1924 United States presidential election in Texas

none June 2025 September 2023 1924 United States presidential election 1924 United States presidential election in Texas Texas 1923 presidential no 1920 United States presidential election in Texas 1920 1928 United States presidential election in Texas 1928 November 4, 1924 x160px John William Davis.jpg John W. Davis Democratic Party (United States) West Virginia Charles W. Bryan 20 484,605 73.70% Calvin Coolidge cph.3g10777 crop.jpg Calvin Coolidge Republican Party (United States) Massachusetts Charles G. Dawes 0 130,023 19.78% Robert La Follette Sr crop.jpg Robert M. La Follette A2ED70 Progressive Wisconsin Burton K. Wheeler 0 42,881 6.52% 350px 350px County results Davis #b9d7ff 40–50% #86b6f2 50–60% #4389e3 60–70% #1666cb 70–80% #0645b4 80–90% #002b84 90–100% Coolidge #ffccd0 30–40% #f2b3be 40–50% #e27f90 50–60% #cc2f4a 60–70% La Follette #73d873 50–60% #30a630 70–80% President Calvin Coolidge Republican Party (United States) Calvin Coolidge Republican Party (United States) The 1924 United States presidential election in Texas took place on November 4, 1924, as part of the 1924 United States presidential election. State voters chose 20 representatives, or electors, to the Electoral College, who voted for president and vice president. Ever since statehood, Texas had been very nearly the strongest state for the Democratic Party owing to its initial history being as a Deep South state based around slavery. Even during Reconstruction when African-Americans were briefly enfranchised, the Republican Party won just one statewide election, and after Redemption and the passing of a new constitution in 1876 the GOP became confined largely to areas of abolitionist German refugee settlement in the Hill Country,Bass Jack The Transformation of Southern Politics: Social Change and Political Consequence Since 1945 1995 25 University of Georgia Press 0820317284 and to a few South Texas counties where local Republican bosses could until 1920 outcompete their Democratic equivalents.Weeks O. Douglas The Texas Mexican and the Politics of South Texas https://archive.org/details/sim_american-political-science-review_1930-08_24_3/page/606 The American Political Science Review 24 3 August 1930 606–627 10.2307/1946929 1946929 The Terrell Election Law created a poll tax that, from 1902, disenfranchised virtually all remaining African-American voters, the vast majority of Mexican Americans, and also most poor whites.Davidson Chandler Race and Class in Texas Politics March 10, 1992 21 Princeton University Press 0691025398 Voter turnout among males over twenty-one fell from over eighty percent to under thirty percent following the poll tax.Davidson; Race and Class in Texas Politics, p. 24 The period following this disfranchisement nonetheless saw a considerable amount of typically "Progressive" reform under