1928 United States presidential election in Texas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
United States presidential election in Texas, 1928

← 1924 November 6, 1928 1932 →
  Herbert Hoover - NARA - 532049.tif AlfredSmith.png
Nominee Herbert Hoover Al Smith
Party Republican Democratic
Home state California New York
Running mate Charles Curtis Joseph T. Robinson
Electoral vote 20 0
Popular vote 367,036 341,032
Percentage 51.8% 48.1%

President before election

Calvin Coolidge
Republican

Elected President

Herbert Hoover
Republican

The 1928 United States presidential election in Texas took place on November 6, 1928, as part of the 1928 United States Presidential Election which was held throughout all contemporary forty-eight states. Voters chose twenty representatives, or electors to the Electoral College, who voted for president and vice president.

Background[edit]

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. By the time Texas participated in its first postbellum election in 1872, cracks were emerging in Republican Reconstruction plans, so that the Democratic "Redeemers" gained control of Southern legislatures by 1874.[1]

After "Redemption" and the passing of a new constitution in 1876 the GOP became confined largely to areas of abolitionist German "Forty-Eighter" settlement in the Hill Country,[2] and to a few South Texas counties where local Republican bosses could outcompete their Democratic equivalents.[3] The Terrell Election Law created a poll tax disenfranchised the remaining African American voters from 1902, the vast majority of Mexican-Americans, and also most poor whites.[4] Voter turnout among males over twenty-one fell from over eighty percent to under thirty percent following the poll tax.[5] The period following this disfranchisement, nonetheless, saw a considerable amount of typical "Progressive" reform under Governors James Stephen Hogg and Thomas M. Campbell, whilst despite this progressive faction ceding power in 1906 to the conservatives, Texas proved solid in its support for Woodrow Wilson at the 1912 Democratic National Convention.[6] In the meantime, Texas continued to vote solidly Democratic: between 1904 and 1924 no Republican nominee reached 24 percent of the statewide vote total.[7]

Anti-Catholic fear[edit]

However, with all other prominent Democrats sitting the election out,[8] the party nominated Alfred E. Smith, four-term Governor of New York as its nominee for 1928, with little opposition, despite disagreement among Texas Democrats like Governor Moody, plus "Pa" and "Ma" Ferguson.[9] Smith had been the favorite for the 1924 nomination, but had lost due to opposition to his Catholic faith and "wet" views on Prohibition: he wished to repeal or modify the Volstead Act.

Once Smith was nominated – despite his attempt to dispel fears by nominating "dry" Southern Democrat Joseph T. Robinson as his running mate[10] – 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.[11] There was also much opposition to Smith's belief in repealing Prohibition, most notably from minister J. Frank Norris, who became the centre of the anti-Smith campaign, saying that

Texas is the battleground for this, the most titanic struggle in the political, moral and religious life of the nation.[12]

The Southern Baptist Convention similarly said that

We enter into a sacred covenant and solemn pledge that we will support for the office of President, or any other office, only such men as stand for our present order of prohibition.[13]

Smith's campaign managers responded to this criticism by saying that the "Hoovercrats" were "Republicans, Klansmen and Bolsheviks".[14]

Vote[edit]

Hoover won the Lone Star State by a narrow margin of 3.67 percent. His victory in the state made him the first Republican presidential candidate to carry Texas (Ironically, 4 years after achieving this historic feat, Hoover would go on to lose Texas by the largest margin of any major candidate in presidential history, losing every county and not even garnering 100,000 votes).[15] He produced a swing of over 32 percent compared to the vote for Calvin Coolidge in 1924; however, there were huge variations. The traditionally Republican Texas German counties of Comal and Guadalupe, along with the former 1920 Ferguson counties of Lee and Washington voted overwhelmingly for Smith in appreciation of his views on Prohibition:[16] in Comal County, which had been Robert La Follette's strongest nationwide in 1924,[17] the Democratic vote rose from 13 to 78 percent, thus supporting La Follette's family's endorsement of Smith after he died.

