Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
This file contains:
Election '72 Election Report: The Cities - Minneapolis-St. Paul RE: 1972 Election information on Minneapolis-St.Paul, Minnesota, from the RNC Research Division. 9pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 11/30/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE: Election '72: The Cities, the latest edition of the Political/Research Division's series on the 1972 elections in the big cities. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/30/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE: Election '72: The Cities. "Election '72: Election Report: The Cities - Houston" attached. 8pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/29/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE: Election '72: The Cities. "Election '72: Election Report: The Cities - Pittsburgh" attached. 7pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/28/1972
Election '72 Election Report: The Cities - Milwaukee RE: 1972 Election information on Milwaukee, Wisconsin, from the RNC Research Division. 4pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 11/27/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt Re: Election '72: The Cities. The initial studies of the presidential vote in four of the nation's largest cities: Boston, Chicago, New York and Philadelphia. 31pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/24/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE: Precinct Report. 1972 Presidential election results for over 40 selected precincts around the country report attached. 3pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/22/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE: State House report reviewing Republican fortunes in elections. "Election '72: Election Report: The Statehouses" attached. 14pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/21/1972
To: Gordon Strachan and Bruce Kehrli From: Ed DeBolt RE: GOP Turnout Analysis, preliminary analysis of the approximate number of GOP voters turning out and participating in 1972 election. Analysis and handwritten notes attached. 6pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/20/1972
To: Larry Higby From: Gordon Strachan RE: re-typed version of most recent voter figures, as well as additional information on the key counties. Election report results attached. 10pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/14/1972
To: Gordon Strachan and Bruce Kehrli From: Ed DeBolt RE: Response to request for follow-up percentages of eligible voters in 50 states and selected counties. Election Results and Registration Profiles attached. 22pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/17/1972
To: Bruce Kehrli From: Ed DeBolt RE: Presidential Election Returns - for all states and key counties. 1972 Election Results - Key Counties attached. 15pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/16/1972
To: Robert M. Smalley From: Robert C. Odle, Jr. RE: bill about filming Presidential spots being paid by Senate candidates and not charged against the White House's account at the Committee. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 12/11/1972
Report including State, Candidates, Total Turnout, Voting Age Population, Total Registered Voters, % Turnout of Registered Voters, % Turnout of Voting Age Population. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Report], no date
Handwritten notes from Haldeman. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 11/22/1972
Chart of Percentages of Votes for President. Includes States, % of Precinct, % of Votes for Nixon, % of Votes for McGovern, % of Votes for Schmitz, and Date of Certification. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Chart of Percentages of Votes for President. Includes States, % of Precinct, % of Votes for Nixon, % of Votes for McGovern, % of Votes for Schmitz, and Date of Certification. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Report], no date
1972 Election Report: Aggregate Report on the top 15 SMSA's - New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, San Francisco, Washington DC, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Baltimore, Cleveland, Houston, Newark, Minneapolis, Dallas. 5pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Report], no date
1972 Election Report: Aggregate Report on the top 15 SMSA's - New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, San Francisco, Washington DC, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Baltimore, Cleveland, Houston, Newark, Minneapolis, Dallas. 5pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Report], no date
Handwritten notes by Haldeman RE: Jack Saloma - Political Science at MIT. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Handwritten notes from Haldeman RE: Teeter; including voter turnout and postelection surveys. 6pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Handwritten notes from Haldeman RE: post election. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Handwritten note to Strachan (author unk) RE: action memos requesting a complete analysis of the Republican vote and the Republican Party performance in the election. Drafts of memos attached. 3pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Action Memo To: Higby From: HRH RE: Report on the California voter turnout percentage vs the national percentage, as well as Republican vote turnout throughout country and South vs. the rest of the country. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/10/1972
To: Bob Haldeman From: Charlie McWhorter RE: Post Election Comments. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/20/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Dwight L. Chapin RE: Congratulating Strachan on a job well done in his work on the President's re-election effort. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 11/8/1972
To: Donald Dwight and Mrs. Charles Malone From: Richard Nixon RE: Their work in the re-election effort in Massachusetts, despite Massachusetts not coming in the Presidential winner column. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/8/1972
To: Otto A. Wahlrab From: Richard Nixon RE: Thanking Wahlrab for work in the Presidential election in Massachusetts, despite Massachusetts not showing up in the winner column. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/8/1972