Governors James Stephen Hogg and Thomas M. Campbell, and despite this progressive faction ceding power in 1906 to the conservatives, Texas proved solid in its support for progressive candidate Woodrow Wilson at the 1912 Democratic National Convention.Grantham Dewey W. The Life and Death of the Solid South: A Political History July 11, 2014 50–52 University Press of Kentucky 978-0813148724 Another populist, James Ferguson, took the governorship in 1914 on an anti-Prohibition platform, but was impeached for misappropriation of public funds.Warren Kenneth F. Encyclopedia of U.S. Campaigns, Elections, and Electoral Behavior April 4, 2008 788 SAGE Publications 978-1452265872 1916 had seen Democrat Woodrow Wilson establish firmer control over the machine-dominated areas of South Texas, but hostility towards Wilson's peace promises caused some losses amongst the German population.Murrin John M. Johnson Paul E. McPherson James M. Fahs Alice Gerstle Gary Liberty, Equality, Power: A History of the American People 532 Concise 1285545974 Later Wilson became hated by German and Irish Americans for his entry into the war, his role in drafting the Treaty of Versailles and supporting many anti-German groups during the "Red Scare".Hough Jerry F. Changing Party Coalitions: The Mystery of the Red State-Blue State Alignment 2006 83–86 Algora 0875864082 His League of Nations proposal was also opposed in the South where isolationism had long been very powerful,Phillips, Kevin P.; The Emerging Republican Majority, p. 211 9780691163246 but the reaction was much less pronounced than in Acadiana or the Ozarks. At the beginning of the campaign, the victory in the tantamount-to-election Democratic primary for Governor of Miriam A. Ferguson in opposition to the powerful Ku Klux Klan produced substantial doubt about whether Democratic nominee John W. Davis of West Virginia would maintain even James M. Cox’s reduced vote share from 1920,Hart Albert Bushnell The Presidential Election in the United States Current History December 1924 21 3 325–328, 436–438 University of California Press 10.1525/curh.1924.21.3.325 with suggestions some of her supporters would back incumbent Republican president Calvin Coolidge or Progressive nominee Robert M. La Follette. Results 1924 United States presidential election in TexasDave Leip’s U.S. Election Atlas https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=1924&off=0&elect=0&fips=48&f=0 1924 Presidential General Election Results — TexasOwing to problems with the original collection of returns, these figures differ from those in Géoelections and Edgar Eugene Robinson’s work. These totals exclude some counties (noted in the table) where the Texas Secretary of State did not compile data. John W. Davis Democratic Party (United States) #5600AB 484,605 73.70% Calvin Coolidge (incumbent) Republican #FF0000 130,023 19.78% Robert M. La