1952 United States presidential election
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
531 members of the Electoral College 266 electoral votes needed to win | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Turnout | 63.3%[1] 10.3 pp | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Presidential election results map. Red denotes states won by Eisenhower/Nixon, blue denotes those won by Stevenson/Sparkman. Numbers indicate the number of electoral votes allotted to each state. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The 1952 United States presidential election was the 42nd quadrennial presidential election. It was held on Tuesday, November 4, 1952. Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower defeated Democratic Illinois Governor Adlai Stevenson II in a landslide victory, becoming the first Republican president in 20 years. This was the first election since 1928 without an incumbent president or incumbent vice president on the ballot.
Stevenson emerged victorious on the third presidential ballot of the 1952 Democratic National Convention by defeating Tennessee Senator Estes Kefauver, Georgia Senator Richard Russell Jr., and other candidates. The Republican nomination was primarily contested by Eisenhower, a widely-popular general for his leadership in World War II, and the conservative Ohio Senator Robert A. Taft. With the support of Thomas E. Dewey and other party leaders, Eisenhower narrowly prevailed over Taft at the 1952 Republican National Convention. He selected youthful California Senator Richard Nixon as his running mate. In the first televised presidential campaign, Eisenhower was charismatic and very well known, in sharp contrast to Stevenson.[4]
Republicans attacked Truman's handling of the Korean War and the broader Cold War, alleging Soviet spies infiltrated the U.S. government. Democrats faulted Eisenhower for failing to condemn Senators Joseph McCarthy, William E. Jenner, and other reactionary Republicans, who, the Democrats alleged, engaged in reckless and unwarranted attacks. Stevenson tried to separate himself from the unpopular Truman administration. Instead, he campaigned on the popularity of the New Deal and stoked fears of another Great Depression under a Republican administration.
Eisenhower retained his enormous popularity from the war, as was seen in his campaign slogan, "I Like Ike." Eisenhower's public support, coupled with the unpopularity of Truman, allowed him to win comfortably with 55.18% of the popular vote and carry every state outside of the
Nominees
Republican Party
1952 Republican Party ticket | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dwight D. Eisenhower | Richard Nixon | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
for President | for Vice President | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) (1951–1952) |
U.S. Senator from California (1950–1953) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Campaign |
-
-
-
General of the Army Douglas MacArthur, from New York
The fight for the
The moderate Eastern Republicans were led by New York Governor
The conservative Republicans, led by Taft, were based in the Midwest and parts of the South. The Midwest was a bastion of conservatism and isolationist sentiment. Dislike of Europeans, in particular the British, was common, and there was a widespread feeling that the British manipulated American foreign policy and were eager to kowtow to the Soviet Union, although such attitudes had begun to change among the younger generation who had fought in World War II. In addition, the conservatives opposed much of the New Deal, regarding these programs as diminishing individual liberty and economic freedom. Taft had unsuccessfully sought the Republican nomination in the 1940 and 1948 presidential elections but lost both times to moderate candidates from New York: Wilkie and Dewey respectively. At the age of 63, Taft felt that it was his last chance to run for president so his friends and supporters, encompassing many party regulars, worked diligently on his behalf. His feelings were correct, as he died about nine months after the election.
Warren, although highly popular in California, refused to campaign in the presidential primaries, which limited his chances of winning the nomination. He retained the support of the California delegation, and his supporters hoped that in the event of an Eisenhower–Taft deadlock, Warren might emerge as a compromise candidate.
After being
Republican National Convention
This section needs additional citations for verification. (September 2023) |
When the 1952 Republican National Convention opened in Chicago, most political experts rated Taft and Eisenhower as about equal in delegate vote totals. Eisenhower's managers, led by both Dewey and Massachusetts Senator Henry Cabot Lodge Jr., accused Taft of "stealing" delegate votes in Southern states such as Texas and Georgia, and claimed that Taft's leaders in those states had unfairly denied delegate spots to Eisenhower supporters, putting Taft delegates in their place. Lodge and Dewey proposed to evict the Taft delegates in those states and replace them with Eisenhower delegates and called the proposal "Fair Play." Although Taft and his supporters angrily denied that charge, the convention voted to support Fair Play 658 to 548, and Taft lost many Southern delegates. Eisenhower's chances were boosted when several uncommitted state delegations, such as Michigan and Pennsylvania, decided to support him and also when Stassen released his delegates and asked them to support Eisenhower. The removal of many Southern delegates and the support of the uncommitted states decided the nomination in Eisenhower's favor.
However, the convention was among the most bitter and emotional in American history. When Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois, a Taft supporter, pointed at Dewey on the convention floor during a speech and accused him of leading the Republicans "down the road to defeat," mixed boos and cheers rang out from the delegates, and there were even fistfights between some Taft and Eisenhower delegates.