To: The President From: Maurice H. Stans RE: Preliminary report on the fund-raising efforts in the Presidential campaign. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 11/8/1972
To: Patrick J. Buchanan From: Ken Khachigian RE: Analysis of Why McGovern Lost. 14pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/4/1972
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26146084
label
WHSF: Contested, 41-4
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26146084
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 41-4
description
This file contains:
Election '72 Election Report: The Cities - Minneapolis-St. Paul RE: 1972 Election information on Minneapolis-St.Paul, Minnesota, from the RNC Research Division. 9pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 11/30/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE: Election '72: The Cities, the latest edition of the Political/Research Division's series on the 1972 elections in the big cities. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/30/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE: Election '72: The Cities. "Election '72: Election Report: The Cities - Houston" attached. 8pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/29/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE: Election '72: The Cities. "Election '72: Election Report: The Cities - Pittsburgh" attached. 7pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/28/1972
Election '72 Election Report: The Cities - Milwaukee RE: 1972 Election information on Milwaukee, Wisconsin, from the RNC Research Division. 4pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 11/27/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt Re: Election '72: The Cities. The initial studies of the presidential vote in four of the nation's largest cities: Boston, Chicago, New York and Philadelphia. 31pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/24/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE: Precinct Report. 1972 Presidential election results for over 40 selected precincts around the country report attached. 3pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/22/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE: State House report reviewing Republican fortunes in elections. "Election '72: Election Report: The Statehouses" attached. 14pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/21/1972
To: Gordon Strachan and Bruce Kehrli From: Ed DeBolt RE: GOP Turnout Analysis, preliminary analysis of the approximate number of GOP voters turning out and participating in 1972 election. Analysis and handwritten notes attached. 6pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/20/1972
To: Larry Higby From: Gordon Strachan RE: re-typed version of most recent voter figures, as well as additional information on the key counties. Election report results attached. 10pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/14/1972
To: Gordon Strachan and Bruce Kehrli From: Ed DeBolt RE: Response to request for follow-up percentages of eligible voters in 50 states and selected counties. Election Results and Registration Profiles attached. 22pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/17/1972
To: Bruce Kehrli From: Ed DeBolt RE: Presidential Election Returns - for all states and key counties. 1972 Election Results - Key Counties attached. 15pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/16/1972
To: Robert M. Smalley From: Robert C. Odle, Jr. RE: bill about filming Presidential spots being paid by Senate candidates and not charged against the White House's account at the Committee. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 12/11/1972
Report including State, Candidates, Total Turnout, Voting Age Population, Total Registered Voters, % Turnout of Registered Voters, % Turnout of Voting Age Population. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Report], no date
Handwritten notes from Haldeman. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], 11/22/1972
Chart of Percentages of Votes for President. Includes States, % of Precinct, % of Votes for Nixon, % of Votes for McGovern, % of Votes for Schmitz, and Date of Certification. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Chart of Percentages of Votes for President. Includes States, % of Precinct, % of Votes for Nixon, % of Votes for McGovern, % of Votes for Schmitz, and Date of Certification. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Report], no date
1972 Election Report: Aggregate Report on the top 15 SMSA's - New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, San Francisco, Washington DC, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Baltimore, Cleveland, Houston, Newark, Minneapolis, Dallas. 5pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Report], no date
1972 Election Report: Aggregate Report on the top 15 SMSA's - New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, San Francisco, Washington DC, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Baltimore, Cleveland, Houston, Newark, Minneapolis, Dallas. 5pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Report], no date
Handwritten notes by Haldeman RE: Jack Saloma - Political Science at MIT. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Handwritten notes from Haldeman RE: Teeter; including voter turnout and postelection surveys. 6pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Handwritten notes from Haldeman RE: post election. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Handwritten note to Strachan (author unk) RE: action memos requesting a complete analysis of the Republican vote and the Republican Party performance in the election. Drafts of memos attached. 3pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Action Memo To: Higby From: HRH RE: Report on the California voter turnout percentage vs the national percentage, as well as Republican vote turnout throughout country and South vs. the rest of the country. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/10/1972
To: Bob Haldeman From: Charlie McWhorter RE: Post Election Comments. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/20/1972
