1928 United States presidential election in North Carolina

none June 2025 September 2023 1928 United States presidential election in North Carolina North Carolina presidential no 1924 United States presidential election in North Carolina 1924 1932 United States presidential election in North Carolina 1932 November 6, 1928 Image:Herbert Hoover - NARA - 532049.jpg 200x200px Herbert Hoover Republican Party (United States) California Charles Curtis 12 348,923 54.94% Image:Unsuccessful 1928.jpg Al Smith Democratic Party (United States) New York Joseph T. Robinson 0 286,227 45.06% 400px 400px County results Hoover #e27f90 50–60% #cc2f4a 60–70% #d40000 70–80% #aa0000 80–90% Smith #86b6f2 50–60% #4389e3 60–70% #1666cb 70–80% #0645b4 80–90% President Calvin Coolidge Republican Party (United States) Herbert Hoover Republican Party (United States) 1928 United States presidential election The 1928 United States presidential election in North Carolina was held on November 6, 1928. North Carolina voters chose twelve electors to the Electoral College, who voted for president and vice president. As a former Confederate state, North Carolina had a history of Jim Crow laws, disfranchisement of its African-American population and dominance of the Democratic Party in state politics. However, unlike the Deep South, the Republican Party had sufficient historic Unionist White support from the mountains and northwestern Piedmont to gain a stable one-third of the statewide vote total in most general elections,Phillips, Kevin P.; The Emerging Republican Majority, pp. 210, 242 978-0-691-16324-6 where turnout was higher than elsewhere in the former Confederacy due substantially to the state's early abolition of the poll tax in 1920.Key, Valdimer Orlando; Southern Politics in State and Nation, p. 502, Alfred A. Knopf (1949) A rapid move following disenfranchisement to a completely "lily-white" state GOP also helped maintain Republican support amongst the state's voters.Heersink Boris Jenkins Jeffery A. Republican Party Politics and the American South, 1865–1968 2020 48–50, 239–243 Cambridge University Press 9781316663950 Like Virginia, Tennessee and Oklahoma, the relative strength of Republican opposition meant that North Carolina did not have statewide White primaries, although certain counties did use the White primary.Klarman Michael J. The White Primary Rulings: A Case Study in the Consequences of Supreme Court Decision-Making Florida State University Law Review 29 2001 55–107 At the beginning of October, polls were suggesting that despite the divide in the state's Democrats, Smith would carry the state, and he visited Raleigh in mid-October.Merrill Charles Raleigh Will Give Smith Warm Welcome Today: North Carolina Seems Safe For Governor Unless Simmons Comes Out For Hoover, Says Merrill Daily Boston Globe October 11, 1928 16 This prediction of a Smith victory despite Protestant opposition to his Catholicism and his anti-Prohibition views seemed confirmed in the days before the poll.State Forecasts Lean to Hoover: Reports From Close States Take View That He Is Stronger Than Smith The New York Times November 4, 1928 33 However, with late counting, it became apparent that Smith had lost the state alongside Virginia, Florida and Texas.Hoover's Plurality 5,000,000, Congress Safely Republican: Late Returns Add to Republican Nominee's Hold On 40 States and Electoral Vote of 444 Daily Boston Globe November 8, 1928 1 Hoover's victory was due to a combination of anti-Catholicism – at its strongest in the fishing communities of the Outer Banks, where he carried several counties that had gone to John W. Davis in 1924 by four- or five-to-one margins – with increasing middle-class Republican voting in such cities as Charlotte, Durham and Greensboro.Phillips; The Emerging Republican Majority, pp. 212-215 Although the state's Black Belt remained extremely loyal to Smith,Phillips, The Emerging Republican Majority, p. 303 this was not enough to come close to holding the state against traditional Appalachian Republicanism alongside urban and Outer Banks trends against him. Overall, Hoover won North Carolina by 9.88 percent, which made it his second-best state in the former Confederacy after Florida, and the only occasion between 1876 and 1964 in which North Carolina would vote Republican. The state would subsequently vote solidly Democratic until Richard Nixon won it in 1968. 