In the end, Eisenhower narrowly defeated Taft on the first ballot. To heal the wounds caused by the battle, he visited Taft's hotel suite and met with him. Taft issued a brief statement congratulating Eisenhower on his victory, but he was bitter about the accusation that he had stolen delegates and withheld his active support for Eisenhower for several weeks after the convention. In September 1952, Taft and Eisenhower met again at
Though there were initial suggestions that Warren could earn the party's vice-presidential slot for the second successive election if he withdrew and endorsed Eisenhower, he ultimately chose not to do so. Eisenhower wished to award the vice-presidential nod to Stassen, who had endorsed Eisenhower and held generally similar political positions. However, the party bosses wanted to find a running mate who could mollify Taft's supporters, as the schism between the moderate and conservative wings was so severe that it was feared that party's conservatives would run Taft as a third-party candidate.
Eisenhower had apparently given little thought to choosing his running mate. When asked, he replied that he assumed the convention would pick someone. The spot ultimately fell to the young California Senator Richard Nixon, who was viewed as a centrist. Nixon was known as an aggressive campaigner and a fierce anticommunist but as one who shied away from some of the more extreme ideas of the party's right wing, including isolationism and the dismantling of the New Deal. Most historians[who?] now believe that Eisenhower's nomination was the result of his perceived electability against the Democrats. Most of the delegates were conservatives who would probably have supported Taft if they felt that he could win the general election.
Despite not earning the presidential or the vice-presidential nomination, Warren would be appointed as Chief Justice of the United States in October 1953, and Stassen would hold various positions within Eisenhower's administration.
The balloting at the Republican convention went as follows:[9]
Presidential Balloting, RNC 1952 | ||
Ballot | 1st Before Shifts | 1st After Shifts |
---|---|---|
Dwight D. Eisenhower | 595 | 845 |
Robert A. Taft | 500 | 280 |
Earl Warren | 81 | 77 |
Harold Stassen | 20 | 0 |
Douglas MacArthur | 10 | 4 |
Democratic Party
1952 Democratic Party ticket | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Adlai Stevenson | John Sparkman | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
for President | for Vice President | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(1949–1953) |
U.S. Senator from Alabama (1946–1979) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Campaign |
-
Vice President
Alben W. Barkley -
Senator Hubert Humphrey from Minnesota
-
Senator Estes Kefauver from Tennessee
-
Senator Robert S. Kerr from Oklahoma
-
Senator Richard Russell Jr. from Georgia
The expected candidate for the
Truman's main opponent was the populist Tennessee Senator
With Truman's withdrawal, Kefauver became the frontrunner for the nomination, and he won most of the primaries. Other primary winners were Senator Hubert Humphrey, who won his home state of Minnesota; Senator Richard Russell Jr. from Georgia, who won the Florida primary, and the diplomat W. Averell Harriman, who won West Virginia. However, most states still chose their delegates to the Democratic Convention by state conventions, which meant that the party bosses, especially the mayors and governors of large Northern and Midwestern states and cities, were able to choose the Democratic nominee. The bosses, including Truman himself, strongly disliked Kefauver since his investigations of organized crime had revealed connections between American Mafia figures and many of the big-city Democratic political organizations.[11] The party bosses thus viewed Kefauver as a maverick who could not be trusted and so refused to support him for the nomination.[11]
Instead, with Truman taking the initiative, they began to search for other more acceptable candidates. However, most of the other candidates had a major weakness. Russell had much Southern support, but his support of
One candidate soon emerged who seemingly had few political weaknesses, Governor Adlai Stevenson of Illinois. The grandson of former Vice President
Democratic Convention
The 1952 Democratic National Convention was held in Chicago in the same Coliseum that the Republicans had gathered in several weeks earlier. Since the convention was being held in his home state, Governor Stevenson, who still proclaimed that he was not a presidential candidate, was asked to give the welcoming address to the delegates. He proceeded to give a witty and stirring address that led his supporters to begin a renewed round of efforts to nominate him despite his protests. After meeting with Jacob Arvey, the boss of the Illinois delegation, Stevenson finally agreed to enter his name as a candidate for the nomination. The party bosses from other large Northern and Midwestern states quickly joined in support. Kefauver led on the first ballot, but he had far fewer votes than necessary to win. Stevenson gradually gained strength until he was nominated on the third ballot.
After the delegates nominated Stevenson, the convention then turned to selecting a vice-presidential nominee. After narrowing it down to Senators
Sparkman remained in the Senate until his retirement in 1978.