In contrast, numerous Baptist High Plains counties saw Hoover gain over fifty percent relative to Coolidge due to vehement opposition to Catholicism and repeal of Prohibition.[18] Hoover was also helped by a powerful vote from the emerging middle class in Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston:[19] his combined margin in Harris, Dallas and Tarrant Counties was slightly larger than his statewide plurality.[20] East Texas, the earliest-settled region of the state with greatest white fear of the Republican Party's association with Reconstruction, and South Texas, which had similar fears of Mexican-American political power, remained normally loyal to Smith.[21]

Texas wouldn't support another Republican presidential candidate until 1952 when native Texan Dwight D. Eisenhower carried the state. As of the 2016 presidential election, this is the last election in which Maverick County voted for a Republican presidential candidate.[22]

Results[edit]

United States presidential election in Texas, 1928[23]
Party Candidate Votes Percentage Electoral votes
Republican Herbert Hoover 367,036 51.77% 20
Democratic Alfred E. Smith 341,032 48.10% 0
Socialist Norman Thomas 722 0.10% 0
Communist William Z. Foster 209 0.03% 0
Totals 708,999 100.00% 20
Voter turnout (Voting age) 24.8%[24]

Results by county[edit]

Herbert Clark Hoover
Republican
Alfred Emmanuel Smith
Democratic
Various candidates
Other parties
Margin Total votes cast[25]
County # % # % # % # % #
Anderson 1,814 50.94% 1,747 49.06% 0 0.00% 67 1.88% 3,561
Andrews 66 72.53% 25 27.47% 0 0.00% 41 45.05% 91
Angelina 1,209 34.41% 2,305 65.59% 0 0.00% -1,096 -31.19% 3,514
Aransas 161 51.44% 152 48.56% 0 0.00% 9 2.88% 313
Archer 799 48.02% 865 51.98% 0 0.00% -66 -3.97% 1,664
Armstrong 316 45.80% 373 54.06% 1 0.14% -57 -8.26% 690
Atascosa 888 56.56% 682 43.44% 0 0.00% 206 13.12% 1,570
Austin 466 17.94% 2,129 81.98% 2 0.08% -1,663 -64.04% 2,597
Bailey 410 74.28% 142 25.72% 0 0.00% 268 48.55% 552
Bandera 936 74.52% 317 25.24% 3 0.24% 619 49.28% 1,256
Bastrop 850 35.65% 1,534 64.35% 0 0.00% -684 -28.69% 2,384
Baylor 491 38.51% 784 61.49% 0 0.00% -293 -22.98% 1,275
Bee 1,189 53.18% 1,043 46.65% 4 0.18% 146 6.53% 2,236
Bell 3,366 52.17% 3,079 47.72% 7 0.11% 287 4.45% 6,452
Bexar 16,477 49.69% 16,626 50.14% 57 0.17% -149 -0.45% 33,160
Blanco 615 53.25% 539 46.67% 1 0.09% 76 6.58% 1,155
Borden 98 57.31% 73 42.69% 0 0.00% 25 14.62% 171
Bosque 1,526 55.19% 1,235 44.67% 4 0.14% 291 10.52% 2,765
Bowie 2,225 42.57% 3,002 57.43% 0 0.00% -777 -14.87% 5,227
Brazoria 1,588 59.39% 1,086 40.61% 0 0.00% 502 18.77% 2,674
Brazos 738 33.23% 1,480 66.64% 3 0.14% -742 -33.41% 2,221
