1928 United States presidential election in Tennessee

none June 2025 September 2023 1928 United States presidential election 1928 United States presidential election in Tennessee Tennessee presidential no 1924 United States presidential election in Tennessee 1924 1932 United States presidential election in Tennessee 1932 All 12 Tennessee votes to the Electoral College November 6, 1928 x200px Herbert Hoover - NARA - 532049.jpg Herbert Hoover Republican Party (United States) California Charles Curtis 12 195,388 53.76% Unsuccessful 1928.jpg Al Smith Democratic Party (United States) New York Joseph Taylor Robinson 0 167,343 46.04% 350px County results Hoover #e27f90 50–60% #cc2f4a 60–70% #d40000 70–80% #aa0000 80–90% #800000 90–100% Smith #86b6f2 50–60% #4389e3 60–70% #1666cb 70–80% #0645b4 80–90% #002b84 90–100% President Calvin Coolidge Republican Party (United States) Herbert Hoover Republican Party (United States) The 1928 United States presidential election in Tennessee took place on November 6, 1928, as part of the 1928 United States presidential election. Tennessee voters chose 12 representatives, or electors, to the Electoral College, who voted for president and vice president. For over a century after the Civil War, Tennessee was divided according to political loyalties established in that war. Unionist regions covering almost all of East Tennessee, Kentucky Pennyroyal-allied Macon County, and the five West Tennessee Highland Rim counties of Carroll, Henderson, McNairy, Hardin and WayneWright, John K.; 'Voting Habits in the United States: A Note on Two Maps'; Geographical Review, vol. 22, no. 4 (October 1932), pp. 666-672 voted Republican – generally by landslide margins – as they saw the Democratic Party as the "war party" who had forced them into a war they did not wish to fight.Key (Jr.), Valdimer Orlando; Southern Politics in State and Nation (New York, 1949), pp. 282-283 Contrariwise, the rest of Middle and West Tennessee who had supported and driven the state's secession was equally fiercely Democratic as it associated the Republicans with Reconstruction.Lyons, William; Scheb (II), John M. and Stair Billy; Government and Politics in Tennessee, pp. 183-184 1572331410 After the disfranchisement of the state's African-American population by a poll tax was largely complete in the 1890s,Phillips, Kevin P.; The Emerging Republican Majority, pp. 208, 210 9780691163246 the Democratic Party was certain of winning statewide elections if united,Grantham, Dewey W.; 'Tennessee and Twentieth-Century American Politics'; Tennessee Historical Quarterly, Vol. 54, No. 3 (Fall 1995), pp. 210-229 although unlike the Deep South Republicans would almost always gain thirty to forty percent of the statewide vote from mountain and Highland Rim support. When the Democratic Party was bitterly divided, the Republicans did win the governorship in 1910 and 1912, but did not gain at other levels. The 1920 election saw a significant but not radical change, whereby by moving into a small number of traditionally Democratic areas in Middle TennesseeReichard, Gary W.; 'The Aberration of 1920: An Analysis of Harding's Victory in Tennessee'; The Journal of Southern History, Vol. 36, No. 1 (February 1970), pp. 33-49 and expanding turnout due to the Nineteenth Amendment and powerful isolationist sentiment,Phillips; The Emerging Republican Majority, p. 211 the Republican Party was able to capture Tennessee's presidential electoral votes and win the governorship and take three congressional seats in addition to the rock-ribbed GOP First and Second Districts. In 1922 and 1924, with the ebbing of isolationist sympathy and a consequent decline in turnout,Phillips; The Emerging Republican Majority, p. 287 the Democratic Party regained Tennessee's governorship and presidential electoral votes. Early in the campaign, Tennessee was seen as a "puzzle" for