General election
Campaign issues
The Eisenhower campaign was one of the first presidential campaigns to make a major and concerted effort to win the female vote. Many of his radio and television commercials discussed topics such as education, inflation, ending the Korean War, and other issues that were thought to appeal to women. The Eisenhower campaign made extensive use of female campaign workers, who made phone calls to likely Eisenhower voters, distributed "Ike" buttons and leaflets, and threw parties to build support for the Republican ticket in their neighborhoods. On election day, Eisenhower won a solid majority of the female vote.[12]
Eisenhower campaigned by attacking "Korea, Communism, and Corruption," issues that the Republicans regarded as the failures of the outgoing Truman administration to solve.[13] The Eisenhower campaign accused the administration of "neglecting Latin America" and thus "leading them into the arms of wily Communist agents waiting to exploit local misery and capitalize on any opening to communize the Americas."[14] Charges that Soviet spies had infiltrated the government plagued the Truman administration and became a "major campaign issue" for Eisenhower.[15] The Republicans blamed the Democrats for the military's failure to be fully prepared to fight in Korea, accused the Democrats of harboring communist spies within the federal government, and criticized the Truman administration for the many officials who had been accused of various crimes.
Stevenson hoped to exploit the rift between the conservative Taft Republicans and the moderate Eisenhower Republicans.
Neither Stevenson nor Sparkman had been a part of the Truman administration, and both largely ignored its record, preferred to hark back to the Roosevelt's New Deal achievements, and warned against a repetition of the Great Depression under President Herbert Hoover if Eisenhower was elected. The historian Herbert Parmet stated that, "although Stevenson tried to separate his campaign from Truman's record, his efforts failed to dispel the widespread recognition that, for a divided America, torn by paranoia and unable to understand what had disrupted the anticipated tranquility of the postwar world, the time for change had really arrived. Neither Stevenson nor anyone else could have dissuaded the electorate from its desire to repudiate 'Trumanism.'"[22]
Campaign
Eisenhower's goal to unite the Republican Party for the fall campaign led him to campaign with and endorse several Republicans with whom he was uncomfortable. In particular, he resented having to endorse Senator William Jenner's reelection campaign when campaigning in Indianapolis, due to Jenner's accusations against George Marshall as being "a living lie" who was "joining hands once more with this criminal crowd of traitors and Communist appeasers ... under the direction of Mr. Truman and Mr. Acheson."[23] Many Democrats were particularly upset when Eisenhower, on a scheduled campaign swing through Wisconsin, decided not to give a speech he had written criticizing McCarthy's methods without naming him and later allowed himself to be photographed shaking hands with McCarthy as if he had supported McCarthy. Truman, who had once been friends with Eisenhower, never forgot what he saw as a betrayal. He had previously thought Eisenhower would make a good president but said that "he has betrayed almost everything I thought he stood for."[24]
Eisenhower retained his enormous personal popularity from his leading role in
Nixon scandal and "Checkers speech"
A notable event of the 1952 campaign concerned a scandal that emerged when Richard Nixon, Eisenhower's running mate, was accused by several newspapers of receiving $18,000 in undeclared "gifts" from wealthy donors. In reality, contributions were by design only from early supporters and limited to $1,000, with full accountability. Nixon, who had been accusing the Democrats of hiding corruption, suddenly found himself on the defensive. Eisenhower and his aides even considered dropping Nixon from the ticket and picking Senator William Knowland as a replacement running mate.
Eisenhower, who barely knew Nixon, waffled and refused to comment on the incident. Nixon saved his political career, however, with a dramatic half-hour speech, the "Checkers speech," on live television. In this speech, Nixon denied the charges against him, gave a detailed account of his modest financial assets, and offered a glowing assessment of Eisenhower's candidacy. The highlight of the speech came when Nixon stated that a supporter had given his daughters a gift, a dog named "Checkers," and that he would not return it because his daughters loved it. The "Checkers speech" led hundreds of thousands of citizens nationwide to wire the Republican National Committee to urge the Republican Party to keep Nixon on the ticket, and Eisenhower stayed with him.
Despite the red-baiting of the Republicans' right wing, the campaign on the whole was conducted with a considerable degree of dignity, and Stevenson was seen as reinvigorating a Democratic Party that had become exhausted after 20 years in power and as refreshing its appeal with younger voters. He accused Eisenhower of silently tolerating McCarthy's excesses. Stevenson went before the American Legion, a bastion of hardline conservatism, and boldly declared that there was nothing patriotic or American about what McCarthy was doing.
Even with the dignified nature of the campaign, the dislike between the two candidates was visible. Stevenson criticized Eisenhower's noncondemnation of McCarthy and his use of television spots, and Eisenhower, who had initially respected Stevenson, came in time to view him as simply another career politician, which he strongly disliked.
Television
The 1952 election campaign was the first one to make use of the new medium of television, partly by the efforts of
Studying Douglas MacArthur's keynote speech at the Republican Convention in July, Reeves believed that the general's words were "powerful" but "unfocused" and "all over the map." Eisenhower's public speeches were even worse since he was unable to make his point to the voting public in a clear intelligible manner. Reeves felt that Eisenhower needed to condense his message down to a few simple easily-digestible slogans.
