HOME | FAQ

ARTICLES | LAW

BLOG
Last Entry: 5/8/2008
"McCain's VP; Limbaugh's vote-tampering"


ELECTION RESULTS:




CONTACT






Strange Political Pairings
by Philip Fowler
October 24, 2004

Any serious student of the Electoral College must do a great deal of research to uncover past electoral trends that will help him or her better predict the way the states will fall into line on Election Night in the coming Presidential contest. Those trends usually reveal themselves in the most basic ways: geographical, demographic, and historical. Some of this trending is obvious, like the Northeast trending Democratic (since 1992), or the Great Plains going to the GOP (since 1968), and the South as well -- unless the Democratic candidate is from there (1976, 1992, 1996). But there are other trends, quaint oddities that present themselves if you know just where to look. Among those oddities are the strange political pairings that have occurred throughout our nation's electoral history. The most famous among those was the odd pairing of Maine and Vermont.

Prior to Franklin Roosevelt's landslide reelection in 1932, there was an old saw that ran, "As Maine goes, so goes the nation". And Maine had been right on the money since 1896 -- -with that one exception: siding with the losing Republican candidate, Supreme Court Justice Charles Evans Hughes in 1916. But Maine's bellwether status ended in 1932, when she and Vermont voted against FDR. Four years later, both states would repeat their preferences supporting the losing Republican candidate, Kansas Governor Alfred Landon, while the rest of the nation supported President Franklin Roosevelt. So the old adage was rewritten: "As Maine goes, so goes Vermont". And this has been the case ever since, with that one exception: the 1968 three-way contest between Richard Nixon, Hubert Humphrey and George Wallace. It is important to note that aside from that single aberration, Maine and Vermont have been solid voting partners since 1856's Buchanan-Fremont contest. Certainly their geographic proximity would lend itself to their common voting record, but there are other strange political pairings that truly transcend geography.

By all accounts for the presidential contest of 2004, Indiana, the first state to report on Election Night, is safely in the Republican column. And the same goes for South Dakota. In fact, for the last 100 years, since President William McKinley's reelection of 1900, Indiana and South Dakota have shared a common political bias -- excepting, of course, the 1912 election. But that election, like every three-way contest, was an anomaly. While Indiana went Democratic, supporting the winner, Governor Woodrow Wilson of New Jersey, South Dakota went for the Progressive Party candidate, former President Theodore Roosevelt. Incredibly, the incumbent, President Taft, wasn't even on South Dakota's ballot that year! Nevertheless, here is a truly remarkable instance where two states from diverse parts of the country share the same voting pattern. And it doesn't stop there.

With the Harding-Cox contest of 1920, the state of Kansas joined the Indiana-South Dakota voting coterie. This might not be considered as extraordinary, since Kansas is a Great Plains state like South Dakota. But with the first Eisenhower win of 1952, a Southern state joined the club: Virginia. Neither Kansas nor Virginia have ever deviated since. The foursome became a quintet when Senator John Kennedy held off Vice President Richard Nixon in 1960, with the addition of the new state of Alaska. The diversity is exceptional here, consider: a mid-western state, two Great Plains states, a Southern state, and a northwestern state all voting the very same way for the last 40 years! Incredible. Therefore, in recalling the Maine-Vermont adage, we can surely conclude that, "As Indiana goes, so goes South Dakota. And Kansas. And Virginia. And Alaska." Could there possibly be any more odd voting associations?

There are indeed a few more odd pairings. When Indiana picked up another voting partner in Kansas in 1920, neighboring Illinois found one too: New Mexico. Both Illinois and New Mexico have now voted for the same candidate for the past 21 presidential elections. Another pair, Iowa and Oregon, together have selected the same candidate since 1952. Both pairs have no exceptions to their voting records. Both pairs also have that big difference in geography and demographics. One other notable pairing is New Hampshire and Nevada. Since Wilson's win 1912, they've also voted the same, but they have 2 exceptions: 1948 and 1960. As one can surmise, other odd pairings will turn up under enough scrutiny.

Granted, several states on either side of the continent will share common political leanings. As Maryland and California tend to be Democratic supporters, while Montana and Mississippi tend to side with the Republican candidate for president. But Maryland and California don't have a consistent shared voting track record; nor do Montana and Mississippi always match up. The peculiarity occurs when states as geographically and economically diverse as Indiana and South Dakota, or even Illinois and New Mexico share the same voting record.

In conclusion, the Indiana-led voting quintet looks to remain in tact for the election of 2004. The GOP appears to hold double digit leads in the polls in all five members. However, with both President Bush and Senator Kerry pounding away at the constituencies of New Mexico, Nevada, New Hampshire, Iowa and Oregon (all considered swing states), it's fair to say that those voting clubs have less chance of continuing in the same way as before. Still, there are bizarre trends that intrigue, and curiosities that show up in Electoral College history that continue to make election history an incredibly interesting subject.



Strange Political Pairings
© Philip Fowler. Used with permission.

Philip is a retired U.S. Marine Corps Gunnery Sergeant. He is married and a father of 7, and works as a Programmer/Analyst (SAS & SQL) in Indiana. He is a critical student of ancient history and U.S. Presidential history and is a staunch supporter of the Electoral College.