2024 11 As of the 2024 presidential election, this is the last election in which Orange County voted for a Republican presidential candidate.Sullivan, Robert David; ‘How the Red and Blue Map Evolved Over the Past Century’; America Magazine in The National Catholic Review; June 29, 2016 Results 1928 United States presidential election in North Carolinahttps://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=1928&fips=37&off=0&elect=0&f=0 Dave Leip's U.S. Election Atlas 1928 Presidential General Election Results – North Carolina Herbert Hoover Republican Party (United States) 348,923 54.94% Al Smith Democratic Party (United States) 286,227 45.06% 635,150 100.00% Results by county 1928 United States presidential election in North Carolina by countyOur Campaigns https://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=2984 NC US President Race, November 06, 1928CountyHerbert Clark HooverRepublicanAlfred Emmanuel SmithDemocraticMargin % # % # % # Avery 89.35% 3,273 10.65% 390 78.71% 2,883 Yadkin 83.60% 3,878 16.40% 761 67.19% 3,117 Madison 81.38% 4,776 18.62% 1,093 62.75% 3,683 Mitchell 80.60% 3,436 19.40% 827 61.20% 2,609 Wilkes 73.59% 7,808 26.41% 2,802 47.18% 5,006 Davie 73.17% 2,959 26.83% 1,085 46.34% 1,874 Sampson 70.94% 5,579 29.06% 2,285 41.89% 3,294 Forsyth 66.63% 13,258 33.37% 6,639 33.27% 6,619 Durham 66.06% 8,723 33.94% 4,482 32.12% 4,241 Surry 65.79% 7,015 34.21% 3,647 31.59% 3,368 Stokes 65.61% 3,759 34.39% 1,970 31.23% 1,789 Brunswick 65.48% 1,931 34.52% 1,018 30.96% 913 Caldwell 64.74% 4,207 35.26% 2,291 29.49% 1,916 Burke 63.94% 5,108 36.06% 2,881 27.88% 2,227 Randolph 63.90% 7,414 36.10% 4,188 27.81% 3,226 Davidson 63.19% 8,960 36.81% 5,220 26.38% 3,740 Cherokee 62.89% 3,239 37.11% 1,911 25.79% 1,328 Guilford 62.62% 16,541 37.38% 9,872 25.25% 6,669 Rowan 62.46% 7,957 37.54% 4,783 24.91% 3,174 Henderson 62.33% 5,210 37.67% 3,149 24.66% 2,061 Rockingham 62.08% 5,585 37.92% 3,411 24.17% 2,174 Alamance 61.52% 6,810 38.48% 4,260 23.04% 2,550 New Hanover 60.62% 4,248 39.38% 2,760 21.23% 1,488 Catawba 60.58% 7,556 39.42% 4,916 21.17% 2,640 Stanly 60.51% 4,597 39.49% 3,000 21.02% 1,597 Carteret 60.51% 3,133 39.49% 2,045 21.01% 1,088 Johnston 60.42% 7,696 39.58% 5,041 20.84% 2,655 Alexander 60.20% 2,605 39.80% 1,722 20.41% 883 Gaston 59.14% 9,702 40.86% 6,702 18.29% 3,000 Swain 59.04% 2,484 40.96% 1,723 18.09% 761 Orange 58.77% 2,564 41.23% 1,799 17.53% 765 Rutherford 58.16% 5,762 41.84% 4,146 16.31% 1,616 Iredell 58.12% 6,712 41.88% 4,836 16.25% 1,876 Jones 57.52% 658 42.48% 486 15.03% 172 Lincoln 57.43% 3,930 42.57% 2,913 14.86% 1,017 Cabarrus 57.35% 6,548 42.65% 4,869 14.71% 1,679 Buncombe 57.22% 16,590 42.78% 12,405 14.43% 4,185 Harnett 57.15% 4,740 42.85% 3,554 14.30% 1,186 Macon 56.99% 2,903 43.01% 2,191 13.98% 712 Washington 56.85% 1,183 43.15% 898 13.70% 285 Montgomery 56.82% 2,653 43.18% 2,016 13.64% 637 Graham 56.68% 1,260 43.32% 963 13.36% 297 Pender 56.57% 1,300 43.43% 998 13.14% 302 Transylvania 55.70% 2,165 44.30% 1,722 11.40% 443 Ashe 55.64% 4,337 44.36% 3,458 11.28% 879 Pamlico 55.59% 1,099 44.41% 878 11.18% 221 Moore 55.49% 3,290 44.51% 2,639 10.98% 651 Mecklenburg 55.41% 12,041 44.59% 9,690 10.82% 2,351 Chatham 55.32% 3,318 44.68% 2,680 10.64% 638 Columbus 55.32% 3,533 44.68% 2,854 10.63% 679 Bladen 55.18% 1,911 44.82% 1,552 10.37% 359 Clay 55.05% 1,106 44.95% 903 10.10% 203 Watauga 54.94% 3,159 45.06% 2,591 9.88% 568 Onslow 53.89% 1,253 46.11% 1,072 7.78% 181 Wayne 53.85% 4,340 46.15% 3,720 7.69% 620 Polk 53.68% 1,873 46.32% 1,616 7.37% 257 Hyde 53.62% 682 46.38% 590 7.23% 92 Jackson 52.55% 3,512 47.45% 3,171 5.10% 341 Duplin 52.37% 2,911 47.63% 2,647 4.75% 264 Yancey 52.27% 2,712 47.73% 2,476 4.55% 236 Cumberland 51.73% 3,534 48.27% 3,297 3.47% 237 Haywood 51.73% 4,472 48.27% 4,173 3.46% 299 Tyrrell 51.53% 505 48.47% 475 3.06% 30 McDowell 49.95% 3,423 50.05% 3,430 -0.10% -7 Perquimans 49.63% 600 50.37% 609 -0.74% -9 Gates 49.38% 558 50.62% 572 -1.24% -14 Cleveland 49.24% 4,766 50.76% 4,914 -1.53% -148 Alleghany 49.17% 1,368 50.83% 1,414 -1.65% -46 Dare 