Brewster 406 59.36% 273 39.91% 5 0.73% 133 19.44% 684
Briscoe 301 46.96% 336 52.42% 4 0.62% -35 -5.46% 641
Brooks 160 32.52% 332 67.48% 0 0.00% -172 -34.96% 492
Brown 2,033 50.46% 1,992 49.44% 4 0.10% 41 1.02% 4,029
Burleson 339 17.87% 1,558 82.13% 0 0.00% -1,219 -64.26% 1,897
Burnet 936 66.67% 467 33.26% 1 0.07% 469 33.40% 1,404
Caldwell 1,189 49.54% 1,211 50.46% 0 0.00% -22 -0.92% 2,400
Calhoun 333 46.84% 375 52.74% 3 0.42% -42 -5.91% 711
Callahan 979 51.02% 940 48.98% 0 0.00% 39 2.03% 1,919
Cameron 3,544 52.45% 3,202 47.39% 11 0.16% 342 5.06% 6,757
Camp 494 43.56% 640 56.44% 0 0.00% -146 -12.87% 1,134
Carson 891 60.04% 592 39.89% 1 0.07% 299 20.15% 1,484
Cass 1,323 43.79% 1,698 56.21% 0 0.00% -375 -12.41% 3,021
Castro 319 45.38% 384 54.62% 0 0.00% -65 -9.25% 703
Chambers 256 51.41% 242 48.59% 0 0.00% 14 2.81% 498
Cherokee 1,933 49.94% 1,938 50.06% 0 0.00% -5 -0.13% 3,871
Childress 1,438 66.45% 726 33.55% 0 0.00% 712 32.90% 2,164
Clay 1,327 53.36% 1,160 46.64% 0 0.00% 167 6.71% 2,487
Cochran 197 64.38% 109 35.62% 0 0.00% 88 28.76% 306
Coke 450 68.60% 206 31.40% 0 0.00% 244 37.20% 656
Coleman 1,645 53.00% 1,459 47.00% 0 0.00% 186 5.99% 3,104
Collin 3,476 50.55% 3,377 49.11% 23 0.33% 99 1.44% 6,876
Collingsworth 1,179 65.98% 608 34.02% 0 0.00% 571 31.95% 1,787
Colorado 891 33.22% 1,787 66.63% 4 0.15% -896 -33.41% 2,682
Comal 508 21.14% 1,893 78.78% 2 0.08% -1,385 -57.64% 2,403
Comanche 1,483 53.08% 1,311 46.92% 0 0.00% 172 6.16% 2,794
Concho 446 50.97% 426 48.69% 3 0.34% 20 2.29% 875
Cooke 2,262 53.99% 1,924 45.92% 4 0.10% 338 8.07% 4,190
Coryell 1,123 46.21% 1,306 53.74% 1 0.04% -183 -7.53% 2,430
Cottle 473 51.19% 451 48.81% 0 0.00% 22 2.38% 924
Crane 127 44.41% 159 55.59% 0 0.00% -32 -11.19% 286
Crockett 291 81.97% 64 18.03% 0 0.00% 227 63.94% 355
Crosby 1,004 57.97% 728 42.03% 0 0.00% 276 15.94% 1,732
Culberson 72 45.86% 85 54.14% 0 0.00% -13 -8.28% 157
Dallam 618 53.00% 539 46.23% 9 0.77% 79 6.78% 1,166
Dallas 27,272 60.89% 17,437 38.93% 78 0.17% 9,835 21.96% 44,787
Dawson 1,448 77.23% 427 22.77% 0 0.00% 1,021 54.45% 1,875
Deaf Smith 570 58.10% 411 41.90% 0 0.00% 159 16.21% 981
Delta 753 43.96% 958 55.93% 2 0.12% -205 -11.97% 1,713
Denton 2,587 51.89% 2,384 47.81% 15 0.30% 203 4.07% 4,986
DeWitt 1,142 41.66% 1,594 58.15% 5 0.18% -452 -16.49% 2,741
Dickens 741 64.10% 415 35.90% 0 0.00% 326 28.20% 1,156
Dimmit 626 70.81% 258 29.19% 0 0.00% 368 41.63% 884
Donley 1,092 68.90% 491 30.98% 2 0.13% 601 37.92% 1,585
Duval 434 25.85% 1,245 74.15% 0 0.00% -811 -48.30% 1,679
Eastland 3,233 56.38% 2,501 43.62% 0 0.00% 732 12.77% 5,734
Ector 168 52.66% 151 47.34% 0 0.00% 17 5.33% 319