Eisenhower at first also fared poorly on television and had a difficult time appearing relaxed and at ease on camera. The television lighting was not flattering and made him look old and unattractive. In particular, his forehead tended to glisten under the lights. Eisenhower became upset when the CBS correspondent Dave Schoenbrun pointed that out and suggested him to try to alter his poses to make his forehead less noticeable and to apply makeup so that it would not shine from the lighting. Eventually, he gave in and agreed to those modifications. Reeves also wanted Eisenhower to not wear his eyeglasses on camera to look younger, but since he could not read the prompter board without them, Reeves devised a large handwritten signboard.
Reeves's television work, although pioneering, was the subject of considerable criticism on the grounds that he was attempting to sell a presidential candidate to the public in the same manner that one might sell a car or a brand of toothpaste. The liberal journalist Marya Mannes mocked the approach with this ditty: "
Both campaigns made use of television ads. A notable ad for Eisenhower was an issue-free feel-good
Throughout the entire campaign, Eisenhower
Citizens for Eisenhower
To circumvent the local Republican Party organizations, which were mostly controlled by Taft supporters, the Eisenhower forces created a nationwide network of grassroots clubs, "Citizens for Eisenhower." Independents and Democrats were welcome, as the group specialized in canvassing neighborhoods and holding small-group meetings. Citizens for Eisenhower hoped to revitalize the party by expanding its activist ranks and by supporting moderate and internationalist policies. It did not endorse candidates other than Eisenhower, but he paid it little attention after he had won, and it failed to maintain its impressive starting momentum. Instead, it energized the conservative Republicans, which led finally to the Barry Goldwater campaign of 1964. Longtime Republican activists viewed the newcomers with suspicion and hostility. More significantly, activism in support of Eisenhower did not translate into enthusiasm for the party's cause.[27]
Results
On election day, Eisenhower won a decisive victory by winning over 55% of the popular vote and carrying 39 of the 48 states. Stevenson did not win a single state north of the
Of the 3,099 counties/independent cities making returns, Eisenhower won the most popular votes in 2,104 (67.89%) while Stevenson carried 995 (32.11%). Eisenhower won in 21 of the 39 cities with a population above 250,000. He won in six of the eight largest Southern cities.[29]
The election was the first in which a computer, the UNIVAC I (and Monrobot III[30]), was used to predict the results; it came within 3.5% of Eisenhower's popular vote tally and four votes of his electoral vote total.[31]
Presidential candidate | Party | Home state | Popular vote | Electoral vote |
Running mate | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Count | Percentage | Vice-presidential candidate | Home state | Electoral vote | ||||
Dwight D. Eisenhower | Republican | New York | 34,075,529 | 55.18% | 442 | Richard Nixon | California | 442 |
Adlai Stevenson II | Democratic | Illinois | 27,375,090 | 44.33% | 89 | John Sparkman | Alabama | 89 |
Vincent Hallinan | Progressive
|
California | 140,746 | 0.23% | 0 | Charlotta Bass | New York | 0 |
Stuart Hamblen | Prohibition | Texas | 73,412 | 0.12% | 0 | Enoch A. Holtwick | Illinois | 0 |
Eric Hass | Socialist Labor | New York | 30,406 | 0.05% | 0 | Stephen Emery | New York | 0 |
Darlington Hoopes | Socialist | Pennsylvania | 20,203 | 0.03% | 0 | Samuel H. Friedman | New York | 0 |
Douglas MacArthur | Constitution | Arkansas | 17,205 | 0.03% | 0 | Harry F. Byrd | Virginia | 0 |
Farrell Dobbs | Socialist Workers | Minnesota | 10,312 | 0.02% | 0 | Myra Tanner Weiss | California | 0 |
Other | 9,039 | 0.02% | — | Other | — | |||
Total | 61,751,942 | 100% | 531 | 531 | ||||
Needed to win | 266 | 266 |
Source (Popular Vote): Leip, David. "1952 Presidential Election Results". Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. Retrieved September 16, 2012.Source (Electoral Vote): "Electoral College Box Scores 1789–1996". National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved August 1, 2005.
