Challenge: presidential and VP nominees *both* lose their home states--but still win

See http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/smartpolitics/2012/11/20_presidential_tickets_that_l.php for a list of twenty US presidential tickets which lost *both* the presidential and vice-presidential nominees' home states. They really should have added a twenty-first: Nixon-Agnew 1968. Nixon had not yet changed his legal address from New York to California at the time of the election http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2199&dat=19690108&id=UR5UAAAAIBAJ&sjid=BjoNAAAAIBAJ&pg=3194%2C779876 and the Nixon-Agnew ticket lost both New York and Maryland.

So there have been two *successful* presidential tickets which lost both the presidential and vice-presidential nominees' home states (which I will define as legal residence at the time of the election). They are

(1) Nixon-Agnew 1968 and

(2) Wilson-Marshall 1916.

Question: What other possibilities are there? Here are a few I can think of:

(1) Polk-Dallas 1844. In OTL, the ticket carried Dallas' home state of Pennsylvania by 50.5-48.6. http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/pres/1844.txt Polk largely neutralized the tariff issue in the state by writing a letter to a Pennsylvania Democrat saying that he did not object to moderate revenue tariffs with "reasonable incidental protection" to industry. Meanwhile, Polk was privately assuring Southerners that one of the first acts of his administration would be to lower duties to the 20 percent *ad valorem* level specified in the 1833 tariff! If word of those private assurances leaked out, Polk-Dallas might have lost Pennsylvania, but it would probably not have cost the ticket any other state, and it would therefore not cost it the election.

(2) Hancock-English 1880. http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/pres/1880.txt

Admittedly, the Democrats only lost Indiana very narrowly--and, the Democrats complained, due to Republican fraud, which vice-president-elect Arthur would later come pretty close to admitting at a notorious dinner in honor of Republican national chairman Stephen Dorsey. [1] So at first sight it would seem difficult for Hancock-English to win *without* carrying Indiana.

However, this could be done if the ticket had only carried New York, which was almost as closely contested as Indiana. In OTL, Tammany boss "Honest John" Kelly does not seem to have been too anxious to help Hancock win the White House; Kelly hurt the national Democratic ticket in New York by backing a very controversial nominee for Mayor of New York City. (Perhaps Kelly feared that a successful Hancock could use federal patronage to build up a rival Democratic organization in New York City.) So with a more cooperative Kelly, maybe Hancock can carry New York, which will enable him to win 190-179, even while losing both his own Pennsylvania and English's Indiana.

(3) Nixon-Lodge 1960. http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/pres/1960.txt Admittedly, if the GOP national ticket lost California (which at first it seemed to have done before the absentee votes were counted) it would be hard for it to win nationally--in OTL victories in Illinois and Texas would have been enough to give Nixon an outright majority in the Electoral College, but not in this ATL. However, a combination of Illinois, Texas, New Jersey, Missouri and Hawaii would get Nixon to 270 electoral votes, even without California. These were all close (and in some cases disputed) JFK states in OTL but why Nixon would carry *all* of them yet lose California is something I have not yet been able to work out.

(4) Romney-Ryan 2012 http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/pres/usa2012.txt
This requires a substantially better showing for Romney-Ryan than in OTL--let's say that the botched ACA rollout happens in 2012 instead of 2013. Romney carries every state he lost by less than 5.5 percentage points in OTL. This gives him victory nationally--but still not in his own Massachusetts or Paul Ryan's Wisconsin.

Any other possibilities?

[1] "After a squib at an absent Blaine for the loss of Maine in September, Arthur went on: 'the first great business of the [national] committee was to carry Indiana, and Mr. Dorsey was selected as the leader of the forlorn hope to carry Indiana. That was a cheerful task.' When the laughter subsided, Arthur continued: 'Indiana was really, I suppose, a Democratic State. It had always been put down in the book as a State that might be carried by close and careful and perfect organization and a great deal of--' Here he paused for a moment, and there were cries from the audience of 'soap'--a reference to purchased votes--followed by more laughter. 'I see the reporters here,' Arthur warned, 'and therefore I will simply say that everybody showed a great deal of interest in the occasion, and distributed tracts and political documents all through the country.' The audience thoroughly appreciated this. When it was again relatively quiet, Arthur added, 'If it were not for the reporters I would tell you the truth, because I know you are intimate friends and devoted adherents to the Republican Party.'

"When it came time for Henry Ward Beecher to speak, he said that he was not present as a clergyman, and that it was well for some in the audience that he was not. The crowd roared in delight." (Quoted in Thomas C. Reeves, *Gentleman Boss: The Life of Chester Alan Arthur*, p. 215)


 
Last edited:
2000 Al Gore / Bob Kerrey

What states would Kerrey give to Gore that he didn't win with Lieberman? I suppose it's arguable that anti-Semitism hurt the Gore-Lieberman ticket a bit in parts of northern Florida but that was probably more than made up for in southern Florida (butterfly ballots notwithstanding).
 

Jasen777

Donor
There's several months after the convention/Veep naming for something to happen to get Gore 600 votes in Florida. Not a guarantee of course, but it certainly could happen, and it was the first one I though of.
 
There's several months after the convention/Veep naming for something to happen to get Gore 600 votes in Florida. Not a guarantee of course, but it certainly could happen, and it was the first one I though of.

What does Kerrey bring that Gephardt would not?
 
What does Kerrey bring that Gephardt would not?

I think people would be iffy about two Southerners on the ticket, Kerrey is also younger than Gephardt, and Gephardt would boost Gore in Missouri, which is going against the challenge.
 
If Wallace had ran with FDR in 1944, the ticket almost certainly would have still won but there's a good chance Dewy would have picked up New York as well as Iowa.
 

Jasen777

Donor
What does Kerrey bring that Gephardt would not?

Well he's a war hero. Gore/Gephardt is a possibility also though.

And for this challenge Nebraska is completely out of reach for the Democrats (Bush won by 29%), whereas Missouri about 3.5%, by my calculations, 7 of the 18 veep candidates between '76 and '08 have swung their state more than that.
 
I think people would be iffy about two Southerners on the ticket, Kerrey is also younger than Gephardt, and Gephardt would boost Gore in Missouri, which is going against the challenge.

Missouri is a border state, and I'm not sure that Gephardt would swing his ome state. Also peoole weren't weary of two southerners on the ticket in 1992.
 
Top