Edwards 546 89.66% 59 9.69% 4 0.66% 487 79.97% 609
Ellis 3,569 44.72% 4,399 55.12% 13 0.16% -830 -10.40% 7,981
El Paso 6,050 49.74% 6,114 50.26% 0 0.00% -64 -0.53% 12,164
Erath 1,923 56.94% 1,372 40.63% 82 2.43% 551 16.32% 3,377
Falls 877 26.04% 2,484 73.75% 7 0.21% -1,607 -47.71% 3,368
Fannin 2,122 45.62% 2,525 54.29% 4 0.09% -403 -8.66% 4,651
Fayette 689 15.87% 3,647 84.01% 5 0.12% -2,958 -68.14% 4,341
Fisher 1,259 60.07% 837 39.93% 0 0.00% 422 20.13% 2,096
Floyd 1,176 63.84% 666 36.16% 0 0.00% 510 27.69% 1,842
Foard 430 47.51% 466 51.49% 9 0.99% -36 -3.98% 905
Fort Bend 631 26.77% 1,724 73.14% 2 0.08% -1,093 -46.37% 2,357
Franklin 386 35.12% 713 64.88% 0 0.00% -327 -29.75% 1,099
Freestone 1,178 47.14% 1,318 52.74% 3 0.12% -140 -5.60% 2,499
Frio 673 72.21% 258 27.68% 1 0.11% 415 44.53% 932
Gaines 312 69.03% 140 30.97% 0 0.00% 172 38.05% 452
Galveston 4,401 42.43% 5,951 57.38% 20 0.19% -1,550 -14.94% 10,372
Garza 794 73.59% 285 26.41% 0 0.00% 509 47.17% 1,079
Gillespie 1,447 55.12% 1,174 44.72% 4 0.15% 273 10.40% 2,625
Glasscock 124 78.48% 34 21.52% 0 0.00% 90 56.96% 158
Goliad 554 54.10% 468 45.70% 2 0.20% 86 8.40% 1,024
Gonzales 1,112 45.74% 1,319 54.26% 0 0.00% -207 -8.52% 2,431
Gray 1,871 65.35% 986 34.44% 6 0.21% 885 30.91% 2,863
Grayson 6,277 57.63% 4,600 42.23% 15 0.14% 1,677 15.40% 10,892
Gregg 646 39.29% 996 60.58% 2 0.12% -350 -21.29% 1,644
Grimes 701 37.37% 1,175 62.63% 0 0.00% -474 -25.27% 1,876
Guadalupe 1,442 43.46% 1,872 56.42% 4 0.12% -430 -12.96% 3,318
Hale 2,143 65.98% 1,098 33.81% 7 0.22% 1,045 32.17% 3,248
Hall 1,409 74.08% 493 25.92% 0 0.00% 916 48.16% 1,902
Hamilton 927 48.38% 989 51.62% 0 0.00% -62 -3.24% 1,916
Hansford 417 56.58% 319 43.28% 1 0.14% 98 13.30% 737
Hardeman 1,333 59.43% 910 40.57% 0 0.00% 423 18.86% 2,243
Hardin 951 47.96% 1,032 52.04% 0 0.00% -81 -4.08% 1,983
Harris 27,188 55.70% 21,536 44.12% 86 0.18% 5,652 11.58% 48,810
Harrison 1,776 46.69% 2,023 53.18% 5 0.13% -247 -6.49% 3,804
Hartley 179 52.34% 163 47.66% 0 0.00% 16 4.68% 342
Haskell 1,430 48.08% 1,532 51.51% 12 0.40% -102 -3.43% 2,974
Hays 1,088 63.70% 620 36.30% 0 0.00% 468 27.40% 1,708
Hemphill 489 60.67% 317 39.33% 0 0.00% 172 21.34% 806
Henderson 1,128 39.52% 1,726 60.48% 0 0.00% -598 -20.95% 2,854
Hidalgo 4,285 51.41% 4,034 48.40% 16 0.19% 251 3.01% 8,335
Hill 2,446 50.34% 2,413 49.66% 0 0.00% 33 0.68% 4,859
Hockley 765 75.82% 235 23.29% 9 0.89% 530 52.53% 1,009
Hood 640 57.09% 479 42.73% 2 0.18% 161 14.36% 1,121
Hopkins 1,767 48.85% 1,845 51.01% 5 0.14% -78 -2.16% 3,617
Houston 763 36.35% 1,336 63.65% 0 0.00% -573 -27.30% 2,099
Howard 812 54.86% 665 44.93% 3 0.20% 147 9.93% 1,480