To: Gordon Strachan From: Dwight L. Chapin RE: Congratulating Strachan on a job well done in his work on the President's re-election effort. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 11/8/1972
To: Donald Dwight and Mrs. Charles Malone From: Richard Nixon RE: Their work in the re-election effort in Massachusetts, despite Massachusetts not coming in the Presidential winner column. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/8/1972
To: Otto A. Wahlrab From: Richard Nixon RE: Thanking Wahlrab for work in the Presidential election in Massachusetts, despite Massachusetts not showing up in the winner column. 1pg [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/8/1972
To: The President From: Maurice H. Stans RE: Preliminary report on the fund-raising efforts in the Presidential campaign. 2pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Letter], 11/8/1972
To: Patrick J. Buchanan From: Ken Khachigian RE: Analysis of Why McGovern Lost. 14pgs [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 11/4/1972
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26146084
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
fb95228408fe01a3
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
41
4
11/30/1972
Campaign
Report
Election '72 Election Report: The Cities -
Minneapolis-St. Paul RE: 1972 Election
information on Minneapolis-St.Paul,
Minnesota, from the RNC Research
Division. 9pgs
41
4
11/30/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE:
Election '72: The Cities, the latest edition of
the Political/Research Division's series on
the 1972 elections in the big cities. 1pg
41
4
11/29/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE:
Election '72: The Cities. "Election '72:
Election Report: The Cities - Houston"
attached. 8pgs
41
4
11/28/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE:
Election '72: The Cities. "Election '72:
Election Report: The Cities - Pittsburgh"
attached. 7pgs
41
4
11/27/1972
Campaign
Report
Election '72 Election Report: The Cities -
Milwaukee RE: 1972 Election information
on Milwaukee, Wisconsin, from the RNC
Research Division. 4pgs
41
4
11/24/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt Re:
Election '72: The Cities. The initial studies
of the presidential vote in four of the nation's
largest cities: Boston, Chicago, New York
and Philadelphia. 31pgs
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Page 1 of 5
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
41
4
11/22/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE:
Precinct Report. 1972 Presidential election
results for over 40 selected precincts around
the country report attached. 3pgs
41
4
11/21/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Gordon Strachan From: Ed DeBolt RE:
State House report reviewing Republican
fortunes in elections. "Election '72: Election
Report: The Statehouses" attached. 14pgs
41
4
11/20/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Gordon Strachan and Bruce Kehrli
From: Ed DeBolt RE: GOP Turnout
Analysis, preliminary analysis of the
approximate number of GOP voters turning
out and participating in 1972 election.
Analysis and handwritten notes attached.
6pgs
41
4
11/14/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Larry Higby From: Gordon Strachan
RE: re-typed version of most recent voter
figures, as well as additional information on
the key counties. Election report results
attached. 10pgs
41
4
11/17/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Gordon Strachan and Bruce Kehrli
From: Ed DeBolt RE: Response to request
for follow-up percentages of eligible voters
in 50 states and selected counties. Election
Results and Registration Profiles attached.
22pgs
41
4
11/16/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Bruce Kehrli From: Ed DeBolt RE:
Presidential Election Returns - for all states
and key counties. 1972 Election Results -
Key Counties attached. 15pgs
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Page 2 of 5
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
41
4
12/11/1972
Campaign
Letter
To: Robert M. Smalley From: Robert C.
Odle, Jr. RE: bill about filming Presidential
spots being paid by Senate candidates and
not charged against the White House's
account at the Committee. 1pg
41
4
Campaign
Report
Report including State, Candidates, Total
Turnout, Voting Age Population, Total
Registered Voters, % Turnout of Registered
Voters, % Turnout of Voting Age
Population. 2pgs
41
4
11/22/1972
Campaign
Report
Chart of Percentages of Votes for President.
Includes States, % of Precinct, % of Votes
for Nixon, % of Votes for McGovern, % of
Votes for Schmitz, and Date of Certification.
2pgs
41
4
Campaign
Report
Chart of Percentages of Votes for President.
Includes States, % of Precinct, % of Votes
for Nixon, % of Votes for McGovern, % of
Votes for Schmitz, and Date of Certification.
2pgs
41
4
Campaign
Report
1972 Election Report: Aggregate Report on
the top 15 SMSA's - New York City, Los
Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, San
Francisco, Washington DC, Pittsburgh, St.
Louis, Baltimore, Cleveland, Houston,
Newark, Minneapolis, Dallas. 5pgs
41
4
Campaign
Report
1972 Election Report: Aggregate Report on
the top 15 SMSA's - New York City, Los
Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, San
Francisco, Washington DC, Pittsburgh, St.
Louis, Baltimore, Cleveland, Houston,
Newark, Minneapolis, Dallas. 5pgs
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Page 3 of 5
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
41
4
>
Campaign
Other Document
Handwritten notes from Haldeman. 1pg
41
4
Campaign
Other Document
Handwritten notes by Haldeman RE: Jack
Saloma - Political Science at MIT. 1pg
41
4
Campaign
Other Document
Handwritten notes from Haldeman RE:
Teeter; including voter turnout and post-
election surveys. 6pgs
41
4
Campaign
Other Document
Handwritten notes from Haldeman RE: post
election. 2pgs
41
4
Campaign
Other Document
Handwritten note to Strachan (author unk)
RE: action memos requesting a complete
analysis of the Republican vote and the
Republican Party performance in the
election. Drafts of memos attached. 3pgs
41
4
11/10/1972
Campaign
Memo
Action Memo To: Higby From: HRH RE:
Report on the California voter turnout
percentage vs the national percentage, as
well as Republican vote turnout throughout
country and South vs. the rest of the country.