Follette Progressive Progressive Party (United States, 1924–1927) 42,881 6.52% 657,509 100% Results by county County John W. Davis Democratic Calvin CoolidgeRepublican Robert M. La FolletteProgressive Margin Total votescastRobinson Edgar Eugene The Presidential Vote 1896-1932 331–350, 395–396 9780804716963Géoelections http://geoelections.free.fr/USA/elec_comtes/1924lafo.htm Popular Vote for Robert LaFollette (.xlsx file for €15) # % # % # % # % Anderson 374 31.40% 562 47.19% 255 21.41% -188 -15.79% 1,191 Andrews 60 84.51% 7 9.86% 4 5.63% 53 74.65% 71 Angelina 3,914 88.57% 333 7.54% 172 3.89% 3,581 81.04% 4,419 Aransas 195 70.14% 75 26.98% 8 2.88% 120 43.17% 278 Archer 883 79.05% 146 13.07% 88 7.88% 737 65.98% 1,117 Armstrong 426 76.62% 106 19.06% 24 4.32% 320 57.55% 556 Atascosa 869 62.56% 303 21.81% 217 15.62% 566 40.75% 1,389 Austin 2,601 71.71% 457 12.60% 569 15.69% 2,032"FollettedCoolidge In this county where Coolidge ran third behind La Follette, margin given is Davis vote minus La Follette vote. 56.02% 3,627 Bailey 166 66.40% 63 25.20% 21 8.40% 103 41.20% 250 Bandera 425 46.00% 442 47.84% 57 6.17% -17 -1.84% 924 Bastrop 2,711 78.53% 494 14.31% 247 7.16% 2,217 64.22% 3,452 Baylor 1,012 87.02% 135 11.61% 16 1.38% 877 75.41% 1,163 Bee 897 45.14% 944 47.51% 146 7.35% -47 -2.37% 1,987 Bell 7,273 76.91% 1,632 17.26% 552 5.84% 5,641 59.65% 9,457 Bexar 10,838 43.88% 9,898 40.07% 3,963 16.05% 940 3.81% 24,699 Blanco 586 54.36% 317 29.41% 175 16.23% 269 24.95% 1,078 Borden 73 42.69% 98 57.31% 0 0.00% -25 -14.62% 171 Bosque 2,524 83.94% 403 13.40% 80 2.66% 2,121 70.54% 3,007 Bowie 3,455 77.40% 740 16.58% 269 6.03% 2,715 60.82% 4,464 Brazoria 1,761 58.82% 1,114 37.21% 119 3.97% 647 21.61% 2,994 Brazos 2,128 87.07% 255 10.43% 61 2.50% 1,873 76.64% 2,444 Brewster 366 73.20% 113 22.60% 21 4.20% 253 50.60% 500 Briscoe 397 83.40% 53 11.13% 26 5.46% 344 72.27% 476 Brooks 205 76.49% 59 22.01% 4 1.49% 146 54.48% 268 Brown 3,467 87.48% 396 9.99% 100 2.52% 3,071 77.49% 3,963 Burleson 2,496 90.96% 224 8.16% 24 0.87% 2,272 82.80% 2,744 Burnet 1,725 83.74% 277 13.45% 58 2.82% 1,448 70.29% 2,060 Caldwell 2,194 78.44% 399 14.27% 204 7.29% 1,795 64.18% 2,797 Calhoun 686 76.05% 181 20.07% 35 3.88% 505 55.99% 902 Callahan 1,614 82.94% 244 12.54% 88 4.52% 1,370 70.40% 1,946 Cameron 2,225 60.68% 1,266 34.52% 176 4.80% 959 26.15% 3,667 Camp 1,186 83.76% 187 13.21% 43 3.04% 999 70.55% 1,416 Carson 611 64.18% 306 32.14% 35 3.68% 305 32.04% 952 Cass 2,125 66.18% 997 31.05% 89 2.77% 1,128 35.13% 3,211 Castro 219 59.35% 68 18.43% 82 22.22% 137"FollettedCoolidge 37.13% 369 Chambers 315 57.80% 219 40.18% 11 2.02% 96 17.61% 545 Cherokee 4,343 85.17% 666 13.06% 90 1.77% 3,677 72.11% 5,099 Childress 1,117 81.77% 178 13.03% 71 5.20% 939 68.74% 1,366 Clay 1,402 76.49% 318 17.35% 113 6.16% 1,084 59.14% 1,833 Cochran 59 81.94% 9 12.50% 4 5.56% 50 69.44% 72 Coke 673 87.86% 80 