1908 United States presidential election in Tennessee
The 1908 United States presidential election in Tennessee took place on November 3, 1908. All contemporary 46 states were part of the 1908 United States presidential election. Tennessee voters chose 12 electors to the Electoral College, which selected the president and vice president.
 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 County Results
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.jpg.webp)
| Elections in Tennessee |
|---|
 |
 Government |
Background and vote
For over a century after the Civil War, Tennessee was divided according to political loyalties established in that war. Unionist regions covering almost all of East Tennessee, Kentucky Pennyroyal-allied Macon County, and the five West Tennessee Highland Rim counties of Carroll, Henderson, McNairy, Hardin and Wayne[1] voted Republican – generally by landslide margins – as they saw the Democratic Party as the “war party” who had forced them into a war they did not wish to fight.[2] Contrariwise, the rest of Middle and West Tennessee who had supported and driven the state’s secession was equally fiercely Democratic as it associated the Republicans with Reconstruction.[3] After the disfranchisement of the state’s African-American population by a poll tax was largely complete in the 1890s,[4] the Democratic Party was certain of winning statewide elections if united,[5] although unlike the Deep South Republicans would almost always gain thirty to forty percent of the statewide vote from mountain and Highland Rim support.
During the 1908 election new GOP nominee William Howard Taft would in October become the first Republican candidate to tour the South, visiting Tennessee and North Carolina[6] Aided by opposition by developing manufacturers to third-time Democratic nominee William Jennings Bryan’s populism,[6] and by his willingness to accept black disfranchisement[7] Taft gained noticeably given the extremely deep-rooted partisan loyalties established by the Civil War. Whereas Alton B. Parker had carried Tennessee by 10.87 percent in 1904, Taft, although doing worse nationally, lost only by 6.85 percentage points
Results
| 1908 United States presidential election in Tennessee[8] | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Party | Candidate | Votes | Percentage | Electoral votes | |
| Democratic | William Jennings Bryan | 135,608 | 52.73% | 12 | |
| Republican | William Howard Taft | 117,977 | 45.87% | 0 | |
| Social Democratic | Eugene Debs | 1,870 | 0.73% | 0 | |
| Populist | Thomas E. Watson | 1,092 | 0.42% | 0 | |
| Independence | Thomas Hisgen | 332 | 0.13% | 0 | |
| Prohibition | Eugene Chafin | 301 | 0.12% | 0 | |
| Totals | 257,180 | 100.00% | 12 | ||
| Voter turnout | — | ||||
Results by county
| County | William Jennings Bryan[9] Democratic |
William Howard Taft[9] Republican |
Eugene Victor Debs[9] Socialist |
Thomas Edward Watson[9] Populist |
Various candidates[9] Other parties |
Margin | Total votes cast | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| # | % | # | % | # | % | # | % | # | % | # | % | ||