Hudspeth 123 51.25% 117 48.75% 0 0.00% 6 2.50% 240
Hunt 3,009 46.16% 3,510 53.84% 0 0.00% -501 -7.69% 6,519
Hutchinson 1,115 60.43% 730 39.57% 0 0.00% 385 20.87% 1,845
Irion 259 68.52% 119 31.48% 0 0.00% 140 37.04% 378
Jack 1,068 70.22% 450 29.59% 3 0.20% 618 40.63% 1,521
Jackson 572 54.68% 473 45.22% 1 0.10% 99 9.46% 1,046
Jasper 611 40.44% 898 59.43% 2 0.13% -287 -18.99% 1,511
Jeff Davis 157 58.15% 112 41.48% 1 0.37% 45 16.67% 270
Jefferson 9,209 56.74% 7,006 43.16% 16 0.10% 2,203 13.57% 16,231
Jim Hogg 109 29.30% 263 70.70% 0 0.00% -154 -41.40% 372
Jim Wells 423 36.06% 747 63.68% 3 0.26% -324 -27.62% 1,173
Johnson 3,181 61.58% 1,981 38.35% 4 0.08% 1,200 23.23% 5,166
Jones 1,995 55.95% 1,563 43.83% 8 0.22% 432 12.11% 3,566
Karnes 855 44.83% 1,052 55.17% 0 0.00% -197 -10.33% 1,907
Kaufman 1,718 39.27% 2,657 60.73% 0 0.00% -939 -21.46% 4,375
Kendall 663 63.63% 377 36.18% 2 0.19% 286 27.45% 1,042
Kenedy 12 9.23% 118 90.77% 0 0.00% -106 -81.54% 130
Kent 363 69.01% 163 30.99% 0 0.00% 200 38.02% 526
Kerr 1,575 73.36% 570 26.55% 2 0.09% 1,005 46.81% 2,147
Kimble 660 80.39% 157 19.12% 4 0.49% 503 61.27% 821
King 85 65.38% 45 34.62% 0 0.00% 40 30.77% 130
Kinney 182 47.64% 200 52.36% 0 0.00% -18 -4.71% 382
Kleberg 751 51.94% 695 48.06% 0 0.00% 56 3.87% 1,446
Knox 992 55.70% 784 44.02% 5 0.28% 208 11.68% 1,781
Lamar 2,887 57.08% 2,163 42.76% 8 0.16% 724 14.31% 5,058
Lamb 1,266 74.21% 440 25.79% 0 0.00% 826 48.42% 1,706
Lampasas 899 60.91% 567 38.41% 10 0.68% 332 22.49% 1,476
La Salle 327 40.57% 479 59.43% 0 0.00% -152 -18.86% 806
Lavaca 911 24.27% 2,842 75.73% 0 0.00% -1,931 -51.45% 3,753
Lee 449 27.63% 1,176 72.37% 0 0.00% -727 -44.74% 1,625
Leon 543 38.59% 862 61.27% 2 0.14% -319 -22.67% 1,407
Liberty 1,070 53.63% 918 46.02% 7 0.35% 152 7.62% 1,995
Limestone 1,642 38.64% 2,608 61.36% 0 0.00% -966 -22.73% 4,250
Lipscomb 776 69.35% 331 29.58% 12 1.07% 445 39.77% 1,119
Live Oak 484 55.82% 383 44.18% 0 0.00% 101 11.65% 867
Llano 439 46.07% 514 53.93% 0 0.00% -75 -7.87% 953
Loving 6 37.50% 10 62.50% 0 0.00% -4 -25.00% 16
Lubbock 3,079 60.79% 1,979 39.07% 7 0.14% 1,100 21.72% 5,065
Lynn 1,268 62.49% 754 37.16% 7 0.34% 514 25.33% 2,029
McCulloch 1,294 63.59% 741 36.41% 0 0.00% 553 27.17% 2,035
McLennan 5,744 51.81% 5,330 48.07% 13 0.12% 414 3.73% 11,087
McMullen 96 50.00% 94 48.96% 2 1.04% 2 1.04% 192
Madison 364 44.61% 452 55.39% 0 0.00% -88 -10.78% 816
Marion 443 40.90% 640 59.10% 0 0.00% -197 -18.19% 1,083
Martin 330 60.77% 213 39.23% 0 0.00% 117 21.55% 543
Mason 807 76.64% 244 23.17% 2 0.19% 563 53.47% 1,053
Matagorda 1,194 58.85% 829 40.86% 6 0.30% 365 17.99% 2,029
Maverick 311 63.34% 180 36.66% 0 0.00% 131 26.68% 491