10.44% 13 1.70% 593 77.42% 766 Coleman 2,763 82.70% 502 15.03% 76 2.27% 2,261 67.67% 3,341 Collin 7,215 77.04% 1,981 21.15% 169 1.80% 5,234 55.89% 9,365 Collingsworth 731 73.99% 234 23.68% 23 2.33% 497 50.30% 988 Colorado 2,105 66.57% 681 21.54% 376 11.89% 1,424 45.03% 3,162 Comal 330 13.39% 312 12.66% 1,823 73.96% -1,493"FollettedCoolidge -60.57% 2,465 Comanche 376 39.75% 456 48.20% 114 12.05% -80 -8.46% 946 Concho 668 85.53% 90 11.52% 23 2.94% 578 74.01% 781 Cooke 3,170 77.58% 525 12.85% 391 9.57% 2,645 64.73% 4,086 Coryell 2,890 85.28% 429 12.66% 70 2.07% 2,461 72.62% 3,389 Cottle 580 88.15% 59 8.97% 19 2.89% 521 79.18% 658 Crockett 69 37.91% 112 61.54% 1 0.55% -43 -23.63% 182 Crosby 1,242 79.92% 278 17.89% 34 2.19% 964 62.03% 1,554 Culberson 93 79.49% 15 12.82% 9 7.69% 78 66.67% 117 Dallam 506 48.42% 254 24.31% 285 27.27% 221"FollettedCoolidge 21.15% 1,045 Dallas 30,207 76.99% 8,018 20.43% 1,012 2.58% 22,189 56.55% 39,237 Dawson 1,079 83.06% 185 14.24% 35 2.69% 894 68.82% 1,299 De Witt 2,131 56.21% 868 22.90% 792 20.89% 1,263 33.32% 3,791 Deaf Smith 538 70.51% 192 25.16% 33 4.33% 346 45.35% 763 Delta 2,186 80.49% 479 17.64% 51 1.88% 1,707 62.85% 2,716 Denton 4,708 81.10% 712 12.27% 385 6.63% 3,996 68.84% 5,805 Dickens 849 83.24% 161 15.78% 10 0.98% 688 67.45% 1,020 Dimmit 289 58.62% 180 36.51% 24 4.87% 109 22.11% 493 Donley 893 72.37% 273 22.12% 68 5.51% 620 50.24% 1,234 Duval"WorldAlmanac" 1,290 92.14% 89 6.36% 21 1.50% 1,201 85.79% 1,400 Eastland 4,548 80.04% 972 17.11% 162 2.85% 3,576 62.94% 5,682 Ector 138 89.03% 12 7.74% 5 3.23% 126 81.29% 155 Edwards 204 36.17% 346 61.35% 14 2.48% -142 -25.18% 564 El Paso"WorldAlmanac" Totals for this county are at least partially from the World Almanac and not the official manuscript of returns from the Secretary of State. 6,220 54.90% 4,078 35.99% 1,032 9.11% 2,142 18.91% 11,330 Ellis 7,678 84.93% 1,220 13.50% 142 1.57% 6,458 71.44% 9,040 Erath 3,396 85.89% 406 10.27% 152 3.84% 2,990 75.62% 3,954 Falls 2,817 81.51% 448 12.96% 191 5.53% 2,369 68.55% 3,456 Fannin 5,596 86.60% 653 10.11% 213 3.30% 4,943 76.49% 6,462 Fayette 3,851 59.66% 1,450 22.46% 1,154 17.88% 2,401 37.20% 6,455 Fisher 1,653 82.12% 302 15.00% 58 2.88% 1,351 67.11% 2,013 Floyd 1,197 85.99% 166 11.93% 29 2.08% 1,031 74.07% 1,392 Foard 585 81.82% 95 13.29% 35 4.90% 490 68.53% 715 Fort Bend 1,690 75.11% 356 15.82% 204 9.07% 1,334 59.29% 2,250 Franklin 1,157 86.60% 118 8.83% 61 4.57% 1,039 77.77% 1,336 Freestone 2,484 78.31% 608 19.17% 80 2.52% 1,876 59.14% 3,172 Frio 637 78.84% 158 19.55% 13 1.61% 479 59.28% 808 Gaines 342 77.55% 37 8.39% 62 14.06% 280"FollettedCoolidge 63.49% 441 Galveston 5,068 66.52% 1,912 25.10% 639 8.39% 3,156 41.42% 7,619 Garza 588 62.29% 331 35.06% 25 2.65% 257 27.22% 944 Gillespie 352 13.03% 768 28.42% 1,582 58.55% -814"FollettedDavis" In this county where Davis ran third behind La Follette, margin given is