political pundits, and the state was viewed as "doubtful".'Tennessee a Puzzle in Political Trend: Wide Organization of Women's Hoover Clubs Is Big Factor in Situation'; The New York Times, September 24, 1928, p. 3 Smith made a major battleground of Tennessee in his October campaign after Republican nominee Herbert Hoover visited earlier in the month and was confident of carrying Tennessee,'Hoover Confident of Southern Gains: Believes Tennessee Speech Has Aided Cause; Passes Quiet Day in Capital'; The Washington Post, criticising Hoover's campaign as "vague".'Smith Challenges Hoover to State Views Clearly; Gets Tennessee Ovations'; The New York Times, October 13, 1928, p. 1 By the beginning of November it was thought by pollsters that Smith would carry the state,Howland, William S.; 'Smith Fairly Certain to Win Tennessee: Shift of Entire Woman's Vote Alone May Turn Tide to Hoover'; The Washington Post, November 4, 1928, p. M5 but as it turned out the state's votes went quite clearly to Hoover, despite the powerful Democratic loyalty of whites in West Tennessee.McCarthy, G. Michael; 'Smith v Hoover – The Politics of Race in West Tennessee'; Phylon, Vol. 39, No. 2 (2nd Quarter, 1978), pp. 154-168 Hoover benefitted from a substantial Republican trend in normally rock-ribbed Democratic but heavily white counties of Middle Tennessee. Although Hoover managed to flip only Houston County – where he was the only Republican victor until Mitt Romney in 2012Menendez, Albert J.; The Geography of Presidential Elections in the United States, 1868-2004, pp. 298-303 0786422173 – and heavily populated Davidson and "Little Confederacy" Sullivan Counties where he was the first Republican victor since Ulysses S. Grant in 1868, due to a powerful Prohibitionist anti-Catholic vote he gained very strongly compared to Coolidge's 1924 showing in many white counties that remained Democratic,Phillips; The Emerging Republican Majority, p. 212 and this added to the mountain and Highland Rim GOP vote ensured Hoover won the state. This would be the best Republican performance in Tennessee between Grant's 36.85% 1868 landslide and Richard Nixon's carrying the state by 37.95% in 1972.https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/compare.php?year=1928&fips=47&f=0&off=0&elect=0&type=state Dave Leip's U.S. Ekeciton Atlas Presidential General Election Results Comparison – Tennessee Tennessee would not vote Republican again until Dwight Eisenhower narrowly won the state in 1952. Background Scopes Trial and a Catholic Nominated by the Democrats In 1925, Tennessee gained national prominence due to the "Scopes Monkey Trial" which aimed to outlaw the teaching of evolution in this powerfully fundamentalist Protestant state with a strong Ku Klux Klan,Larson, Edward J.; Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate over Science and Religion 9780465075102 and a populace extremely hostile to the Catholic faith of most urban immigrants.Whitfield, Stephen J.; '"One Nation Under God": The Rise of the Religious Right'; The Virginia Quarterly Review, Vol. 58, No. 4 (Autumn 1982), pp. 557-574 However, with most other Democrats sitting the 1928 election out due to the prevailing prosperity,Warren, Kenneth F.; Encyclopedia of U.S. campaigns, elections, and electoral behavior: A-M, Volume 1, p. 620 1412954894 the nomination of Catholic New York Governor Al Smith was always a foregone conclusion from the beginning of the election campaign. Once Smith was nominated – despite his attempt to dispel fears by nominating "dry" Southern Democrat Joseph T. Robinson as his running mateNelson, Michael (1991); Historic documents on presidential elections, 1787-1988, p. 296 – extreme fear ensued in the South, which had no experience of the Southern and Eastern European Catholic immigrants who were Smith's local constituency. Southern fundamentalist Protestants believed