| Anderson | 632 | 23.64% | 2,022 | 75.65% | 15 | 0.56% | 2 | 0.07% | 2 | 0.07% | -1,390 | -52.00% | 2,673 |
| Bedford | 1,996 | 57.91% | 1,446 | 41.95% | 3 | 0.09% | 2 | 0.06% | 0 | 0.00% | 550 | 15.96% | 3,447 |
| Benton | 1,221 | 57.06% | 860 | 40.19% | 6 | 0.28% | 53 | 2.48% | 0 | 0.00% | 361 | 16.87% | 2,140 |
| Bledsoe | 295 | 40.75% | 425 | 58.70% | 1 | 0.14% | 3 | 0.41% | 0 | 0.00% | -130 | -17.96% | 724 |
| Blount | 847 | 24.67% | 2,568 | 74.80% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 18 | 0.52% | -1,721 | -50.13% | 3,433 |
| Bradley | 620 | 36.17% | 1,063 | 62.02% | 18 | 1.05% | 9 | 0.53% | 4 | 0.23% | -443 | -25.85% | 1,714 |
| Campbell | 530 | 21.99% | 1,806 | 74.94% | 30 | 1.24% | 6 | 0.25% | 38 | 1.58% | -1,276 | -52.95% | 2,410 |
| Cannon | 904 | 57.18% | 672 | 42.50% | 0 | 0.00% | 4 | 0.25% | 1 | 0.06% | 232 | 14.67% | 1,581 |
| Carroll | 1,802 | 43.10% | 2,290 | 54.77% | 18 | 0.43% | 71 | 1.70% | 0 | 0.00% | -488 | -11.67% | 4,181 |
| Carter | 459 | 12.70% | 3,152 | 87.19% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 4 | 0.11% | -2,693 | -74.50% | 3,615 |
| Cheatham | 1,206 | 69.55% | 526 | 30.33% | 2 | 0.12% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 680 | 39.22% | 1,734 |
| Chester | 703 | 50.79% | 577 | 41.69% | 10 | 0.72% | 94 | 6.79% | 0 | 0.00% | 126 | 9.10% | 1,384 |
| Claiborne | 971 | 36.96% | 1,637 | 62.31% | 0 | 0.00% | 14 | 0.53% | 5 | 0.19% | -666 | -25.35% | 2,627 |
| Clay | 764 | 54.07% | 634 | 44.87% | 4 | 0.28% | 10 | 0.71% | 1 | 0.07% | 130 | 9.20% | 1,413 |
| Cocke | 688 | 27.93% | 1,749 | 71.01% | 6 | 0.24% | 11 | 0.45% | 9 | 0.37% | -1,061 | -43.08% | 2,463 |
| Coffee | 1,654 | 70.50% | 656 | 27.96% | 30 | 1.28% | 1 | 0.04% | 5 | 0.21% | 998 | 42.54% | 2,346 |
| Crockett | 1,226 | 50.43% | 1,205 | 49.57% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 21 | 0.86% | 2,431 |
| Cumberland | 479 | 32.17% | 1,010 | 67.83% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | -531 | -35.66% | 1,489 |
| Davidson | 8,309 | 73.98% | 2,721 | 24.23% | 157 | 1.40% | 18 | 0.16% | 27 | 0.24% | 5,588 | 49.75% | 11,232 |
| DeKalb | 1,284 | 46.66% | 1,464 | 53.20% | 2 | 0.07% | 1 | 0.04% | 1 | 0.04% | -180 | -6.54% | 2,752 |
| Decatur | 845 | 46.87% | 958 | 53.13% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | -113 | -6.27% | 1,803 |
| Dickson | 1,499 | 60.76% | 899 | 36.44% | 56 | 2.27% | 11 | 0.45% | 2 | 0.08% | 600 | 24.32% | 2,467 |
| Dyer | 1,786 | 71.87% | 672 | 27.04% | 20 | 0.80% | 7 | 0.28% | 0 | 0.00% | 1,114 | 44.83% | 2,485 |
| Fayette | 1,849 | 98.88% | 4 | 0.21% | 3 | 0.16% | 14 | 0.75% | 0 | 0.00% | 1,835[lower-alpha 1] | 98.13% | 1,870 |
| Fentress | 332 | 26.95% | 894 | 72.56% | 6 | 0.49% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | -562 | -45.62% | 1,232 |
| Franklin | 2,168 | 74.71% | 716 | 24.67% | 15 | 0.52% | 1 | 0.03% | 2 | 0.07% | 1,452 | 50.03% | 2,902 |
| Gibson | 3,173 | 69.39% | 1,369 | 29.94% | 3 | 0.07% | 26 | 0.57% | 2 | 0.04% | 1,804 | 39.45% | 4,573 |