Medina 1,243 46.94% 1,400 52.87% 5 0.19% -157 -5.93% 2,648
Menard 589 71.57% 234 28.43% 0 0.00% 355 43.13% 823
Midland 347 49.57% 350 50.00% 3 0.43% -3 -0.43% 700
Milam 1,270 30.86% 2,842 69.05% 4 0.10% -1,572 -38.19% 4,116
Mills 774 63.65% 442 36.35% 0 0.00% 332 27.30% 1,216
Mitchell 1,099 59.57% 746 40.43% 0 0.00% 353 19.13% 1,845
Montague 1,519 51.13% 1,452 48.87% 0 0.00% 67 2.26% 2,971
Montgomery 613 40.36% 905 59.58% 1 0.07% -292 -19.22% 1,519
Moore 87 41.23% 124 58.77% 0 0.00% -37 -17.54% 211
Morris 287 26.90% 780 73.10% 0 0.00% -493 -46.20% 1,067
Motley 450 56.32% 349 43.68% 0 0.00% 101 12.64% 799
Nacogdoches 822 30.41% 1,879 69.52% 2 0.07% -1,057 -39.10% 2,703
Navarro 3,341 47.80% 3,648 52.20% 0 0.00% -307 -4.39% 6,989
Newton 397 41.27% 564 58.63% 1 0.10% -167 -17.36% 962
Nolan 1,475 58.76% 1,035 41.24% 0 0.00% 440 17.53% 2,510
Nueces 2,481 45.36% 2,985 54.58% 3 0.05% -504 -9.22% 5,469
Ochiltree 556 67.31% 270 32.69% 0 0.00% 286 34.62% 826
Oldham 172 52.28% 157 47.72% 0 0.00% 15 4.56% 329
Orange 919 42.43% 1,247 57.57% 0 0.00% -328 -15.14% 2,166
Palo Pinto 2,001 63.28% 1,161 36.72% 0 0.00% 840 26.57% 3,162
Panola 420 24.21% 1,312 75.62% 3 0.17% -892 -51.41% 1,735
Parker 2,178 66.24% 1,110 33.76% 0 0.00% 1,068 32.48% 3,288
Parmer 620 65.75% 315 33.40% 8 0.85% 305 32.34% 943
Pecos 524 47.99% 562 51.47% 6 0.55% -38 -3.48% 1,092
Polk 508 33.73% 994 66.00% 4 0.27% -486 -32.27% 1,506
Potter 3,627 57.90% 2,637 42.10% 0 0.00% 990 15.80% 6,264
Presidio 254 44.64% 315 55.36% 0 0.00% -61 -10.72% 569
Rains 202 26.90% 544 72.44% 5 0.67% -342 -45.54% 751
Randall 733 52.66% 659 47.34% 0 0.00% 74 5.32% 1,392
Reagan 387 62.82% 229 37.18% 0 0.00% 158 25.65% 616
Real 479 83.02% 98 16.98% 0 0.00% 381 66.03% 577
Red River 1,172 41.30% 1,666 58.70% 0 0.00% -494 -17.41% 2,838
Reeves 344 46.61% 394 53.39% 0 0.00% -50 -6.78% 738
Refugio 383 36.34% 671 63.66% 0 0.00% -288 -27.32% 1,054
Roberts 243 70.03% 104 29.97% 0 0.00% 139 40.06% 347
Robertson 751 33.54% 1,487 66.41% 1 0.04% -736 -32.87% 2,239
Rockwall 289 25.37% 850 74.63% 0 0.00% -561 -49.25% 1,139
Runnels 1,645 52.26% 1,494 47.46% 9 0.29% 151 4.80% 3,148
Rusk 1,033 37.36% 1,732 62.64% 0 0.00% -699 -25.28% 2,765
Sabine 419 34.18% 807 65.82% 0 0.00% -388 -31.65% 1,226
San Augustine 467 36.26% 821 63.74% 0 0.00% -354 -27.48% 1,288
San Jacinto 296 37.00% 503 62.88% 1 0.13% -207 -25.88% 800
San Patricio 1,388 70.56% 579 29.44% 0 0.00% 809 41.13% 1,967
San Saba 682 47.56% 752 52.44% 0 0.00% -70 -4.88% 1,434
Schleicher 227 62.36% 137 37.64% 0 0.00% 90 24.73% 364
Scurry 1,597 77.49% 462 22.42% 2 0.10% 1,135 55.07% 2,061
Shackelford 558 51.10% 533 48.81% 1 0.09% 25 2.29% 1,092
