.[12]

Presidential Ballot
Ballot1st
John Bidwell 590
Gideon T. Stewart 179
William Jennings Demorest 139
H. Clay Bascom 3

Source: US President – P Convention. Our Campaigns. (May 9, 2010).

Socialist Labor Party Nomination

The first Socialist Labor Party National Convention assembled in New York City and, despite running on a platform that called for the abolition of the positions of president and vice-president, decided to nominate candidates for those positions: Simon Wing from Massachusetts for president and Charles Matchett from New York for vice-president. They were on the ballot in five states: Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania.[13]

General election

Campaign

Cleveland/Stevenson poster.

The tariff issue dominated this rather lackluster campaign. Harrison defended the protectionist McKinley Tariff passed during his term. For his part, Cleveland assured voters that he opposed absolute free trade and would continue his campaign for a reduction in the tariff. Cleveland also denounced the Lodge Bill, a voting rights bill that sought to protect the rights of African American voters in the South.[14] William McKinley campaigned extensively for Harrison, setting the stage for his own run four years later.

The campaign took a somber turn when, in October, First Lady Caroline Harrison died. Despite the ill health that had plagued Mrs. Harrison since her youth and had worsened in the last decade, she often accompanied Mr. Harrison on official travels. On one such trip, to California in the spring of 1891, she caught a cold. It quickly deepened into her chest, and she was eventually diagnosed with tuberculosis. A summer in the Adirondack Mountains failed to restore her to health. An invalid the last six months of her life, she died in the White House on October 25, 1892, just two weeks before the national election. As a result, all of the candidates ceased campaigning.

Results

Results by county explicitly indicating the percentage for the winning candidate. Shades of blue are for Cleveland (Democratic), shades of red are for Harrison (Republican), and shades of green are for Weaver (Populist).

The margin in the popular vote for Cleveland was 400,000, the largest since Grant's re-election in 1872.[15] The Democrats won the presidency and both houses of Congress for the first time since 1856. President Harrison's re-election bid was a decisive loss in both the popular and electoral count, unlike President Cleveland's re-election bid four years earlier, in which he won the popular vote, but lost the electoral vote. Cleveland was the third of only five presidents to win re-election with a smaller percentage of the popular vote than in previous elections, although in the two prior such incidents—James Madison in 1812 and Andrew Jackson in 1832—not all states held popular elections. Ironically, Cleveland saw his popular support decrease not only from his electoral win in 1884, but also from his electoral loss in 1888. A similar vote decrease would happen again for Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1940 and 1944 and Barack Obama in 2012.

At the county level, the Democratic candidate fared much better than the Republican candidate. The Republicans' vote was not nearly as widespread as the Democrats. In 1892, it was still a sectionally based party mainly situated in the East, Midwest, and West and was barely visible south of the Mason–Dixon line. In only a few counties in the South was the party holding on. In East Tennessee and tidewater Virginia, the vote at the county level showed some strength, but it barely existed in Alabama, Mississippi, and Texas.[16]

In a continuation of its collapse there during the 1890 Congressional elections, the Republican Party even struggled in its Midwestern strongholds, where general electoral troubles from economic woes were acutely exacerbated by the promotion of temperance laws and, in Wisconsin and Illinois, the aggressive support of state politicians for English-only compulsory education laws. Such policies, which particularly in the case of the latter were associated with an upwelling of nativist and anti-Catholic attitudes amongst their supporters, resulted in the defection of large sections of immigrant communities, especially Germans, to the Democratic Party. Cleveland carried Wisconsin and Illinois with their 36 combined electoral votes, a Democratic victory not seen in those states since 1852 and 1856, respectively, and which would not be repeated until Woodrow Wilson's election in 1912. While not as dramatic a loss as in 1890, it would take until the next election cycle for more moderate Republican leaders to pick up the pieces left by the reformist crusaders and bring alienated immigrants back to the fold.[17]

Of the 2,683 counties making returns, Cleveland won in 1,389 (51.77%), Harrison carried 1,017 (37.91%), while Weaver placed first in 276 (10.29%). One county (0.04%) split evenly between Cleveland and Harrison.

Populist James B. Weaver, calling for free coinage of silver and an inflationary monetary policy, received such strong support in the West that he become the only third-party nominee between 1860 and 1912 to carry a single state. The Democratic Party did not have a presidential ticket on the ballot in the states of Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, North Dakota, or Wyoming, and Weaver won the first four of these states.[18]

Weaver also performed well in the South as he won counties in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, and Texas. Populists did best in Alabama, where electoral chicanery probably carried the day for the Democrats.[15]

The Prohibition ticket received 270,879, or 2.2% nationwide. It was the largest total vote and highest percentage of the vote received by any Prohibition Party national ticket.