1pg
41
4
11/20/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Bob Haldeman From: Charlie
McWhorter RE: Post Election Comments.
2pgs
41
4
11/8/1972
Campaign
Letter
To: Gordon Strachan From: Dwight L.
Chapin RE: Congratulating Strachan on a
job well done in his work on the President's
re-election effort. 1pg
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Page 4 of 5
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
41
4
11/8/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Donald Dwight and Mrs. Charles
Malone From: Richard Nixon RE: Their
work in the re-election effort in
Massachusetts, despite Massachusetts not
coming in the Presidential winner column.
1pg
41
4
11/8/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Otto A. Wahlrab From: Richard Nixon
RE: Thanking Wahlrab for work in the
Presidential election in Massachusetts,
despite Massachusetts not showing up in the
winner column. 1pg
41
4
11/8/1972
Campaign
Letter
To: The President From: Maurice H. Stans
RE: Preliminary report on the fund-raising
efforts in the Presidential campaign. 2pgs
41
4
11/4/1972
Campaign
Memo
To: Patrick J. Buchanan From: Ken
Khachigian RE: Analysis of Why McGovern
Lost. 14pgs
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Page 5 of 5
ELECTION
72
Election
Report
The Cities
Minneapolis-St.Paul
POLITICAL/RESEARCH DIVISION Republican National Committee, Bob Dole, Chairman
RNC RESEARCH DIVISION
November 30, 1972
ELECTION '72
BIG CITIES REPORT
Minneapolis--St. Paul
Introduction
Minneapolis--St. Paul, or the "Twin Cities" as they are popularly known
contain nearly half the population of the state of Minnesota. The area
is Democratic but not the state's strongest Democratic area, which is
the north country, particularly Duluth and the iron bearing Mesabi Range.
Minneapolis was settled by Swedes. Their descendents are still spread
throughout the city. Swedish and Norwegian stock account for 15% of
the city's population compared to only 4% blacks. St. Paul, on the
other hand, was settled by Irish and German Catholics and has always been
slightly more Democratic than Minneapolis.
THE RESULTS--MINNEAPOLIS
1968
In Minneapolis in 1968 President Nixon lost the city to "favorite son"
Hubert Humphrey by a plurality of 44,705.
Nixon
70,016
(36.1%)
Humphrey
114,721
(59.1%)
Wallace
8,455
( 4.4%)
Other
977
( .4%)
Total
194,169
(100.0%)
1972
This year the plurality was cut to 24,309-- significant gain that aided
the President in carrying the state.
Nixon
83,790
(42.8%)
McGovern
108,099
(55.2%)
Schmitz
2,948
( 1.5%)
Other
999
( .5%)
Total
195,836
(100.0%)
WARD ANALYSIS
MIDDLE CLASS--TICKET SPLITTERS
President Nixon gained a good deal of ground in this year's race in
essentially Middle to upper Middle class neighborhoods in Minneapolis
with some history of selectivity in their voting habits. Two wards--
the fourth and 13th illustrate the phenomenon. The President lost these
two wards taken together by 4,744 (although he won the 13th by a
small plurality) in 1968. This year, the two wards produced a 2,425
vote victory.
Minneapolis St. Paul
Page 2
Fourth Ward
The fourth ward is located in the extreme northwestern end of the city.
It contains a substantial number of city employees but tends to be
rather a swing district with independent oriented voters. McGovern
lost ground with these elements.
1972
1968
Nixon
7,075
(43.6%)
Nixon
4,754
(28.5%)
McGovern
8,712
(53.7%)
Humphrey
10,991
(65.8%)
Schmitz
368
( 2.3%)
Wallace
930
( 5.6%)
Other
62
( .4%)
Other
33
( .1%)
Total
16,217
(100.0%)
Total
16,708
(100.0%)
Thirteenth Ward
The 13th ward is located in the extreme southwestern end of the city.
It bonders on the very affluent suburb of Edina and is referred to
by local "politicos" as a silk-stocking district. Nixon carried
the ward in 1968 but substantially increased his margin this time.
1972
1968
Nixon
10,496
(57.5%)
Nixon
10,459
(52.2%)
McGovern
7,434
(40.8%)
Humphrey
8,966
(44.7%)
Schmitz
231
( 1.3%)
Wallace
569
( 2.8%)
Other
76
( .4%)
Other
50
( .3%)
Total
18,237
(100.0%)
Total
20,044
(100.0%)
.
YOUTH VOTE
Second Ward
The second ward, divided in half by the Mississippi River, is the site
of the University of Minnesota and its environs. The ward contains a
good number of students, faculty members and other "intelligentsia"
elements. The McGovern campaign strategy had as one of its goals the
accumulation of substantial majorities in areas such as this one.