that Smith would allow papal and priestly leadership in the United States, which Protestantism was a reaction against.Whisenhunt, Donald W.; President Herbert Hoover, p. 69 1600214762 Nevertheless, fear that the Republicans would place the heavily black regions of West Tennessee under the influence of "Negro bossism" and possible abolition of lynching meant that whites in the far western region remained all along extremely loyal to SmithMcCarthy, G. Michael; 'Smith v Hoover – The Politics of Race in West Tennessee'; Phylon, Vol. 39, No. 2 (2nd Quarter, 1978), pp. 154-168 although in East Tennessee where many communities had become sundown towns or countiesLoewen, James A.; Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of American Racism, pp. 72-74 0743294483 it was believed that Smith was unacceptable because the Catholic Church officially opposed social and political segregation of the races.Moore, Edmund A. A Catholic Runs For President (New York, 1956) p. 157 Results Presidential candidate Running mate Party Electoral Vote (EV)Popular Vote (PV) Herbert Hoover Charles Curtis Republican 12https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.php?year=1928&fips=47&f=0&off=0&elect=0&minper=0 Dave Leip's U.S. Election Atlas 1928 Presidential General Election Results – Tennessee 195,388 53.76% Al Smith Joseph Taylor Robinson Democratic 0 167,343"10,200" This total is 10,200 votes greater than that from America at the Polls. 46.04% Norman Thomas James Maurer Socialist 0 631 0.17% William Z. Foster Benjamin Gitlow Communist 0 111 0.03% Results by county 1928 United States presidential election in Tennessee by countyScammon, Richard M. (compiler); America at the Polls: A Handbook of Presidential Election Statistics 1920-1964; pp. 415-416 0405077114The figures for Smith differ from those in Dave Leip's Atlas.CountyHerbert HooverRepublicanAl SmithDemocraticVarious candidatesOther partiesMarginTotal votescast # % # % # % # % Anderson 2,306 81.11% 537 18.89% 0 0.00% 1,769 62.22% 2,843 Bedford 1,405 47.84% 1,532 52.16% 0 0.00% -127 -4.32% 2,937 Benton 949 43.08% 1,241 56.33% 13 0.59% -292 -13.25% 2,203 Bledsoe 899 59.97% 600 40.03% 0 0.00% 299 19.95% 1,499 Blount 4,135 85.17% 715 14.73% 5 0.10% 3,420 70.44% 4,855 Bradley 2,854 75.70% 913 24.22% 3 0.08% 1,941 51.49% 3,770 Campbell 3,007 83.60% 585 16.26% 5 0.14% 2,422 67.33% 3,597 Cannon 588 48.60% 622 51.40% 0 0.00% -34 -2.81% 1,210 Carroll 2,987 62.87% 1,743 36.69% 21 0.44% 1,244 26.18% 4,751 Carter 4,934 90.37% 512 9.38% 14 0.26% 4,422 80.99% 5,460 Cheatham 488 34.78% 913 65.07% 2 0.14% -425 -30.29% 1,403 Chester 588 44.44% 735 55.56% 0 0.00% -147 -11.11% 1,323 Claiborne 2,565 67.68% 1,225 32.32% 0 0.00% 1,340 35.36% 3,790 Clay 556 49.03% 576 50.79% 2 0.18% -20 -1.76% 1,134 Cocke 2,909 80.05% 722 19.87% 3 0.08% 2,187 60.18% 3,634 Coffee 1,126 48.72% 1,175 50.84% 10 0.43% -49 -2.12% 2,311 Crockett 710 48.66% 749 51.34% 0 0.00% -39 -2.67% 1,459 Cumberland 1,188 70.09% 507 29.91% 0 0.00% 681 40.18% 1,695 Davidson 15,359 53.26% 13,453 46.65% 27 0.09% 1,906 6.61% 28,839 Decatur 748 47.95% 812 52.05% 0 0.00% -64 -4.10% 1,560 DeKalb 2,261 57.23% 1,690 42.77% 0 0.00% 571 14.45% 3,951 Dickson 891 38.42% 1,428 61.58% 0 0.00% -537 -23.16% 2,319 Dyer 842 24.04% 2,661 75.96% 0 0.00% -1,819 -51.93% 3,503 Fayette 122 9.98% 1,100 90.02% 0 0.00% -978 -80.03% 1,222 Fentress 1,399 78.07% 375 20.93% 18 1.00% 1,024 57.14% 1,792 Franklin 928 35.26% 1,698 64.51% 6 0.23% -770 -29.26% 2,632 Gibson 1,372 31.97% 2,911 67.84% 8 0.19% -1,539 -35.87% 4,291 Giles 1,032 27.94% 2,661 72.06% 0 0.00% -1,629 -44.11% 3,693 Grainger 1,464 75.39% 466 24.00% 12 0.62% 998 51.39% 1,942 Greene 3,599 61.04% 2,297 38.96% 0 0.00% 1,302 22.08% 5,896 Grundy 380 38.31% 608 61.29% 4 0.40% -228 -22.98% 992 Hamblen 1,902 59.96% 1,270 40.04% 0 0.00% 632 19.92% 3,172 Hamilton 13,244 64.49% 7,190 35.01% 103 0.50% 6,054 29.48% 