Coolidge vote minus La Follette vote. -30.13% 2,702 Glasscock 89 81.65% 14 12.84% 6 5.50% 75 68.81% 109 Goliad 733 54.99% 438 32.86% 162 12.15% 295 22.13% 1,333 Gonzales 2,499 75.96% 463 14.07% 328 9.97% 2,036 61.88% 3,290 Gray 608 51.14% 581 48.86% 0 0.00% 27 2.27% 1,189 Grayson 7,413 71.73% 1,973 19.09% 949 9.18% 5,440 52.64% 10,335 Gregg 1,286 76.96% 177 10.59% 208 12.45% 1,078"FollettedCoolidge 64.51% 1,671 Grimes 2,136 91.09% 177 7.55% 32 1.36% 1,959 83.54% 2,345 Guadalupe 831 20.32% 1,657 40.52% 1,601 39.15% 56"FollettedDavis" 1.37% 4,089 Hale 1,446 70.85% 507 24.84% 88 4.31% 939 46.01% 2,041 Hall 1,060 78.34% 229 16.93% 64 4.73% 831 61.42% 1,353 Hamilton 2,035 87.45% 202 8.68% 90 3.87% 1,833 78.77% 2,327 Hansford 263 72.45% 76 20.94% 24 6.61% 187 51.52% 363 Hardeman 1,099 78.05% 256 18.18% 53 3.76% 843 59.87% 1,408 Hardin 1,516 66.55% 645 28.31% 117 5.14% 871 38.24% 2,278 Harris 20,648 63.57% 8,953 27.57% 2,878 8.86% 11,695 36.01% 32,479 Harrison 2,573 78.88% 463 14.19% 226 6.93% 2,110 64.68% 3,262 Hartley 156 64.20% 61 25.10% 26 10.70% 95 39.09% 243 Haskell 2,050 78.66% 428 16.42% 128 4.91% 1,622 62.24% 2,606 Hays 1,616 77.36% 394 18.86% 79 3.78% 1,222 58.50% 2,089 Hemphill 405 62.99% 167 25.97% 71 11.04% 238 37.01% 643 Henderson 3,819 88.73% 405 9.41% 80 1.86% 3,414 79.32% 4,304 Hidalgo 3,662 75.16% 996 20.44% 214 4.39% 2,666 54.72% 4,872 Hill 5,778 86.39% 807 12.07% 103 1.54% 4,971 74.33% 6,688 Hockley 69 73.40% 20 21.28% 5 5.32% 49 52.13% 94 Hood 1,074 85.51% 122 9.71% 60 4.78% 952 75.80% 1,256 Hopkins 4,156 85.97% 557 11.52% 121 2.50% 3,599 74.45% 4,834 Houston 3,289 86.92% 457 12.08% 38 1.00% 2,832 74.84% 3,784 Howard 1,100 76.02% 186 12.85% 161 11.13% 914 63.17% 1,447 Hudspeth 84 59.15% 34 23.94% 24 16.90% 50 35.21% 142 Hunt 6,828 87.43% 836 10.70% 146 1.87% 5,992 76.72% 7,810 Hutchinson 159 67.95% 69 29.49% 6 2.56% 90 38.46% 234 Irion 205 71.18% 73 25.35% 10 3.47% 132 45.83% 288 Jack 1,154 78.50% 290 19.73% 26 1.77% 864 58.78% 1,470 Jackson 758 64.84% 354 30.28% 57 4.88% 404 34.56% 1,169 Jasper 1,526 88.77% 176 10.24% 17 0.99% 1,350 78.53% 1,719 Jeff Davis 117 63.59% 49 26.63% 18 9.78% 68 36.96% 184 Jefferson 5,925 55.09% 4,348 40.42% 483 4.49% 1,577 14.66% 10,756 Jim Hogg 139 87.97% 19 12.03% 0 0.00% 120 75.95% 158 Jim Wells 654 65.93% 213 21.47% 125 12.60% 441 44.46% 992 Johnson 4,600 79.85% 851 14.77% 310 5.38% 3,749 65.08% 5,761 Jones 3,010 81.86% 566 15.39% 101 2.75% 2,444 66.47% 3,677 Karnes 1,727 69.19% 531 21.27% 238 9.54% 1,196 47.92% 2,496 Kaufman 5,573 85.33% 884 13.54% 74 1.13% 4,689 71.80% 6,531 Kendall 136 11.04% 689 55.93% 407 33.04% 282"FollettedDavis" 22.89% 1,232 Kenedy 67 89.33% 7 9.33% 1 1.33% 60 80.00% 75 Kent 386 81.43% 80 16.88% 8 1.69% 306 64.56% 474 Kerr 735 40.63% 892 49.31% 182 10.06% -157 -8.68% 1,809 Kimble 465 65.77% 223 31.54% 19 2.69% 242 34.23% 707 King 83 95.40% 4 4.60% 0 0.00% 79 90.80% 