-
Results by county, shaded according to winning candidate's percentage of the vote
-
Results by congressional district, shaded according to winning candidate's percentage of the vote
Results by state
Source:[32]
States/districts won by Stevenson/Sparkman |
States/districts won by Eisenhower/Nixon |
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican |
Adlai Stevenson Democratic |
Vincent Hallinan Progressive |
Stuart Hamblen Prohibition |
Eric Hass Socialist Labor |
Margin | State Total | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
State | electoral votes |
# | % | electoral votes |
# | % | electoral votes |
# | % | electoral votes |
# | % | electoral votes |
# | % | electoral votes |
# | % | # | |
Alabama | 11 | 149,231 | 35.02 | – | 275,075 | 64.55 | 11 | – | – | – | 1,814 | 0.43 | – | – | – | – | -125,844 | -29.53 | 426,120 | AL |
Arizona | 4 | 152,042 | 58.35 | 4 | 108,528 | 41.65 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 43,514 | 16.70 | 260,570 | AZ |
Arkansas | 8 | 177,155 | 43.76 | – | 226,300 | 55.90 | 8 | – | – | – | 886 | 0.22 | – | 1 | 0.00 | – | -49,145 | -12.14 | 404,800 | AR |
California | 32 | 3,035,587 | 56.83 | 32 | 2,257,646 | 42.27 | – | 24,692 | 0.46 | – | 16,117 | 0.30 | – | 273 | 0.01 | – | 777,941 | 14.56 | 5,341,603 | CA |
Colorado | 6 | 379,782 | 60.27 | 6 | 245,504 | 38.96 | – | 1,919 | 0.30 | – | – | – | – | 352 | 0.06 | – | 134,278 | 21.31 | 630,103 | CO |
Connecticut | 8 | 611,012 | 55.70 | 8 | 481,649 | 43.91 | – | 1,466 | 0.13 | – | – | – | – | 535 | 0.05 | – | 129,363 | 11.79 | 1,096,911 | CT |
Delaware | 3 | 90,059 | 51.75 | 3 | 83,315 | 47.88 | – | 155 | 0.09 | – | 234 | 0.13 | – | 242 | 0.14 | – | 6,744 | 3.88 | 174,025 | DE |
Florida | 10 | 544,036 | 54.99 | 10 | 444,950 | 44.97 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 99,086 | 10.02 | 989,337 | FL |
Georgia | 12 | 198,979 | 30.34 | – | 456,823 | 69.66 | 12 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | -257,844 | -39.32 | 655,803 | GA |
Idaho | 4 | 180,707 | 65.42 | 4 | 95,081 | 34.42 | – | 443 | 0.16 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 85,626 | 31.00 | 276,231 | ID |
Illinois | 27 | 2,457,327 | 54.84 | 27 | 2,013,920 | 44.94 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 9,363 | 0.21 | – | 443,407 | 9.90 | 4,481,058 | IL |
Indiana | 13 | 1,136,259 | 58.11 | 13 | 801,530 | 40.99 | – | 1,222 | 0.06 | – | 15,335 | 0.78 | – | 979 | 0.05 | – | 334,729 | 17.12 | 1,955,325 | IN |
Iowa | 10 | 808,906 | 63.75 | 10 | 451,513 | 35.59 | – | 5,085 | 0.40 | – | 2,882 | 0.23 | – | 139 | 0.01 | – | 357,393 | 28.17 | 1,268,773 | IA |
Kansas | 8 | 616,302 | 68.77 | 8 | 273,296 | 30.50 | – | – | – | – | 6,038 | 0.67 | – | – | – | – | 343,006 | 38.27 | 896,166 | KS |
Kentucky | 10 | 495,029 | 49.84 | – | 495,729 | 49.91 | 10 | 336 | 0.03 | – | 1,161 | 0.12 | – | 893 | 0.09 | – | -700 | -0.07 | 993,148 | KY |
Louisiana | 10 | 306,925 | 47.08 | – | 345,027 | 52.92 | 10 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | -38,102 | -5.84 | 651,952 | LA |
Maine | 5 | 232,353 | 66.05 | 5 | 118,806 | 33.77 | – | 332 | 0.09 | – | – | – | – | 156 | 0.04 | – | 113,547 | 32.28 | 351,786 | ME |
Maryland | 9 | 499,424 | 55.36 | 9 | 395,337 | 43.83 | – | 7,313 | 0.81 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 104,087 | 11.54 | 902,074 | MD |
Massachusetts | 16 | 1,292,325 | 54.22 | 16 | 1,083,525 | 45.46 | – | 4,636 | 0.19 | – | 886 | 0.04 | – | 1,957 | 0.08 | – | 208,800 | 8.76 | 2,383,398 | MA |
Michigan | 20 | 1,551,529 | 55.44 | 20 | 1,230,657 | 43.97 | – | 3,922 | 0.14 | – | 10,331 | 0.37 | – | 1,495 | 0.05 | – | 320,872 | 11.47 | 2,798,592 | MI |
Minnesota | 11 | 763,211 | 55.33 | 11 | 608,458 | 44.11 | – | 2,666 | 0.19 | – | 2,147 | 0.16 | – | 2,383 | 0.17 | – | 154,753 | 11.22 | 1,379,483 | MN |
Mississippi | 8 | 112,966 | 39.56 | – | 172,566 | 60.44 | 8 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | -59,600 | -20.87 | 285,532 | MS |