Wyoming, having attained statehood two years earlier, became the first state to allow women to vote in a presidential election since 1804. (Women in New Jersey had the right to vote under the state's original constitution, but this right was rescinded in 1807.)

Wyoming was also one of six states (along with North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Washington, and Idaho) participating in their first presidential election—other than the first election, the most in American history.

Electors from the state of Michigan were selected using the congressional district method (the winner in each congressional district wins one electoral vote, the winner of the state wins two electoral votes). This resulted in a split between the Republican and Democratic electors: nine for Harrison and five for Cleveland.[19]

In Oregon, the direct election of presidential electors combined with the fact that one Weaver elector was endorsed by the Democratic Party and elected as a Fusionist, resulted in a split between the Republican and Populist electors: three for Harrison and one for Weaver.[19]

In California, the direct election of presidential electors combined with the close race resulted in a split between the Republican and Democratic electors: eight for Cleveland and one for Harrison.[19]

In Ohio, the direct election of presidential electors combined with the close race resulted in a split between the Republican and Democratic of electors: 22 for Harrison and one for Cleveland.[19]

In North Dakota, two electors from the Democratic-Populist Fusion ticket won and one Republican Elector won. This created a split delegation of electors: one for Weaver, one for Harrison, and one for Cleveland.[19]

This was the first occasion in which incumbent presidents were defeated in two consecutive elections. This would not happen again until 1980.

Presidential candidate Party Home state Popular vote Electoral
vote		 Running mate
Count Pct Vice-presidential candidate Home state Elect. vote
Grover Cleveland Democratic New York 5,553,898 46.02% 277 Adlai E. Stevenson Illinois 277
Benjamin Harrison (Incumbent) Republican Indiana 5,190,819 43.01% 145 Whitelaw Reid New York 145
James B. Weaver Populist Iowa 1,026,595 8.51% 22 James G. Field Virginia 22
John Bidwell Prohibition California 270,879 2.24% 0 James Cranfill Texas 0
Simon Wing Socialist Labor Massachusetts 21,173 0.18% 0 Charles Matchett New York 0
Other 4,673 0.04% — Other —
Total 12,068,037 100% 444 444
Needed to win 223 223

Source (Popular Vote): Leip, David. "1892 Presidential Election Results". Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. Retrieved July 27, 2005. 

Source (Electoral Vote): "Electoral College Box Scores 1789–1996". National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved July 31, 2005. 

Popular vote
Cleveland
  
 46.02%
Harrison
  
 43.01%
Weaver
  
 8.51%
Bidwell
  
 2.24%
Others
  
 0.21%
Electoral vote
Cleveland
  
 62.39%
Harrison
  
 32.66%
Weaver
  
 4.95%

Geography of Results

Results by state

Source: Data from Walter Dean Burnham, Presidential ballots, 1836–1892 (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1955) pp 247-57.[20]