87 Kinney 144 45.71% 158 50.16% 13 4.13% -14 -4.44% 315 Kleberg 721 63.52% 206 18.15% 208 18.33% 513"FollettedCoolidge 45.20% 1,135 Knox 1,399 72.30% 455 23.51% 81 4.19% 944 48.79% 1,935 La Salle 458 84.66% 73 13.49% 10 1.85% 385 71.16% 541 Lamar 5,224 87.37% 596 9.97% 159 2.66% 4,628 77.40% 5,979 Lamb 356 70.22% 121 23.87% 30 5.92% 235 46.35% 507 Lampasas 1,596 86.46% 228 12.35% 22 1.19% 1,368 74.11% 1,846 Lavaca 3,290 62.42% 746 14.15% 1,235 23.43% 2,055"FollettedCoolidge 38.99% 5,271 Lee 1,561 68.35% 271 11.87% 452 19.79% 1,109"FollettedCoolidge 48.56% 2,284 Leon 2,004 83.71% 311 12.99% 79 3.30% 1,693 70.72% 2,394 Liberty 1,506 68.80% 639 29.19% 44 2.01% 867 39.61% 2,189 Limestone 4,868 89.58% 523 9.62% 43 0.79% 4,345 79.96% 5,434 Lipscomb 430 45.31% 405 42.68% 114 12.01% 25 2.63% 949 Live Oak 596 57.20% 353 33.88% 93 8.93% 243 23.32% 1,042 Llano 928 86.17% 88 8.17% 61 5.66% 840 77.99% 1,077 Loving 12 85.71% 2 14.29% 0 0.00% 10 71.43% 14 Lubbock 1,710 73.93% 411 17.77% 192 8.30% 1,299 56.16% 2,313 Lynn 1,131 75.35% 313 20.85% 57 3.80% 818 54.50% 1,501 Madison 1,592 91.34% 146 8.38% 5 0.29% 1,446 82.96% 1,743 Marion 620 58.99% 347 33.02% 84 7.99% 273 25.98% 1,051 Martin 327 76.76% 92 21.60% 7 1.64% 235 55.16% 426 Mason 384 53.48% 171 23.82% 163 22.70% 213 29.67% 718 Matagorda 1,353 56.99% 893 37.62% 128 5.39% 460 19.38% 2,374 Maverick 199 40.53% 261 53.16% 31 6.31% -62 -12.63% 491 McCulloch 1,327 71.96% 495 26.84% 22 1.19% 832 45.12% 1,844 McLennan 7,882 73.52% 2,384 22.24% 455 4.24% 5,498 51.28% 10,721 McMullen 109 48.88% 111 49.78% 3 1.35% -2 -0.90% 223 Medina 986 43.26% 816 35.81% 477 20.93% 170 7.46% 2,279 Menard 304 52.60% 247 42.73% 27 4.67% 57 9.86% 578 Midland 399 89.26% 44 9.84% 4 0.89% 355 79.42% 447 Milam 5,087 80.31% 930 14.68% 317 5.00% 4,157 65.63% 6,334 Mills 1,289 85.08% 175 11.55% 51 3.37% 1,114 73.53% 1,515 Mitchell 1,242 85.89% 169 11.69% 35 2.42% 1,073 74.20% 1,446 Montague 2,236 68.40% 586 17.93% 447 13.67% 1,650 50.47% 3,269 Montgomery 1,500 88.81% 166 9.83% 23 1.36% 1,334 78.98% 1,689 Moore 82 89.13% 9 9.78% 1 1.09% 73 79.35% 92 Morris"WorldAlmanac" 964 81.76% 215 18.24% 0 0.00% 749 63.53% 1,179 Motley 453 86.29% 62 11.81% 10 1.90% 391 74.48% 525 Nacogdoches 3,418 93.16% 204 5.56% 47 1.28% 3,214 87.60% 3,669 Navarro 6,408 85.66% 996 13.31% 77 1.03% 5,412 72.34% 7,481 Newton 782 82.49% 145 15.30% 21 2.22% 637 67.19% 948 Nolan 1,421 77.23% 337 18.32% 82 4.46% 1,084 58.91% 1,840 Nueces"WorldAlmanac" 3,214 65.89% 1,537 31.51% 127 2.60% 1,677 34.38% 4,878 Ochiltree 352 62.63% 155 27.58% 55 9.79% 197 35.05% 562 Oldham 187 68.75% 71 26.10% 14 5.15% 116 42.65% 272 Orange 1,385 71.65% 509 26.33% 39 2.02% 876 45.32% 1,933 Palo Pinto 1,926 73.20% 473 17.98% 232 8.82% 1,453 55.23% 2,631 Panola 2,088 93.51% 119 5.33% 26 1.16% 1,969 88.18% 2,233 Parker 2,391 80.26% 438 14.70% 150 5.04% 1,953 65.56% 2,979 Parmer 214 62.76% 