Missouri | 13 | 959,429 | 50.71 | 13 | 929,830 | 49.14 | – | 987 | 0.05 | – | 885 | 0.05 | – | 169 | 0.01 | – | 29,599 | 1.56 | 1,892,062 | MO |
Montana | 4 | 157,394 | 59.39 | 4 | 106,213 | 40.07 | – | 723 | 0.27 | – | 548 | 0.21 | – | – | – | – | 51,181 | 19.31 | 265,037 | MT |
Nebraska | 6 | 421,603 | 69.15 | 6 | 188,057 | 30.85 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 233,546 | 38.31 | 609,660 | NE |
Nevada | 3 | 50,502 | 61.45 | 3 | 31,688 | 38.55 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 18,814 | 22.89 | 82,190 | NV |
New Hampshire | 4 | 166,287 | 60.92 | 4 | 106,663 | 39.08 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 59,624 | 21.84 | 272,950 | NH |
New Jersey | 16 | 1,374,613 | 56.81 | 16 | 1,015,902 | 41.99 | – | 5,589 | 0.23 | – | 989 | 0.04 | – | 5,815 | 0.24 | – | 358,711 | 14.83 | 2,419,554 | NJ |
New Mexico | 4 | 132,170 | 55.39 | 4 | 105,661 | 44.28 | – | 225 | 0.09 | – | 297 | 0.12 | – | 35 | 0.01 | – | 26,509 | 11.11 | 238,608 | NM |
New York | 45 | 3,952,815 | 55.45 | 45 | 3,104,601 | 43.55 | – | 64,211 | 0.90 | – | – | – | – | 1,560 | 0.02 | – | 848,214 | 11.90 | 7,128,241 | NY |
North Carolina | 14 | 558,107 | 46.09 | – | 652,803 | 53.91 | 14 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | -94,696 | -7.82 | 1,210,910 | NC |
North Dakota | 4 | 191,712 | 70.97 | 4 | 76,694 | 28.39 | – | 344 | 0.13 | – | 302 | 0.11 | – | – | – | – | 115,018 | 42.58 | 270,127 | ND |
Ohio | 25 | 2,100,391 | 56.76 | 25 | 1,600,367 | 43.24 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 500,024 | 13.51 | 3,700,758 | OH |
Oklahoma | 8 | 518,045 | 54.59 | 8 | 430,939 | 45.41 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 87,106 | 9.18 | 948,984 | OK |
Oregon | 6 | 420,815 | 60.54 | 6 | 270,579 | 38.93 | – | 3,665 | 0.53 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 150,236 | 21.61 | 695,059 | OR |
Pennsylvania | 32 | 2,415,789 | 52.74 | 32 | 2,146,269 | 46.85 | – | 4,222 | 0.09 | – | 8,951 | 0.20 | – | 1,377 | 0.03 | – | 269,520 | 5.88 | 4,580,969 | PA |
Rhode Island | 4 | 210,935 | 50.89 | 4 | 203,293 | 49.05 | – | 187 | 0.05 | – | – | – | – | 83 | 0.02 | – | 7,642 | 1.84 | 414,498 | RI |
South Carolina | 8 | 168,082 | 49.28 | – | 173,004 | 50.72 | 8 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | -4,922 | -1.44 | 341,086 | SC |
South Dakota | 4 | 203,857 | 69.27 | 4 | 90,426 | 30.73 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 113,431 | 38.54 | 294,283 | SD |
Tennessee | 11 | 446,147 | 49.99 | 11 | 443,710 | 49.71 | – | 885 | 0.10 | – | 1,432 | 0.16 | – | – | – | – | 2,437 | 0.27 | 892,553 | TN |
Texas | 24 | 1,102,878 | 53.13 | 24 | 969,228 | 46.69 | – | 294 | 0.01 | – | 1,983 | 0.10 | – | – | – | – | 133,650 | 6.44 | 2,075,946 | TX |
Utah | 4 | 194,190 | 58.93 | 4 | 135,364 | 41.07 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 58,826 | 17.85 | 329,554 | UT |
Vermont | 3 | 109,717 | 71.45 | 3 | 43,355 | 28.23 | – | 282 | 0.18 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | 66,362 | 43.22 | 153,557 | VT |
Virginia | 12 | 349,037 | 56.32 | 12 | 268,677 | 43.36 | – | 311 | 0.05 | – | – | – | – | 1,160 | 0.19 | – | 80,360 | 12.97 | 619,689 | VA |
Washington | 9 | 599,107 | 54.33 | 9 | 492,845 | 44.69 | – | 2,460 | 0.22 | – | – | – | – | 633 | 0.06 | – | 106,262 | 9.64 | 1,102,708 | WA |
West Virginia | 8 | 419,970 | 48.08 | – | 453,578 | 51.92 | 8 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | -33,608 | -3.85 | 873,548 | WV |
Wisconsin | 12 | 979,744 | 60.95 | 12 | 622,175 | 38.71 | – | 2,174 | 0.14 | – | – | – | – | 770 | 0.05 | – | 357,569 | 22.25 | 1,607,370 | WI |
Wyoming | 3 | 81,047 | 62.71 | 3 | 47,934 | 37.09 | – | – | – | – | 194 | 0.15 | – | 36 | 0.03 | – | 33,113 | 25.62 | 129,251 | WY |
TOTALS: | 531 | 34,075,529 | 55.18 | 442 | 27,375,090 | 44.33 | 89 | 140,746 | 0.23 | – | 73,412 | 0.12 | – | 30,406 | 0.05 | – | 6,700,439 | 10.85 | 61,751,942 | US |
States that flipped from Democratic to Republican
- Arizona
- California
- Colorado
- Florida
- Idaho
- Illinois
- Iowa
- Massachusetts
- Minnesota
- Missouri
- Montana