| Giles | 3,042 | 65.87% | 1,571 | 34.02% | 0 | 0.00% | 5 | 0.11% | 0 | 0.00% | 1,471 | 31.85% | 4,618 |
| Grainger | 673 | 33.77% | 1,309 | 65.68% | 0 | 0.00% | 5 | 0.25% | 6 | 0.30% | -636 | -31.91% | 1,993 |
| Greene | 1,886 | 48.08% | 2,027 | 51.67% | 1 | 0.03% | 2 | 0.05% | 7 | 0.18% | -141 | -3.59% | 3,923 |
| Grundy | 576 | 58.72% | 261 | 26.61% | 134 | 13.66% | 10 | 1.02% | 0 | 0.00% | 315 | 32.11% | 981 |
| Hamblen | 795 | 44.34% | 991 | 55.27% | 1 | 0.06% | 3 | 0.17% | 3 | 0.17% | -196 | -10.93% | 1,793 |
| Hamilton | 4,564 | 50.08% | 4,250 | 46.64% | 208 | 2.28% | 12 | 0.13% | 79 | 0.87% | 314 | 3.45% | 9,113 |
| Hancock | 370 | 20.95% | 1,396 | 79.05% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | -1,026 | -58.10% | 1,766 |
| Hardeman | 1,568 | 72.32% | 553 | 25.51% | 14 | 0.65% | 33 | 1.52% | 0 | 0.00% | 1,015 | 46.82% | 2,168 |
| Hardin | 720 | 37.72% | 1,132 | 59.30% | 9 | 0.47% | 42 | 2.20% | 6 | 0.31% | -412 | -21.58% | 1,909 |
| Hawkins | 1,152 | 40.49% | 1,693 | 59.51% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | -541 | -19.02% | 2,845 |
| Haywood | 1,215 | 84.91% | 189 | 13.21% | 27 | 1.89% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 1,026 | 71.70% | 1,431 |
| Henderson | 900 | 43.48% | 1,148 | 55.46% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 22 | 1.06% | -248 | -11.98% | 2,070 |
| Henry | 2,369 | 68.15% | 1,069 | 30.75% | 18 | 0.52% | 10 | 0.29% | 10 | 0.29% | 1,300 | 37.40% | 3,476 |
| Hickman | 1,285 | 54.15% | 1,065 | 44.88% | 18 | 0.76% | 4 | 0.17% | 1 | 0.04% | 220 | 9.27% | 2,373 |
| Houston | 665 | 68.00% | 288 | 29.45% | 25 | 2.56% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 377 | 38.55% | 978 |
| Humphreys | 1,301 | 65.25% | 679 | 34.05% | 14 | 0.70% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 622 | 31.19% | 1,994 |
| Jackson | 1,404 | 59.14% | 966 | 40.69% | 2 | 0.08% | 2 | 0.08% | 0 | 0.00% | 438 | 18.45% | 2,374 |
| James | 217 | 26.27% | 608 | 73.61% | 1 | 0.12% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | -391 | -47.34% | 826 |
| Jefferson | 662 | 25.00% | 1,962 | 74.09% | 0 | 0.00% | 4 | 0.15% | 20 | 0.76% | -1,300 | -49.09% | 2,648 |
| Johnson | 232 | 9.74% | 2,148 | 90.21% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 1 | 0.04% | -1,916 | -80.47% | 2,381 |
| Knox | 4,090 | 39.77% | 5,817 | 56.56% | 159 | 1.55% | 39 | 0.38% | 180 | 1.75% | -1,727 | -16.79% | 10,285 |
| Lake | 464 | 71.27% | 178 | 27.34% | 9 | 1.38% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 286 | 43.93% | 651 |
| Lauderdale | 1,315 | 70.85% | 519 | 27.96% | 22 | 1.19% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 796 | 42.89% | 1,856 |
| Lawrence | 1,591 | 47.78% | 1,725 | 51.80% | 12 | 0.36% | 0 | 0.00% | 2 | 0.06% | -134 | -4.02% | 3,330 |
| Lewis | 465 | 56.64% | 354 | 43.12% | 2 | 0.24% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 111 | 13.52% | 821 |
| Lincoln | 2,311 | 75.03% | 692 | 22.47% | 4 | 0.13% | 64 | 2.08% | 9 | 0.29% | 1,619 | 52.56% | 3,080 |
| Loudon | 444 | 30.62% | 986 | 68.00% | 5 | 0.34% | 5 | 0.34% | 10 | 0.69% | -542 | -37.38% | 1,450 |