91 26.69% 36 10.56% 123 36.07% 341 Pecos 440 66.47% 192 29.00% 30 4.53% 248 37.46% 662 Polk 1,839 85.85% 272 12.70% 31 1.45% 1,567 73.16% 2,142 Potter 2,394 62.82% 831 21.81% 586 15.38% 1,563 41.01% 3,811 Presidio 267 76.72% 68 19.54% 13 3.74% 199 57.18% 348 Rains 899 81.88% 151 13.75% 48 4.37% 748 68.12% 1,098 Randall 627 74.20% 154 18.22% 64 7.57% 473 55.98% 845 Reagan 111 77.08% 31 21.53% 2 1.39% 80 55.56% 144 Real 188 37.75% 300 60.24% 10 2.01% -112 -22.49% 498 Red River 3,183 89.84% 311 8.78% 49 1.38% 2,872 81.06% 3,543 Reeves 387 75.59% 96 18.75% 29 5.66% 291 56.84% 512 Refugio 585 62.63% 256 27.41% 93 9.96% 329 35.22% 934 Roberts 241 69.45% 104 29.97% 2 0.58% 137 39.48% 347 Robertson 1,487 64.60% 751 32.62% 64 2.78% 736 31.97% 2,302 Rockwall 1,371 93.20% 93 6.32% 7 0.48% 1,278 86.88% 1,471 Runnels 2,564 81.09% 458 14.48% 140 4.43% 2,106 66.60% 3,162 Rusk 3,097 81.18% 651 17.06% 67 1.76% 2,446 64.12% 3,815 Sabine 1,150 94.42% 61 5.01% 7 0.57% 1,089 89.41% 1,218 San Augustine"WorldAlmanac" 1,475 94.43% 78 4.99% 9 0.58% 1,397 89.44% 1,562 San Jacinto 585 83.57% 104 14.86% 11 1.57% 481 68.71% 700 San Patricio 1,197 52.89% 987 43.61% 79 3.49% 210 9.28% 2,263 San Saba 1,814 89.94% 187 9.27% 16 0.79% 1,627 80.66% 2,017 Schleicher 246 67.40% 118 32.33% 1 0.27% 128 35.07% 365 Scurry 1,292 80.25% 269 16.71% 49 3.04% 1,023 63.54% 1,610 Shackelford 729 50.07% 727 49.93% 0 0.00% 2 0.14% 1,456 Shelby 3,408 92.16% 160 4.33% 130 3.52% 3,248 87.83% 3,698 Sherman 188 62.67% 87 29.00% 25 8.33% 101 33.67% 300 Smith 4,473 78.16% 1,079 18.85% 171 2.99% 3,394 59.30% 5,723 Somervell 403 85.93% 42 8.96% 24 5.12% 361 76.97% 469 Starr 756 97.05% 23 2.95% 0 0.00% 733 94.09% 779 Stephens 2,184 82.07% 372 13.98% 105 3.95% 1,812 68.09% 2,661 Sterling 243 90.33% 25 9.29% 1 0.37% 218 81.04% 269 Stonewall 778 72.91% 171 16.03% 118 11.06% 607 56.89% 1,067 Sutton 143 53.16% 124 46.10% 2 0.74% 19 7.06% 269 Swisher 573 65.19% 272 30.94% 34 3.87% 301 34.24% 879 Tarrant 13,673 61.73% 5,859 26.45% 2,619 11.82% 7,814 35.28% 22,151 Taylor 3,157 86.26% 441 12.05% 62 1.69% 2,716 74.21% 3,660 Terrell 109 34.49% 122 38.61% 85 26.90% -13 -4.11% 316 Terry 823 82.22% 160 15.98% 18 1.80% 663 66.23% 1,001 Throckmorton 539 74.97% 174 24.20% 6 0.83% 365 50.76% 719 Titus"WorldAlmanac" 1,589 81.70% 348 17.89% 8 0.41% 1,241 63.80% 1,945 Tom Green 2,116 75.73% 554 19.83% 124 4.44% 1,562 55.91% 2,794 Travis 7,573 77.06% 1,909 19.43% 345 3.51% 5,664 57.64% 9,827 Trinity 1,504 88.89% 146 8.63% 42 2.48% 1,358 80.26% 1,692 Tyler 929 88.98% 90 8.62% 25 2.39% 839 80.36% 1,044 Upshur 2,611 89.69% 258 8.86% 42 1.44% 2,353 80.83% 2,911 Upton 35 87.50% 4 10.00% 1 2.50% 31 77.50% 40 Uvalde 1,312 76.50% 351 20.47% 52 3.03% 961 56.03% 1,715 Val Verde 434 43.49% 457 45.79% 107 10.72% -23 -2.30% 998 Van Zandt 3,957 79.16% 1,038 20.76% 4 0.08% 2,919 58.39% 4,999 Victoria 1,653 68.36% 459 18.98% 306 12.66% 