The most unlikely presidential victors

Quite right, and the same for 1924. It just wasn't happening.

The 1920s in general was the weakest decade of the Democratic Party in history. It's the only time a party won three consecutive elections by over 10% (and for that matter, 15%!).
 
The 1920s in general was the weakest decade of the Democratic Party in history. It's the only time a party won three consecutive elections by over 10% (and for that matter, 15%!).

I can't recall who, but a certain historian once said the early and middle 1920s were the height of Conservatism in America, and Coolidge was a very conservative man. So was Davis, actually.

Reminds me of the Roosevelt v. Parker election, when it was said that each candidate could switch parties and nobody would even notice. :rolleyes:
 
Looking at victory margins, the least likely elections to come up with a different victor are

1) 1920 Harding vs Cox
2) 1924 Coolidge vs Davis
3) 1936 FDR vs Landon
4) 1972 Nixon vs McGovern
5) 1964 LBJ vs Goldwater

For pre-1900 the least likely elections to change are:

1) 1832 Jackson vs Clay
2) 1836 Van Buren vs WH Harrison
3) 1828 Jackson vs JQ Adams
3) 1856 Buchanan vs Freemont
4) 1872 Grant vs Greely
 
Walter Mondale in 1984. Reagan is not necessarily unbeatable in 1984, but Walter Mondale is certainly not the one to do it.

I think Reagan was unbeatable. He received 59% of the popular vote and won in 49 of the 50 states. Reagan set a record for total votes (55 million) that lasted 20 years. It's pretty hard to argue that it was just a function of running against a bad candidate. He'd cut taxes, the economy was improving and he was generally a popular figure. You could argue that the Democrats might have had a chance in 1988 with a better candidate, but in '84 I think they were toast no matter whom they nominated.
 
Last edited:
Top