McGovern did do well but he only increased Hubert Humphrey's plurality
by approximately 600 voters. This does not represent the type of
gains McGovern needed to make his efforts with the youth vote worth-
while.
1972
1968
Nixon
5,624
(33.3%)
Nixon
4,799
(31.8%)
McGovern
11,013
(65.1%)
Humphrey
9,581
(63.6%)
Schmitz
170
( 1.0%)
Wallace
471
( 3.1%)
Other
97
( .6%)
Other
223
( 1.5%)
Total
16,904
(100.0%)
Total
15,074
(100.0%)
Minneapolis--St. Paul
Page 3
BLACK VOTE
Fifth Ward
Minneapolis' black population is only 4% city-wide but for the most part
it is concentrated in the 5th ward. This ward presents us with the
best example we have city-wide of the black voter. The ward experienced
a 6% decline in turnout from 1968's totals--following the pattern of
many areas around the country with black voters. McGovern's plurality
over the President was thus down somewhat from Humphrey's 1968 totals
but for the most part the Democratic complexion of the ward remained
the same.
1972
1968
Nixon
2,459
(24.1%)
Nixon
2,234
(20.5%)
McGovern
7,571
(74.1%)
Humphrey
8,065
(74.1%)
Schmitz
114
( 1.2%)
Wallace
541
( 5.0%)
Other
67
( .6%)
Other
49
( .4%)
Total
10,211
(100.0%)
Total
10,889
(100.0%)
II. THE RESULTS ST. PAUL*
In St. Paul in 1968 President Nixon lost the city to Hubert Humphrey
by a plurality of 47,068.
Nixon
37,446
(30.7%)
Humphrey
84,514
(69.3%)
Total
121,960
(100.0%)
This year the plurality was cut to 18,703.
Nixon
55,843
(42.8%)
Humphrey
74,546
(57.2%)
Total
130,389
(100.0%)
BLACK VOTE
Seventh Ward
St. Paul, like its twin Minneapolis does not have a large black
population. Those black voters it does have are concentrated in the 7th
ward which is located in the center of the city. This ward is known as
the "Summit University" area. Nearly two-thirds of its residents are
black. Turnout was fairly heavy here but President Nixon received a
higher percentage pf the overall vote
1972
1968
Nixon
3,597
(36.4%)
Nixon
2,073
(31.6%)
McGovern
6,274
(63.6%)
Humphrey
4,490
(68.4%)
Total
9,871
(100.0%)
Total
6,563
(100.0%)
*
Figures for both 1968 and 1972 are based on major party vote only.
Minneapolis--St. Paul
Page 4
GERMAN VOTE
Wards 8 and 9 are both in north-central St. Paul. They are heavily
populated with German voters and have been strong DFL (Democratic-
Farmer Labor Party) core areas for years. The President made significant
gains in both.
Ward 8
1972
1968
Nixon
2,624
(32.8%)
Nixon
1,531
(18.5%)
McGovern
5,380
(67.2%)
Humphrey
6,740
(81.5%)
Total
8,004
(100.0%)
Total
8,271
(100.0%)
Ward 9
1972
1968
Nixon
988
(31%)
Nixon
517
(17.1%)
McGovern
2,199
(69%)
Humphrey
2,504
(82.9%)
Total
3,187
(100%)
Total
3,021
(100.0%)
CENTRAL EUROPEAN
Fifth Ward
The fifth ward of St. Paul is divided by west 7th Street the city's
"main drag." The area is lower middle income and is heavily populated
by central European ethnic groups. They are essentially labor class
people and thus provide an example of blue-collar voting habits also.
(See following section on general working class, blue collar neighborhoods.)
The President improved the percentage of his vote nicely in these areas.
1972
1968
Nixon
3,253
(39.9%)
Nixon
2,016
(21.8%)
McGovern
4,898
(60.1%)
Humphrey
7,234
(78.2%)
Total
8,151
(100.0%)
Total
9,250
(100.0%)
WORKING CLASS
The first and second wards are good examples of working class areas in
St. Paul. The first ward is located in the northeast section of the
city. The second ward is the whole ease side of St. Paul. The second
has been a DFL ward. but it is rather a "mixed bag!" The 3M Company
is located in the 2nd ward and a good number of its employees live
there although there has been in recent years an exodus to the suburbs.
These blue collar workers, like their "brothers" across the country,
defected in large numbers to the GOP.