1,194 49.38% 2,418 Walker 1,792 89.78% 201 10.07% 3 0.15% 1,591 79.71% 1,996 Waller 1,239 84.80% 203 13.89% 19 1.30% 1,036 70.91% 1,461 Ward 206 75.18% 42 15.33% 26 9.49% 164 59.85% 274 Washington 3,568 86.25% 496 11.99% 73 1.76% 3,072 74.26% 4,137 Webb 1,313 73.19% 429 23.91% 52 2.90% 884 49.28% 1,794 Wharton 2,020 67.58% 858 28.71% 111 3.71% 1,162 38.88% 2,989 Wheeler 908 78.89% 197 17.12% 46 4.00% 711 61.77% 1,151 Wichita 5,831 68.75% 2,189 25.81% 461 5.44% 3,642 42.94% 8,481 Wilbarger 1,222 77.44% 269 17.05% 87 5.51% 953 60.39% 1,578 Willacy 307 70.74% 110 25.35% 17 3.92% 197 45.39% 434 Williamson 6,324 83.45% 934 12.33% 320 4.22% 5,390 71.13% 7,578 Wilson 1,633 66.54% 495 20.17% 326 13.28% 1,138 46.37% 2,454 Winkler 15 93.75% 1 6.25% 0 0.00% 14 87.50% 16 Wise 2,958 81.24% 532 14.61% 151 4.15% 2,426 66.63% 3,641 Wood 2,806 85.55% 342 10.43% 132 4.02% 2,464 75.12% 3,280 Yoakum 95 84.82% 9 8.04% 8 7.14% 86 76.79% 112 Young 2,000 84.28% 322 13.57% 51 2.15% 1,678 70.71% 2,373 Zapata 300 60.24% 197 39.56% 1 0.20% 103 20.68% 498 Zavala 326 71.96% 95 20.97% 32 7.06% 231 50.99% 453Totals484,60573.70%130,02319.78%42,8816.52%355,62153.92%675,509 Analysis Texas had been a Democratic stronghold since it first became a state in 1845, and the first poll taken in early October had Davis winning 56 percent of the vote to 34 percent for Coolidge and 10 percent for La Follette, which constituted a slight decrease on Cox's already reduced majority four years previously.Davis Decreases College's Lead in Straw Ballot The Austin American Austin, Texas 14 October 5, 1924 As it turned out, however, the conservative Southern Democrat Davis restored pre-existing Democratic hegemony in most of Texas, improving upon Cox's 1920 vote by fourteen percent and even exceeding Woodrow Wilson’s 1916 performance, whilst Coolidge fell four percent below what Warren G. Harding managed. Although La Follette would carry his home state of Wisconsin and relegate Davis to third in eleven other states, amongst Texas’ poll-tax-restricted electorate his appeal was almost entirely restricted to German Texans who were more culturally allied to the Midwest than to the South. Texas would be La Follette's sixteenth-weakest state nationally, but overwhelmingly German Gillespie and Comal Counties would be the only counties in Southern antebellum slave states to be won by La Follette. In fact, in Comal County La Follette received 73.96 percent of the vote, his highest proportion in any county nationwide.Dave Leip’s U.S. Election Atlas 1924 Presidential Election Statistics https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/stats.php?year=1924&f=0&off=0&elect=0 This would be the last time that Texas voted for the losing candidate in a presidential election until 1968. See also United States presidential elections in Texas Notes References Texas 1924 Category:1924 Texas elections