- Nevada
- New Mexico
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Rhode Island
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Utah
- Virginia
- Washington
- Wisconsin
- Wyoming
States that flipped from Dixiecrat to Democratic
Close states
Election results in these states were within one percentage point (21 electoral votes):
- Kentucky, 0.07% (700 votes)
- Tennessee, 0.27% (2,437 votes)
Election results in these states were within five percentage points (36 electoral votes):
- South Carolina, 1.44% (4,922 votes)
- Missouri, 1.56% (29,599 votes)
- Rhode Island, 1.84% (7,642 votes)
- West Virginia, 3.85% (33,608 votes)
- Delaware, 3.88% (6,744 votes)
Election results in these states were between five and ten percentage points (140 electoral votes):
- Louisiana, 5.84% (38,102 votes)
- Pennsylvania, 5.88% (269,520 votes)
- Texas, 6.44% (133,650 votes)
- North Carolina, 7.82% (94,696 votes)
- Massachusetts, 8.76% (208,800 votes)
- Oklahoma, 9.18% (87,106 votes)
- Washington, 9.64% (106,262 votes)
- Illinois, 9.90% (443,407 votes)
Tipping point state:
- Michigan, 11.47% (320,872 votes)
Statistics
Counties with Highest Percent of Vote (Republican)
- Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana 92.97%
- Gillespie County, Texas 92.29%
- McIntosh County, North Dakota 90.89%
- Campbell County, South Dakota 90.14%
- Kenedy County, Texas 88.52%
Counties with Highest Percent of Vote (Democratic)
- Greene County, North Carolina 94.12%
- Hart County, Georgia 94.08%
- Treutlen County, Georgia 93.34%
- Martin County, North Carolina 92.98%
- Walton County, Georgia 91.89%
See also
- 1952 United States House of Representatives elections
- 1952 United States Senate elections
- History of the United States (1945–1964)
- First inauguration of Dwight D. Eisenhower
References
- UC Santa Barbara.
- ISBN 9781438109947. Retrieved November 16, 2016.
Eisenhower, born in Texas, considered a resident of New York, and headquartered at the time in Paris, finally decided to run for the Republican nomination....
- ^ "The Presidents". uselectionatlas.org. David Leip. Retrieved January 3, 2009.
- ^ James C. Davies, "Charisma in the 1952 Campaign." American Political Science Review 48#4 (1954): 1083-102. online.
- ^ Kabaservice 2012, pp. 21–22.
- ^ Kabaservice 2012, pp. 10–11.
- ^ (Patterson, pp. 575-578)
- ^ (Patterson, pp. 591-592)
- ^ (Richard C. Bain and Judith H. Parris, Convention Decisions and Voting Records, pp. 280-286)
- ^ Page, Susan (April 22, 2008). "Disapproval of Bush breaks record". USA Today. Retrieved April 23, 2008.
- ^ a b c (McKeever, p. 186)
- ^ "1952: The Election of a Military Hero". The Press and the Presidency. Kennesaw State University, Department of Political Science & International Affairs. August 31, 2001. Archived from the original on April 20, 2009. Retrieved November 20, 2008.
- ISBN 9780313380921.
- ^ Smith, Peter H. (2007) [1996]. Talons of the Eagle: Dynamics of U.S. – Latin American Relations (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press, USA. p. 392.
- ^ Time: "The Corruption Issue: A Pandora's Box," September 24, 1956, accessed November 18, 2010
- ^ a b (Abels, p. 192)
- ^ a b (Halberstam, p. 234)
- ^ a b (Halberstam, p. 235)
- ^ (McCullough, p. 911)
- ^ (Halberstam, p. 236)
- ^ (McKeever, p. 237)
- ISBN 9781119027331.
- ^ Ed Cray, Ed Cray, General of the Army: George C. Marshall, Soldier and Statesman (1990: Cooper Square Press ed. 2000), pp. 686.
- ^ Gibbs, Nancy (November 10, 2008). "When New President Meets Old, It's Not Always Pretty". Time. Archived from the original on November 11, 2008.
- ^ "Executives – Are you afraid to say 'I don't know?'".
- ^ TIME: "National Affairs: Public Accounting," October 27, 1952, accessed November 18, 2010
- S2CID 54894636.
- ^ a b Sullivan, Robert David; 'How the Red and Blue Map Evolved Over the Past Century'; America Magazine in The National Catholic Review; June 29, 2016
- ^ Murphy, Paul (1974). Political Parties In American History, Volume 3, 1890-present. G. P. Putnam's Sons.