Minneapolis--St. Paul
Page 5
First Ward
1972
1968
Nixon
5,002
(42%)
Nixon
3,500
(30.6%)
McGovern
6,899
(58%)
Humphrey
7,939
(69.4%)
Total
11,901
(100%)
Total
11,439
(100.0%)
Second Ward
1972
1968
Nixon
12,020
(44.0%)
Nixon
6,734
(27.9%)
McGovern
15,319
(56%)
Humphrey
17,427
(72.1%)
Total
27,319
(100.0%)
Total
24,161
(100.0%)
CONCLUSION
Even the Democratic balliwick of Minneapolis-St. Paul buckled somewhat
under the pressure of President Nixon's "new majority." In some cases,
however, it should be remembered that the 1968 results probably show a
somewhat higher Democratic vote than normal because the state was
voting for one of its own favorite sons. However, even considering
an abnormally low Republican vote in 1968--the President's performance
in 1972 among middle class, blue collar and ethnic voters is impressive,
to say the least.
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Page 6
St. Paul Election Results
1968
Ward
Nixon
Humphrey
1
3,500
(30.6%)
7,939
(69.4%)
2
6,734
(27.9%9
17,427
(72.1%)
3
14
(34.1%)
27
(65.9%)
4
234
(39.8%)
354
(60.2%)
5
2,016
(21.8%)
7,234
(78.2%)
6
1,637
(24.7%)
4,987
(75.3%)
7
2,073
(31.6%)
4,490
(68.4%)
8
1,531
(18.5%)
6,740
(81.5%)
9
517
(17.1%)
2,504
(82.9%)
10
4,742
(38.3%)
7,638
(61.7%)
11
11,996
(39.1%)
18,714
(60.9%)
12
2,452
(27.5%)
6,460
(72.5%)
Total
37,446
(30.7%)
84,514
(69.3%)
1972
Ward
Nixon
McGovern
1
5,002
(42.0%)
6,899
(58.0%)
2
12,020
(44.0%)
15,319
(56.0%)
3
12
(44.4%)
15
(55.6%)
4
417
(47.4%)
462
(52.6%)
5
3,253
(39.9%)
4,898
(60.1%)
6
2,431
(38.3%)
3,920
(61.7%)
7
3,597
(36.4%)
6,274
(63.6%)
8
2,624
(32.8%)
5,380
(67.2%)
9
988
(31.0%)
2,199
(69.0%)
10
6,147
(46.8%)
6,976
(53.2%)
11
15,642
(48.3%)
16,734
(51.7%)
12
3,710
(40.4%)
5,470
(59.6%)
Total
55,843
(42.8%)
74,546
(57.2%)
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Page 7
Minneapolis
PRESIDENT 1968 *
1960 Census
Total
Percentage Total Vote
Population
Ward
Vote
Republican
Democratic
AIP
Other
Plurality
Rep.
Dem.
AIP
WARD 1
10,121
4,407
10,731
935
48
6,324
D
27.3%
66.6%
5.8%
MARD &
15,074
4,799
9,581
471
223
4,782 0
31.8%
63.6%
3,1%
WARD 3
10,042
1,974
7,353
675
40
5,379
0
19.7%
73.2%
6.7%
MAKU 4
16,708
4,754
10,991
930
33
6,237
D
28.5%
65.8%
5.6%
WARD ,
10,489
2,234
8,065
541
49
5,831
D
20.5%
74.1%
5.0%
WARD é
8,003
2,682
4,846
333
142
2,164
D
33.5%
60.6%
4.2%
MARD 7
16,400
7,549
8,286
543
88
737 D
45.8%
50.3%
3.3%
WARD C
13,331
4,628
8,026
614
63
3,398
D
34.7%
60.2%
4.6%
WARD 5
13,570
4,360
8,75C
676
84
4,684
0
29.9%
64.5%
5.0%
WARD 10
16,190
6,652
8,795
701
48
2,143
D
41.1%
54.3%
4.3%
WARD 11
20,024
9,771
9,562
637
54
209 R
48.8%
47.8%
3.2%
WARD 12
17,695
6,041
10,769
830
55
4,728 D
34.1%
60.9%
4.7%
WARD 13
20,044
10,459
8,966
569
50
1,493
R
52.2%
44.7%
2.8%
482,876
TOTAL
194,109
70,016
114,721
8,455
977
44,705 D
36.1%
59.1%
4.4%
President 1972
Wards
GOP
%
Dem.