States won by Cleveland/Stevenson
States won by Harrison/Reid
States won by Weaver/Field
Grover Cleveland
Democratic		 Benjamin Harrison
Republican		 James Weaver
Populist		 John Bidwell
Prohibition		 Simon Wing
Socialist Labor		 Margin State Total
State electoral
votes		 # % electoral
votes		 # % electoral
votes		 # % electoral
votes		 # % electoral
votes		 # % electoral
votes		 # % #
Alabama 11 138,135 59.40 11 9,184 3.95 - 84,984 36.55 - 240 0.10 - - - - 53,151 22.86 232,543 AL
Arkansas 8 87,834 59.30 8 47,072 31.78 - 11,831 7.99 - 113 0.08 - - - - 40,762 27.52 148,117 AR
California 9 118,174 43.83 8 118,027 43.78 1 25,311 9.39 - 8,096 3.00 - - - - 147 0.05 269,609 CA
Colorado 4 - - - 38,620 41.13 - 53,584 57.07 4 1,687 1.80 - - - - -14,964 -15.94 93,891 CO
Connecticut 6 82,395 50.06 6 77,032 46.80 - 809 0.49 - 4,026 2.45 - 333 0.20 - 5,363 3.26 164,595 CT
Delaware 3 18,581 49.90 3 18,077 48.55 - - - - 564 1.51 - - - - 504 1.35 37,235 DE
Florida 4 30,153 85.01 4 - - - 4,843 13.65 - 475 1.34 - - - - 25,310 71.35 35,471 FL
Georgia 13 129,446 58.01 13 48,408 21.70 - 41,939 18.80 - 988 0.44 - - - - 81,038 36.32 223,126 GA
Idaho 3 - - - 8,599 44.31 - 10,520 54.21 3 288 1.48 - - - - -1,921 -9.90 19,407 ID
Illinois 24 426,281 48.79 24 399,288 45.70 - 22,207 2.54 - 25,871 2.96 - - - - 26,993 3.09 873,647 IL
Indiana 15 262,740 47.46 15 255,615 46.17 - 22,208 4.01 - 13,050 2.36 - - - - 7,125 1.29 553,613 IN
Iowa 13 196,367 44.31 - 219,795 49.60 13 20,595 4.65 - 6,402 1.44 - - - - -23,428 -5.29 443,159 IA
Kansas 10 - - - 157,241 48.40 - 163,111 50.20 10 4,553 1.40 - - - - -5,870 -1.81 324,905 KS
Kentucky 13 175,461 51.48 13 135,462 39.74 - 23,500 6.89 - 6,441 1.89 - - - - 39,999 11.73 340,864 KY
Louisiana 8 87,926 76.53 8 26,963 23.47 - - - - - - - - - - 60,963 53.06 114,889 LA
Maine 6 48,049 41.26 - 62,936 54.05 6 2,396 2.06 - 3,066 2.63 - - - - -14,887 -12.78 116,451 ME
Maryland 8 113,866 53.39 8 92,736 43.48 - 796 0.37 - 5,877 2.76 - - - - 21,130 9.91 213,275 MD
Massachusetts 15 176,813 45.22 - 202,814 51.87 15 3,210 0.82 - 7,539 1.93 - 649 0.17 - -26,001 -6.65 391,028 MA
Michigan 14 201,624 43.26 5 222,708 47.79 9 19,931 4.28 - 20,857 4.48 - - - - -21,084 -4.52 466,045 MI
Minnesota 9 100,920 37.76 - 122,823 45.96 9 29,313 10.97 - 14,182 5.31 - - - - -21,903 -8.20 267,238 MN
Mississippi 9 40,030 76.22 9 1,398 2.66 - 10,118 19.27 - 973 1.85 - - - - 29,912 56.95 52,519 MS
Missouri 17 268,400 49.56 17 227,646 42.03 - 41,204 7.61 - 4,333 0.80 - - - - 40,754 7.52 541,583 MO
Montana 3 17,690 39.79 - 18,871 42.44 3 7,338 16.50 - 562 1.26 - - - - -1,181 -2.66 44,461 MT
Nebraska 8 24,943 12.46 - 87,213 43.56 8 83,134 41.53 - 4,902 2.45 - - - - -4,079 -2.04 200,192 NE
Nevada 3 714 6.56 - 2,811 25.84 - 7,264 66.78 3 89 0.82 - - - - -4,453 -40.94 10,878 NV
New Hampshire 4 42,081 47.11 - 45,658 51.11 4 293 0.33 - 1,297 1.45 - - - - -3,577 -4.00 89,329 NH
New Jersey 10 171,066 50.67 10 156,101 46.24 - 985 0.29 - 8,134 2.41 - 1,337 0.40 - 14,965 4.43 337,623 NJ
New York 36 654,868 48.99 36 609,350 45.58 - 16,429 1.23 - 38,190 2.86 - 17,956 1.34 - 45,518 3.41 1,336,793 NY
North Carolina 11 132,951 47.44 11 100,346 35.80 - 44,336 15.82 - 2,637 0.94 - - - - 32,605 11.63 280,270 NC
North Dakota 3 0 0.00 1 17,519 48.50 1 17,700 49.01 1 899 2.49 - - - - -181 -0.50 36,118 ND
Ohio 23 404,115 47.53 1 405,187 47.66 22 14,850 1.75 - 26,012 3.06 - - - - -1,072 -0.13 850,164 OH
Oregon 4 14,243 18.15 - 35,002 44.59 3 26,965 34.35 1 2,281 2.91 - - - - -8,037 -10.24 78,491 OR
Pennsylvania 32 452,264 45.09 - 516,011 51.45 32 8,714 0.87 - 25,123 2.50 - 898 0.09 - -63,747 -6.36 1,003,010 PA
Rhode Island 4 24,336 45.75 - 26,975 50.71 4 228 0.43 - 1,654 3.11 - - - - -2,639 -4.96 53,196 RI
South Carolina 9 54,680 77.56 9 13,345 18.93 - 2,407 3.41 - - - - - - - 41,335 58.63 70,504 SC
South Dakota 4 9,081 12.88 - 34,888 49.48 4 26,544 37.64 - - - - - - - -8,344 -11.83 70,513 SD
Tennessee 12 136,468 51.36 12 100,537 37.83 - 23,918 9.00 - 4,809 1.81 - - - - 35,931 13.52 265,732 TN
Texas 15 239,148 56.65 15 81,144 19.22 - 99,688 23.61 - 2,165 0.51 - - - - 139,460 33.04 422,145 TX
Vermont 4 16,325 29.26 - 37,992 68.09 4 44 0.08 - 1,424 2.55 - - - - -21,667 -38.83 55,796 VT
Virginia 12 164,136 56.17 12 113,098 38.70 - 12,275 4.20 - 2,729 0.93 - - - - 51,038 17.46 292,238 VA
Washington 4 29,802 33.88 - 36,460 41.45 4 19,165 21.79 - 2,542 2.89 - - - - -6,658 -7.57 87,969 WA
West Virginia 6 84,467 49.37 6 80,292 46.93 - 4,167 2.44 - 2,153 1.26 - - - - 4,175 2.44 171,079 WV
Wisconsin 12 177,325 47.72 12 171,101 46.05 - 10,019 2.70 - 13,136 3.54 - - - - 6,224 1.68 371,581 WI
Wyoming 3 - - - 8,454 50.52 3 7,722 46.14 - 530 3.17 - - - - -732 -4.37 16,735 WY
TOTALS: 444 5,553,898 46.02 277 5,190,799 43.01 145 1,026,595 8.51 22 270,889 2.24 - 21,173 0.18 - 363,099 3.01 12,068,027 US