- ^ Murphy, Eugene F.; Berkeley, Edmund C. (January 1, 1953). "Automatic Computers on Election Night". The Computing Machinery Field 1953-01: Vol 2 Iss 1. Internet Archive. Berkeley Enterprises. pp. 27–28.
- ^ UNIVAC: the troubled life of America's first computer arstechnica.com. Retrieved February 9, 2012.
- ^ a b "1952 Presidential General Election Data – National". Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. Retrieved March 18, 2013.
Further reading
- Ambrose, Stephen E. Eisenhower. Vol. I. Soldier, General of the Army, President Elect 1890–1952 (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1983), pp 550–572.
- Blake, David Haven. Liking Ike: Eisenhower, Advertising, and the Rise of Celebrity Politics (Oxford UP, 2016). xvi, 281 pp.
- Boomhower, Ray E. "All the Way with Adlai: John Bartlow Martin and the 1952 Adlai Stevenson Campaign." Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society 111#3 (2018): 67–102 online.
- Bowen, Michael. The roots of modern conservatism: Dewey, Taft, and the battle for the soul of the Republican party (2011)
- Converse, Philip E., Warren E. Miller, Donald E. Stokes, Angus Campbell. The American Voter (1964) the classic political science study of voters in 1952 and 1956
- David, Paul Theodore (1954). Presidential nominating politics in 1952. 5 vol of details on each region
- Davies, Gareth, and Julian E. Zelizer, eds. America at the Ballot Box: Elections and Political History (2015) pp. 167–83, role of television.
- Davies, James C. "Charisma in the 1952 Campaign." American Political Science Review 48#4 (1954): 1083–102. doi:10.2307/1951012. online.
- Divine, Robert A. (1974). Foreign Policy and U.S. Presidential Elections, 1952–1960. New York, New Viewpoints.
- Donaldson, Gary. When America Liked Ike: How Moderates Won the 1952 Presidential Election and Reshaped American Politics (2016) 137pp.
- Grant, Keneshia N. "Great Migration Politics: The Impact of The Great Migration on Democratic Presidential Election campaigns from 1948–1960." Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race 16.1 (2019): 37–61.
- Grant, Philip A. "Eisenhower and the 1952 Republican Invasion of the South: The Case of Virginia." Presidential Studies Quarterly 20#2 (1990): 285–93. online.
- Greene, John Robert. I Like Ike: The Presidential Election of 1952 (2017) excerpt
- Halberstam, David. The Fifties. (New York: Fawcett Columbine, 1993) online
- Hyman, Herbert H. and Paul B. Sheatsley. "The political appeal of President Eisenhower", Public Opinion Quarterly, 17 (1953–54), pp. 443–60 online
- Johnstone, Andrew, and Andrew Priest, eds. US Presidential Elections and Foreign Policy: Candidates, Campaigns, and Global Politics from FDR to Bill Clinton (2017) pp 82–104. online
- Kabaservice, Geoffrey M. (2012). Rule and ruin : the downfall of moderation and the destruction of the Republican Party, from Eisenhower to the Tea Party. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-199-92113-3.
- McCullough, David. Truman. New York: Simon & Schuster. (1992)
- McKeever, Porter (1991). Adlai Stevenson: his life and legacy.
- Martin, John Bartlow. Adlai Stevenson of Illinois (1976) vol 1 covers his campaign in depth
- Medhurst, Martin J. "Text and Context in the 1952 Presidential Campaign: Eisenhower's 'I Shall Go to Korea' Speech." Presidential Studies Quarterly 30.3 (2000): 464–484. online
- Murphy, John M. "Civic republicanism in the modern age: Adlai Stevenson in the 1952 presidential campaign." Quarterly Journal of Speech (1994) 80#3 pp 313–328.
- Parmet, Herbert S. Eisenhower and the American crusades (1972) online
- ISBN 9780395139387.
- OCLC 43953970.
- ISBN 978-1-4000-6693-3
- Strong, Donald S. "The presidential election in the South, 1952." Journal of Politics 17.3 (1955): 343–389. online
- White, John Kenneth. "1952: The Transforming Election." in Still Seeing Red (Routledge, 2018) pp. 79–103.
Primary sources
- ISBN 9780394472706.
- Chester, Edward W A guide to political platforms (1977) online
- Porter, Kirk H. and Donald Bruce Johnson, eds. National party platforms, 1840–1964 (1965) online 1840–1956
External links
- Newsreel on Eisenhower campaign
- 1952 popular vote by counties
- 1952 State-by-state Popular vote
- The Decision Not to Run in 1952, an excerpt from a Truman biography from a University of Virginia
- The Living Room Candidate: Presidential Campaign Commercials: 1952
- Eisenhower's 1952 presidential campaign, Dwight D. Eisenhower Presidential Library Archived November 21, 2017, at the Wayback Machine
- Election of 1952 in Counting the Votes
- "It's a Free Country". Time Magazine. September 1, 1952. Archived from the originalon January 15, 2009. Retrieved May 6, 2008.