%
Schmitz %
Other %
1
6,189
(40.1)
8,791
(57.0)
353
(2.3)
86
(.6)
.2
5,624
(33.3)
11,013
(65.1)
170
(1.0)
97
(.6)
3
4,242
(36.0)
7,209
(61.2)
283
(2.4)
53 (.4)
4
7,075
(43.6)
8,712
(53.7)
368
(2.3)
62 (.4)
5
2,459
(24.1)
7,571
(74.1)
114
(1.2)
67
(.6)
6
4,516
(37.9)
7,171
(60.1)
138
(1.2)
101 (.8)
7
7,687
(44.7)
9,235
(53.7)
169
(1.0)
97
(.6)
8
5,355
(39.0)
8,151
(59.3)
141 (1.0)
90
(.7)
9
4,791
(36.2)
8,154
(61.6)
205
(1.6)
80 (.6)
10
6,998
(45.3)
8,156
(53.0)
204
(1.3)
57
(.4)
11
9,926
(54.3)
8,047
(44.0)
233 (1.3)
75
(.4)
12
8,432
(48.8)
8,455
(48.9)
339
(2.0)
58 (.3)
13
10,496
(57.5)
7,434
(40.8)
231
(1.3)
76
(.4)
Total
83,790
(42.8)
108,099
(55.2)
2,948
(1.5)
999
(.5)
*
1968 results are from America Votes #8 Scammon
Minneapolis-St. Paul
194
Page 8
Minneapolis
53 Av N
Ward Boundaries
37 Av N.E
4
N
N. Bryant
Iddississ!W
Stinson
N.E.5
"
1
Lowry
N. Xerxes
29 Av N.
3
River
Broadway
5
N. Bryant
E. Hennepin
Olson
by Normern RR
N.6
r
6
Hennepin
2
Emerald
6
1
S 9
Cedar
Stevens
E.24
Loke
Av S 28 Av S
W.26
Chicago
2
7
Bloisdell
E.31
9
31 S. 31 Av. S.
Lake
France
E.34
Colhoun
Calhoun
10
E 35
E.35
8
E 38
W 41
Nicollet
E 42
28 S. 28 Av. S.
E.43
Stanldish
dish
Loke
W 44
Ston
Harriet
$ Lyndole
.
Minnehaha
12
13
11
Love Nokomis
28 Av S
W 54
E 54
E 56
$ Yerses
Pleasont
Standish
62
Republican
National
Committee.
November 30, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
GORDON STRACHAN
FROM: .
ED DeBOLT Ed
RE:
ELECTION '72: THE CITIES
Enclosed is a copy of the
latest edition of the Political/Research Division's series
on the 1972 elections in the big cities. The 1972 election
returns have been analyzed in key demographic and voter bloc
wards and precincts. If significant political boundary
changes have not occurred, comparisons are made with 1968
election data. Where available, city-wide ward results
have been provided.
/st
enc.
cc: Senator Bob Dole
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast, Washington, D.C. 20003. (202) 484-6500.
Republican
National
Committee.
November 29, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN Ed
ED DeBOLT
RE:
ELECTION '72: THE CITIES
Enclosed is a copy of the latest
edition of the Political/Research Division's series on the 1972
elections in the big cities. The 1972 election returns have been
analyzed in key demographic and voter bloc wards and precincts.
If significant political boundary changes have not occurred, com-
parisons are made with 1968 election data. Where available, city-
wide ward results have been provided.
/jg
enc.
cc: Senator Bob Dole
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast, Washington, D.C. 20003. (202) 484-6500.
ELECTION
72
Election
Report
The Cities
Houston
POLITICAL/RESEARCH DIVISION Republican National Committee, Bob Dole, Chairman
RNC RESEARCH DIVISION
November 29, 1972
ELECTION '72
BIG CITIES REPORT
Houston, Texas
Introduction
Houston, the fastest growing major city in the country, now ranks sixth in
population among the nation's cities. Indicative of its size and growth,
Houston is:
- the nation's largest refining center and manufacturing and distri-
bution center of petroleum equipment;
- the home of two major airports and the nation's third largest seaport;
- the home of 14 colleges and numerous cultural attractions;
- the site of the Texas Medical Center that includes 22 institutions
within its complex.
Although the President handily carried Harris county, where
Houston is located, with over 60 percent of the vote, the 1972 election
was a disappointment to Houston Republicans in one aspect--Houston recorded
its lowest voter turnout since 1948. Overall turnout was approximately
69 percent. While Republican areas in the region turned out in higher
numbers, as usual, their participation was down 8-10 percent over previous
years. The following analysis uses precincts that have maintained sub-
stantially the same boundaries over the past four years. The totals used
in addition to the President's 1968 and 1972 races are the 1972 Tower-
Sanders senatorial race, the 1972 Grover-Briscoe gubernatorial race, and the
1970 Bush-Bentsen senatorial race.
THE BLACK VOTE
Approximately 25 percent of urban Houston is black. In 1972, the black
vote was solidly Democratic as usual. The following are vote totals for
precincts 48 and 159--both of which are nearly 100 percent black pre-
cincts.