Close states

Margin of victory less than 5% (193 electoral votes):

  1. California, 0.05%
  2. Ohio, 0.13%
  3. North Dakota, 0.50%
  4. Indiana, 1.29%
  5. Delaware, 1.35%
  6. Wisconsin, 1.68%
  7. Kansas, 1.81%
  8. Nebraska, 2.04%
  9. West Virginia, 2.44%
  10. Montana, 2.66%
  11. Illinois, 3.09%
  12. Connecticut, 3.26%
  13. New York, 3.41%
  14. New Hampshire, 4.00%
  15. Wyoming, 4.37%
  16. New Jersey, 4.43%
  17. Michigan, 4.52%
  18. Rhode Island, 4.96%

Margin of victory between 5% and 10% (101 electoral votes):

  1. Iowa, 5.29%
  2. Pennsylvania, 6.36%
  3. Massachusetts, 6.65%
  4. Missouri, 7.52%
  5. Washington, 7.57%
  6. Minnesota, 8.20%
  7. Idaho, 9.90%
  8. Maryland, 9.91%

See also

References

  1. ↑ "Voter Turnout in Presidential Elections". The American Presidency Project. UC Santa Barbara.
  2. ↑ History of American Presidential Elections, Volume II, Pgs 1706–1708
  3. ↑ History of American Presidential Elections, Volume II, Pgs 1706–1707
  4. 1 2 History of American Presidential Elections, Volume II, Pgs 1716
  5. ↑ History of American Presidential Elections, Volume II, Pg 1710–1711
  6. ↑ History of American Presidential Elections, Volume II, Pg 1711–1714
  7. ↑ William DeGregorio, The Complete Book of U.S. Presidents, Gramercy 1997
  8. ↑ "VP Adlai Stevenson". Senate.gov. Retrieved 2016-08-18.
  9. ↑ History of American Presidential Elections, Volume II, p. 1719–1720
  10. ↑ History of American Presidential Elections Volume II 1848–1896; Schlesinger; Pgs 1721–1722
  11. ↑ History of American Presidential Elections Volume II 1848–1896; Schlesinger; Pgs 1722–1723
  12. ↑ "US President – PRB Convention Race – Jun 29, 1892". Our Campaigns. February 24, 2008. Retrieved November 18, 2013.
  13. ↑ "US President – SLP Convention Race – Aug 28, 1892". Our Campaigns. January 28, 2006. Retrieved November 18, 2013.
  14. ↑ Sig Synnestvedt, The White Response to Black Emancipation: Second-class Citizenship in the United States Since Reconstruction. (1972). p 41.
  15. 1 2 Charles W. Calhoun (ed.), The Gilded Age: Perspectives on the Origins of Modern America. Blue Ridge Summit, PA: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2006; pg. 295.
  16. ↑ Presidential Elections, 1789–2008: County, State, and National Mapping of Election Data, Donald R. Deskins, Jr., Hanes Walton, Jr., and Sherman C. Puckett, pg. 250
  17. ↑ Jensen, Richard J. The Winning of the Midwest: Social and Political Conflict, 1888–1896, ch. 4: Iowa, Wet or Dry? & ch. 5: Education, the Tariff, and the Melting Pot. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1971. pp. 89-153.
  18. ↑ Nathan Fine, Farmer and Labor Parties in the United States, 1828–1928. New York: Rand School of Social Science, 1928; pg. 79.
  19. 1 2 3 4 5
  20. ↑ "1892 Presidential General Election Data – National". Uselectionatlas.org. Retrieved May 7, 2013.

Further reading

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 12/4/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.