Shelby 676 25.53% 1,961 74.06% 11 0.42% -1,285 -48.53% 2,648
Sherman 248 64.42% 137 35.58% 0 0.00% 111 28.83% 385
Smith 3,493 59.85% 2,343 40.15% 0 0.00% 1,150 19.71% 5,836
Somervell 241 63.93% 136 36.07% 0 0.00% 105 27.85% 377
Starr 79 9.69% 736 90.31% 0 0.00% -657 -80.61% 815
Stephens 1,789 60.60% 1,163 39.40% 0 0.00% 626 21.21% 2,952
Sterling 122 42.21% 167 57.79% 0 0.00% -45 -15.57% 289
Stonewall 442 46.92% 500 53.08% 0 0.00% -58 -6.16% 942
Sutton 290 75.92% 92 24.08% 0 0.00% 198 51.83% 382
Swisher 887 70.34% 374 29.66% 0 0.00% 513 40.68% 1,261
Tarrant 20,481 68.99% 9,208 31.01% 0 0.00% 11,273 37.97% 29,689
Taylor 4,050 68.07% 1,891 31.78% 9 0.15% 2,159 36.29% 5,950
Terrell 364 80.71% 85 18.85% 2 0.44% 279 61.86% 451
Terry 622 60.45% 407 39.55% 0 0.00% 215 20.89% 1,029
Throckmorton 703 69.81% 304 30.19% 0 0.00% 399 39.62% 1,007
Titus 469 28.99% 1,149 71.01% 0 0.00% -680 -42.03% 1,618
Tom Green 2,618 63.11% 1,528 36.84% 2 0.05% 1,090 26.28% 4,148
Travis 4,847 51.83% 4,487 47.98% 17 0.18% 360 3.85% 9,351
Trinity 456 39.93% 686 60.07% 0 0.00% -230 -20.14% 1,142
Tyler 298 30.88% 666 69.02% 1 0.10% -368 -38.13% 965
Upshur 649 29.37% 1,553 70.27% 8 0.36% -904 -40.90% 2,210
Upton 270 58.82% 189 41.18% 0 0.00% 81 17.65% 459
Uvalde 1,224 62.10% 747 37.90% 0 0.00% 477 24.20% 1,971
Val Verde 854 57.94% 620 42.06% 0 0.00% 234 15.88% 1,474
Van Zandt 1,502 45.35% 1,789 54.02% 21 0.63% -287 -8.67% 3,312
Victoria 663 27.94% 1,710 72.06% 0 0.00% -1,047 -44.12% 2,373
Walker 488 39.51% 747 60.49% 0 0.00% -259 -20.97% 1,235
Waller 376 42.68% 504 57.21% 1 0.11% -128 -14.53% 881
Ward 216 45.76% 256 54.24% 0 0.00% -40 -8.47% 472
Washington 275 9.94% 2,491 90.06% 0 0.00% -2,216 -80.12% 2,766
Webb 767 32.16% 1,615 67.71% 3 0.13% -848 -35.56% 2,385
Wharton 1,151 42.69% 1,545 57.31% 0 0.00% -394 -14.61% 2,696
Wheeler 1,038 57.86% 750 41.81% 6 0.33% 288 16.05% 1,794
Wichita 7,226 59.82% 4,853 40.18% 0 0.00% 2,373 19.65% 12,079
Wilbarger 1,590 52.30% 1,447 47.60% 3 0.10% 143 4.70% 3,040
Willacy 389 49.55% 396 50.45% 0 0.00% -7 -0.89% 785
Williamson 1,833 33.14% 3,689 66.70% 9 0.16% -1,856 -33.56% 5,531
Wilson 622 29.33% 1,499 70.67% 0 0.00% -877 -41.35% 2,121
Winkler 162 34.32% 310 65.68% 0 0.00% -148 -31.36% 472
Wise 2,141 66.20% 1,093 33.80% 0 0.00% 1,048 32.41% 3,234
Wood 1,161 41.38% 1,645 58.62% 0 0.00% -484 -17.25% 2,806
Yoakum 86 56.58% 66 43.42% 0 0.00% 20 13.16% 152
Young 1,826 58.88% 1,275 41.12% 0 0.00% 551 17.77% 3,101
Zapata 19 6.03% 296 93.97% 0 0.00% -277 -87.94% 315
Zavala 571 71.38% 229 28.63% 0 0.00% 342 42.75% 800
Totals 372,324 51.88% 344,542 48.00% 867 0.12% 27,782 3.87% 717,733