47.97% 814 52.03% 883 -4.07% -69 Person 47.63% 1,123 52.37% 1,235 -4.75% -112 Craven 47.28% 2,237 52.72% 2,494 -5.43% -257 Union 46.29% 2,448 53.71% 2,840 -7.41% -392 Lee 45.23% 1,416 54.77% 1,715 -9.55% -299 Caswell 44.45% 749 55.55% 936 -11.10% -187 Wake 41.84% 6,720 58.16% 9,341 -16.32% -2,621 Beaufort 41.64% 2,521 58.36% 3,533 -16.72% -1,012 Richmond 40.74% 2,045 59.26% 2,975 -18.53% -930 Vance 37.70% 1,449 62.30% 2,395 -24.61% -946 Robeson 36.91% 2,767 63.09% 4,730 -26.18% -1,963 Lenoir 35.68% 1,311 64.32% 2,363 -28.63% -1,052 Wilson 35.35% 1,933 64.65% 3,535 -29.30% -1,602 Nash 32.72% 2,066 67.28% 4,249 -34.57% -2,183 Greene 31.46% 542 68.54% 1,181 -37.09% -639 Pasquotank 29.52% 814 70.48% 1,943 -40.95% -1,129 Camden 28.19% 245 71.81% 624 -43.61% -379 Hertford 27.62% 393 72.38% 1,030 -44.76% -637 Chowan 27.33% 352 72.67% 936 -45.34% -584 Scotland 25.03% 588 74.97% 1,761 -49.94% -1,173 Pitt 23.09% 1,395 76.91% 4,646 -53.82% -3,251 Granville 22.46% 858 77.54% 2,962 -55.08% -2,104 Hoke 21.23% 311 78.77% 1,154 -57.54% -843 Northampton 20.93% 456 79.07% 1,723 -58.15% -1,267 Franklin 20.48% 729 79.52% 2,831 -59.04% -2,102 Anson 19.77% 726 80.23% 2,947 -60.47% -2,221 Edgecombe 18.93% 977 81.07% 4,184 -62.14% -3,207 Bertie 15.75% 374 84.25% 2,000 -68.49% -1,626 Warren 15.69% 379 84.31% 2,037 -68.63% -1,658 Halifax 15.42% 890 84.58% 4,882 -69.16% -3,992 Martin 12.73% 411 87.27% 2,818 -74.54% -2,407 Currituck 11.70% 166 88.30% 1,253 -76.60% -1,087 Analysis With all other prominent Democrats sitting the election out,Warren Kenneth F. Encyclopedia of U.S. campaigns, elections, and electoral behavior: A-M, Volume 1 April 4, 2008 620 978-1412954891 the party nominated Alfred E. Smith, four-term Governor of New York as its nominee for 1928, with little opposition. The response in the South was one of anger, because Smith was a devout Catholic, opposed to Prohibition, linked with New York City's Tammany Hall political machine, and the son of Irish and Italian immigrants. Whilst it is generally thought that the South would have accepted a man possessing one of those characteristics,Kennedy David M. Cohen Elizabeth The American Pageant, Volume 2 739 1111831432 the combination proved a bitter dose for many of North Carolina's loyal Democrats. Bishop James M. Cannon summoned a meeting of church leaders in Asheville on July 18 toorganize for the "defeat of the wet Tammany candidate for president"Bauman, Mark K.; ‘Prohibition and Politics: Warren Candler and Al Smith's 1928 Campaign’; The Mississippi Quarterly, volume 31, no. 1 (Winter 1977–78), pp. 109-117At this Asheville assembly Bishop Horace DuBose said that Smith's candidacy posedthe greatest moral crisis in the nation's history and perhaps in the history of mankind. The loyalties of the state Democratic Party – less factionalized than other southern parties because of the consistent Republican oppositionGrayson A.G. North Carolina and Harry Truman, 1944-1948 Journal of American Studies 9 3 December 1975 283–300 10.1017/S0021875800003005 – became further strained when long-serving Senator Furnifold McLendel Simmons refused to support the New York Governor. He argued firstly that Smith's nomination would be extremely dangerous because it would produce a "vexatious" campaign unreasonably focused on religion and Prohibition, and secondly that Smith's followers wanted to eliminate him.Watson jr. Richard L. A Political Leader Bolts: F.M. Simmons in the Presidential Election of 1928 North Carolina Historical Review 37 4 October 1960 516–543 With the aid of Frank R. McNichOulahan Richard V. "Tar Heel" Press Split Over Smith: Some Democratic Papers Follow Senator Simmons – Others Openly Laud Hoover The New York Times September 22, 1928 3 and church leaders, Simmons created the "Anti-Smith Democrats", who became opposed by other leading Democrats such as Josiah W. Bailey (who would unseat Simmons from his Senate seat) and Josephus Daniels. The state's press was equally split over Smith, with The Charlotte Observer and Charlotte News especially unwilling to endorse him against Republican nominee, Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover. References 30em expanded North Carolina 1928 Category:1928 North Carolina elections