| Macon | 684 | 29.67% | 1,594 | 69.15% | 3 | 0.13% | 24 | 1.04% | 0 | 0.00% | -910 | -39.48% | 2,305 |
| Madison | 2,409 | 61.98% | 1,357 | 34.91% | 45 | 1.16% | 75 | 1.93% | 1 | 0.03% | 1,052 | 27.06% | 3,887 |
| Marion | 842 | 43.18% | 1,074 | 55.08% | 29 | 1.49% | 3 | 0.15% | 2 | 0.10% | -232 | -11.90% | 1,950 |
| Marshall | 1,544 | 74.77% | 440 | 21.31% | 4 | 0.19% | 71 | 3.44% | 6 | 0.29% | 1,104 | 53.46% | 2,065 |
| Maury | 2,324 | 77.91% | 620 | 20.78% | 11 | 0.37% | 22 | 0.74% | 6 | 0.20% | 1,704 | 57.12% | 2,983 |
| McMinn | 926 | 40.90% | 1,320 | 58.30% | 0 | 0.00% | 13 | 0.57% | 5 | 0.22% | -394 | -17.40% | 2,264 |
| McNairy | 1,057 | 44.10% | 1,300 | 54.23% | 0 | 0.00% | 37 | 1.54% | 3 | 0.13% | -243 | -10.14% | 2,397 |
| Meigs | 464 | 50.16% | 457 | 49.41% | 0 | 0.00% | 4 | 0.43% | 0 | 0.00% | 7 | 0.76% | 925 |
| Monroe | 1,406 | 43.38% | 1,827 | 56.37% | 8 | 0.25% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | -421 | -12.99% | 3,241 |
| Montgomery | 2,961 | 60.17% | 1,903 | 38.67% | 17 | 0.35% | 28 | 0.57% | 12 | 0.24% | 1,058 | 21.50% | 4,921 |
| Moore | 677 | 86.35% | 103 | 13.14% | 0 | 0.00% | 3 | 0.38% | 1 | 0.13% | 574 | 73.21% | 784 |
| Morgan | 496 | 28.54% | 1,236 | 71.12% | 1 | 0.06% | 0 | 0.00% | 5 | 0.29% | -740 | -42.58% | 1,738 |
| Obion | 2,258 | 75.52% | 711 | 23.78% | 10 | 0.33% | 0 | 0.00% | 11 | 0.37% | 1,547 | 51.74% | 2,990 |
| Overton | 1,401 | 56.63% | 1,008 | 40.74% | 65 | 2.63% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 393 | 15.89% | 2,474 |
| Perry | 756 | 52.28% | 678 | 46.89% | 12 | 0.83% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 78 | 5.39% | 1,446 |
| Pickett | 391 | 43.06% | 517 | 56.94% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | -126 | -13.88% | 908 |
| Polk | 747 | 38.87% | 1,175 | 61.13% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | -428 | -22.27% | 1,922 |
| Putnam | 1,632 | 53.35% | 1,419 | 46.39% | 5 | 0.16% | 0 | 0.00% | 3 | 0.10% | 213 | 6.96% | 3,059 |
| Rhea | 883 | 46.74% | 995 | 52.67% | 4 | 0.21% | 2 | 0.11% | 5 | 0.26% | -112 | -5.93% | 1,889 |
| Roane | 595 | 26.23% | 1,524 | 67.20% | 113 | 4.98% | 18 | 0.79% | 18 | 0.79% | -929 | -40.96% | 2,268 |
| Robertson | 2,418 | 75.85% | 755 | 23.68% | 6 | 0.19% | 7 | 0.22% | 2 | 0.06% | 1,663 | 52.16% | 3,188 |
| Rutherford | 2,764 | 69.27% | 1,226 | 30.73% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 1,538 | 38.55% | 3,990 |
| Scott | 190 | 8.85% | 1,932 | 89.99% | 25 | 1.16% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | -1,742 | -81.14% | 2,147 |
| Sequatchie | 394 | 61.28% | 249 | 38.72% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 145 | 22.55% | 643 |
| Sevier | 291 | 8.50% | 3,130 | 91.44% | 2 | 0.06% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | -2,839 | -82.94% | 3,423 |
| Shelby | 7,411 | 68.90% | 3,069 | 28.53% | 239 | 2.22% | 14 | 0.13% | 23 | 0.21% | 4,342 | 40.37% | 10,756 |
| Smith | 1,638 | 59.13% | 1,056 | 38.12% | 0 | 0.00% | 69 | 2.49% | 7 | 0.25% | 582 | 21.01% | 2,770 |
| Stewart | 1,475 | 64.49% | 715 | 31.26% | 97 | 4.24% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 760 | 33.23% | 2,287 |