20,537 Hancock 1,039 82.79% 216 17.21% 0 0.00% 823 65.58% 1,255 Hardeman 491 25.05% 1,459 74.44% 10 0.51% -968 -49.39% 1,960 Hardin 1,585 68.88% 709 30.81% 7 0.30% 876 38.07% 2,301 Hawkins 2,969 71.28% 1,190 28.57% 6 0.14% 1,779 42.71% 4,165 Haywood 178 8.08% 2,024 91.92% 0 0.00% -1,846 -83.83% 2,202 Henderson 2,005 72.86% 714 25.94% 33 1.20% 1,291 46.91% 2,752 Henry 1,041 28.04% 2,667 71.83% 5 0.13% -1,626 -43.79% 3,713 Hickman 511 32.97% 1,039 67.03% 0 0.00% -528 -34.06% 1,550 Houston 374 59.18% 258 40.82% 0 0.00% 116 18.35% 632 Humphreys 441 36.21% 771 63.30% 6 0.49% -330 -27.09% 1,218 Jackson 617 42.14% 832 56.83% 15 1.02% -215 -14.69% 1,464 Jefferson 2,582 85.53% 437 14.47% 0 0.00% 2,145 71.05% 3,019 Johnson 3,057 93.74% 196 6.01% 8 0.25% 2,861 87.73% 3,261 Knox 14,627 71.57% 5,767 28.22% 44 0.22% 8,860 43.35% 20,438 Lake 166 14.74% 960 85.26% 0 0.00% -794 -70.52% 1,126 Lauderdale 430 13.32% 2,798 86.68% 0 0.00% -2,368 -73.36% 3,228 Lawrence 3,581 56.19% 2,780 43.62% 12 0.19% 801 12.57% 6,373 Lewis 269 39.39% 414 60.61% 0 0.00% -145 -21.23% 683 Lincoln 743 23.76% 2,377 76.02% 7 0.22% -1,634 -52.25% 3,127 Loudon 2,128 78.26% 590 21.70% 1 0.04% 1,538 56.56% 2,719 Macon 1,937 82.22% 419 17.78% 0 0.00% 1,518 64.43% 2,356 Madison 1,894 34.62% 3,577 65.38% 0 0.00% -1,683 -30.76% 5,471 Marion 1,659 58.83% 1,161 41.17% 0 0.00% 498 17.66% 2,820 Marshall 735 31.69% 1,584 68.31% 0 0.00% -849 -36.61% 2,319 Maury 1,362 27.16% 3,652 72.84% 0 0.00% -2,290 -45.67% 5,014 McMinn 4,440 68.51% 2,025 31.25% 16 0.25% 2,415 37.26% 6,481 McNairy 2,326 65.80% 1,209 34.20% 0 0.00% 1,117 31.60% 3,535 Meigs 722 55.07% 589 44.93% 0 0.00% 133 10.14% 1,311 Monroe 3,312 61.99% 2,031 38.01% 0 0.00% 1,281 23.98% 5,343 Montgomery 1,748 48.34% 1,868 51.66% 0 0.00% -120 -3.32% 3,616 Moore 133 23.29% 431 75.48% 7 1.23% -298 -52.19% 571 Morgan 1,487 76.93% 446 23.07% 0 0.00% 1,041 53.85% 1,933 Obion 789 24.05% 2,492 75.95% 0 0.00% -1,703 -51.90% 3,281 Overton 1,195 51.80% 1,105 47.90% 7 0.30% 90 3.90% 2,307 Perry 360 36.66% 622 63.34% 0 0.00% -262 -26.68% 982 Pickett 745 65.64% 383 33.74% 7 0.62% 362 31.89% 1,135 Polk 1,760 63.22% 1,012 36.35% 12 0.43% 748 26.87% 2,784 Putnam 1,612 42.91% 2,145 57.09% 0 0.00% -533 -14.19% 3,757 Rhea 1,588 65.24% 846 34.76% 0 0.00% 742 30.48% 2,434 Roane 2,971 79.14% 761 20.27% 22 0.59% 2,210 58.87% 3,754 Robertson 848 35.30% 1,543 64.24% 11 0.46% -695 -28.93% 2,402 Rutherford 1,429 40.32% 2,115 59.68% 0 0.00% -686 -19.36% 3,544 Scott 2,700 91.59% 244 8.28% 4 0.14% 2,456 83.31% 2,948 Sequatchie 298 43.76% 383 56.24% 0 0.00% -85 -12.48% 681 Sevier 3,874 92.57% 308 7.36% 3 0.07% 3,566 85.21% 4,185 Shelby 11,969 39.76% 18,040 59.93% 92 0.31% -6,071 -20.17% 30,101 Smith 1,150 44.13% 1,446 55.49% 10 0.38% -296 -11.36% 2,606 Stewart 403 24.28% 1,257 75.72% 0 0.00% -854 -51.45% 1,660 Sullivan 4,151 56.35% 3,216 43.65% 0 0.00% 935 12.69% 7,367 Sumner 1,045 29.12% 2,541 70.80% 3 0.08% -1,496 -41.68% 3,589 Tipton 425 18.25% 1,889 81.11% 15 0.64% -1,464 -62.86% 2,329 Trousdale 179 22.74% 607 77.13% 1 0.13% -428 -54.38% 787 Unicoi 2,044 84.22% 376 15.49% 7 0.29% 1,668 68.73% 2,427 Union 1,826 83.30% 360 16.42% 6 0.27% 1,466 66.88% 2,192 Van Buren 257 49.71% 260 50.29% 0 0.00% -3 -0.58% 517 Warren 923 45.13% 1,112 54.38% 10 0.49% -189 -9.24% 2,045 Washington 4,889 75.99% 1,545 24.01% 0 0.00% 3,344 51.97% 6,434 Wayne 1,756 81.71% 382 17.78% 11 0.51% 1,374 63.94% 2,149 Weakley 1,358 35.25% 2,495 64.75% 0 0.00% -1,137 -29.51% 3,853 White 776 43.16% 1,022 56.84% 0 0.00% -246 -13.68% 1,798 Williamson 693 30.20% 1,595 69.50% 7 0.31% -902 -39.30% 2,295 Wilson 1,049 39.17% 1,629 60.83% 0 0.00% -580 -21.66% 2,678Totals195,38855.32%157,143"10,200"44.49%6610.19%38,24510.83%353,192 See also 1928 United States Senate election in Tennessee 1928 Tennessee gubernatorial election Notes References 30em Category:1928 Tennessee elections Tennessee 1928