References[edit]

  1. ^ Granthan, Dewey W.; The Life and Death of the Solid South: A Political History, pp. 3-4 ISBN 0813148723
  2. ^ Bass, Jack; The Transformation of Southern Politics: Social Change and Political Consequence Since 1945, p. 25 ISBN 0820317284
  3. ^ Weeks, O. Douglas; 'The Texas Mexican and the Politics of South Texas'; The American Political Science Review, vol. 24, no. 3 (Aug., 1930), pp. 606-627
  4. ^ Davidson, Chandler; Race and Class in Texas Politics, p. 21 ISBN 0691025398
  5. ^ Davison; Race and Class in Texas Politics, p. 24
  6. ^ Grantham; The Life and Death of the Solid South, pp. 50-52
  7. ^ Dave Leip's U.S. Election Atlas; Presidential General Election Results Comparison – Texas
  8. ^ Warren, Kenneth F.; Encyclopedia of U.S. campaigns, elections, and electoral behavior: A-M, Volume 1, p. 620 ISBN 1412954894
  9. ^ Campbell, Randolph B.; Gone to Texas: A History of the Lone Star State, p. 376 ISBN 0195138422
  10. ^ Nelson, Michael (1991); Historic documents on presidential elections, 1787-1988, p. 296
  11. ^ Whisenhunt, Donald W.; President Herbert Hoover, p. 69 ISBN 1600214762
  12. ^ Marty, Martin E.; Modern American Religion, Volume 2: The Noise of Conflict, 1919-1941, p. 244
  13. ^ Maxwell, Angie and Shields, Todd G. (editors); Unlocking V.O. Key Jr.: "Southern Politics" for the Twenty-First Century, pp. 17-18 ISBN 1557289611
  14. ^ Slayton, Robert A.; Empire Statesman: The Rise and Fall of Al Smith; p. 284 ISBN 0684863022
  15. ^ Leip, Dave. "Dave Leip's US Presidental Election Atlas- Texas Results 1932". uselectionatlas. Dave Leip. Retrieved 27 March 2019.
  16. ^ Richardson, Rupert N.; Anderson, Adrian; Wintz, Cary D. and Wallace Ernest; Texas: The Lone Star State, p. 314 ISBN 1315509806
  17. ^ Dave Leip's U.S. Election Atlas; 1924 Presidential Election Statistics
  18. ^ Phillips, Kevin P.; The Emerging Republican Majority, pp. 214, 317, 352 ISBN 1400852293
  19. ^ Phillips; The Emerging Republican Majority, p. 212
  20. ^ McKay, Seth Shepard; Texas politics, 1906-1944, p. 182
  21. ^ Key, V.O. junior; Southern Politics in State and Nation; p. 324 ISBN 087049435X
  22. ^ Sullivan, Robert David; ‘How the Red and Blue Map Evolved Over the Past Century’; America Magazine in The National Catholic Review; June 29, 2016
  23. ^ "1928 Presidential General Election Results - Texas". Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. Retrieved 2013-08-02.
  24. ^ Burnham, Walter Dean; ‘A Political Scientist and Voting-Rights Litigation: The Case of the 1966 Texas Registration Statute’; p. 353
  25. ^ Scammon, Richard M. (compiler); America at the Polls: A Handbook of Presidential Election Statistics 1920-1964; pp. 431-435 ISBN 0405077114