| Sullivan | 2,393 | 56.16% | 1,836 | 43.09% | 2 | 0.05% | 11 | 0.26% | 19 | 0.45% | 557 | 13.07% | 4,261 |
| Sumner | 2,343 | 76.97% | 673 | 22.11% | 11 | 0.36% | 12 | 0.39% | 5 | 0.16% | 1,670 | 54.86% | 3,044 |
| Tipton | 1,662 | 60.99% | 1,041 | 38.20% | 3 | 0.11% | 18 | 0.66% | 1 | 0.04% | 621 | 22.79% | 2,725 |
| Trousdale | 476 | 70.00% | 198 | 29.12% | 0 | 0.00% | 6 | 0.88% | 0 | 0.00% | 278 | 40.88% | 680 |
| Unicoi | 67 | 7.23% | 860 | 92.77% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | -793 | -85.54% | 927 |
| Union | 496 | 22.72% | 1,684 | 77.14% | 3 | 0.14% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | -1,188 | -54.42% | 2,183 |
| Van Buren | 329 | 64.64% | 176 | 34.58% | 4 | 0.79% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 153 | 30.06% | 509 |
| Warren | 1,573 | 67.51% | 729 | 31.29% | 19 | 0.82% | 2 | 0.09% | 7 | 0.30% | 844 | 36.22% | 2,330 |
| Washington | 1,574 | 41.04% | 2,254 | 58.77% | 4 | 0.10% | 1 | 0.03% | 2 | 0.05% | -680 | -17.73% | 3,835 |
| Wayne | 451 | 24.21% | 1,411 | 75.74% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 1 | 0.05% | -960 | -51.53% | 1,863 |
| Weakley | 2,976 | 61.42% | 1,812 | 37.40% | 17 | 0.35% | 29 | 0.60% | 11 | 0.23% | 1,164 | 24.02% | 4,845 |
| White | 1,572 | 64.88% | 835 | 34.46% | 16 | 0.66% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 737 | 30.42% | 2,423 |
| Williamson | 1,928 | 75.28% | 605 | 23.62% | 5 | 0.20% | 23 | 0.90% | 0 | 0.00% | 1,323 | 51.66% | 2,561 |
| Wilson | 2,212 | 70.99% | 902 | 28.95% | 0 | 0.00% | 2 | 0.06% | 0 | 0.00% | 1,310 | 42.04% | 3,116 |
| Totals | 135,604 | 52.73% | 117,977 | 45.87% | 1,870 | 0.73% | 1,092 | 0.42% | 633 | 0.25% | 17,627 | 6.85% | 257,176 |
Notes
- In this county where Watson ran second ahead of Taft, margin given is Bryan vote minus Watson vote and percentage margin Bryan percentage minus Watson percentage.
References
- Wright, John K.; ‘Voting Habits in the United States: A Note on Two Maps’; Geographical Review, vol. 22, no. 4 (October 1932), pp. 666-672
- Key (Jr.), Valdimer Orlando; Southern Politics in State and Nation (New York, 1949), pp. 282-283
- Lyons, William; Scheb (II), John M. and Stair Billy; Government and Politics in Tennessee, pp. 183-184 ISBN 1572331410
- Phillips, Kevin P.; The Emerging Republican Majority, pp. 208, 210 ISBN 9780691163246
- Grantham, Dewey W.; ‘Tennessee and Twentieth-Century American Politics’; Tennessee Historical Quarterly, Vol. 54, No. 3 (Fall 1995), pp. 210-229
- Tindall, George B.; ‘Southern Strategy: A Historical Perspective’; North Carolina Historical Review; vol. 48, no. 2 (April 1971), pp. 126-141
- de Santis, Vincent P.; ‘Republican Efforts to “Crack” the Democratic South’; The Review of Politics, vol. 14, no. 2 (April 1952), pp. 244-264
- Dave Leip's U.S. Election Atlas; Presidential General Election Results – Tennessee
- Géoelections; Popular Vote at the Presidential Election for 1908 (.xlsx file for €30 including full minor party figures)
Notes
| |
|
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.