Precinct 48
Nixon
23 ( 3%)
Nixon
5 ( 1%)
McGovern
719
(97%)
Humphrey
829 ( 99%)
Wallace
0 ( 0%)
Grover
22 ( 3%)
Briscoe
697 (97%)
Tower
19 ( 3%)
Bush
55 ( 10%)
Sanders
707
(97%)
Bentsen
523 ( 90%)
Houston, Texas
Page 2
Precinct 159
Nixon
24 ( 3%)
Nixon
20 ( 1%)
McGovern
883
(97%)
Humphrey
1 ,295 (98%)
Wallace
4 (---)
Grover
25 ( 3%)
Briscoe
841 (97%)
Tower
23 ( 3%)
Bush
127
(15%)
Sanders
855 (97%)
Bentsen
707
(85%)
As the returns indicate, no appreciable gains were made by the President
in 1972 in Houston's black precincts over the 1968 race. Returns indicate
heavy straight-ticket voting given the constant 3 percent showing by all
state-wide Republican candidates in 1972.
THE MEXICAN-AMERICAN VOTE
Though Houston does not contain the large Mexican-American community found
in cities such as San Antonio, approximately 10-12 percent of its inhabitants
are of Mexican-American heritage. Precincts 44 and 46 contain large numbers
of Mexican-Americans. Their election returns follow:
Precinct 44
Nixon
219
(32%)
Nixon
105 (16%)
McGovern
463
(68%)
Humphrey
477 (73%)
Wallace
73
(11%)
Grover
140 (21%)
Briscoe
310
(47%)
Muniz
193 (29%)
Tower
158
(24%)
Bush
126
(31%)
Sanders
389
(60%)
Bentsen
276
(69%)
Precinct 46
Nixon
362
(33%)
Nixon
169
(17%)
McGovern
738
(67%)
Humphrey
707
(71%)
Wallace
125
(12%)
Grover
258 (24%)
Briscoe
568 (53%)
Muniz
232
(22%)
Tower
183 (18%)
Bush
288 (36%)
Sanders
700 (68%)
Bentsen
518
(64%)
(Note: Muniz was the 1972 gubernatorial candidate on the La Raza Unida
Party ticket, whose main appeal was to Spanish-speaking voters.)
Though the President clearly made a better showing in these precincts in
1972 than he did in 1968, part of his increased total must necessarily be
attributed to the Wallace vote. That the gains were not as large as hoped
Houston, Texas
Page 3
for was indicated by Harris County Republicans who believe very few sub-
stantial gains were made among Houston's Mexican-American voters by the
Republican Party.
THE JEWISH VOTE
Large numbers of affluent Jewish voters are situated in southwest Houston,
where several of the large synagogues are located. Precincts 176 and 281,
whose vote totals are below, both contain large numbers of Jewish people.
Precinct 176
Nixon
1,246
(79%)
Nixon
1,539
(67%)
McGovern
333
(21%)
Humphrey
622
(27%)
Wallace
147
( 6%)
Grover
1,121
(71%)
Briscoe
380
(24%)
Tower
1,061
(67%)
Bush
1,062
(78%)
Sanders
512
(32%)
Bentsen
303
(22%)
Precinct 281
Nixon
2,087
(80%)
Nixon
1,513
(64%)
McGovern
519
(20%)
Humphrey
709
(30%)
Wallace
126
( 5%)
Grover
1,757
(68%)
Briscoe
709
(28%)
Tower
1,689
(65%)
Bush
1,634
(73%)
Sanders
889 (34%)
Bentsen
606
(27%)
Though there are many non-Jewish voters in these precincts, the large
Republican majorities should not be misleading. In the past, Houston's
Jewish voters have been good to the Republican Party, unlike their
counterparts in other large U.S. cities. Evidence suggests that while
no massive realignment occurred in Houston, the Jewish vote was higher
than ever for the Republican Party.
THE BLUE COLLAR VOTE
Precinct 266 is just north of the Houston Ship Canal in a heavily industrial
section of Harris County. In 1972, the President handily carried this
precinct, having run third in 1968. Precinct 266 returns follow.
Houston, Texas
Page 4
Nixon
1,338
(68%)
Nixon
585
(27%)
McGovern
601
(31%)
Humphrey
692 (32%)
Wallace
899 (41%)
Grover
1,041
(54%)
Briscoe
879
(45%)
Tower
890 (46%)
Bush
704
(49%)
Sanders
1,028
(54%)
Bentsen
728
(51%)
THE YOUTH VOTE
Unlike their Boston counterparts, Texas youth took a relatively dim view
of George McGovern. Though McGovern actually improved upon Humphrey's 1968
showings in Precinct 40 (Rice University) and Precinct 38 (in the vicinity
of the University of St. Thomas), the President led the entire Republican
ticket in both precincts. Their vote follows.
Precinct 40
Nixon
1,130
(60%)
Nixon
582
(58%)
McGovern
749 (40%)
Humphrey
344
(34%)
Wallace
80
( 8%)
Grover
1,010
(55%)
Briscoe
578 (32%)
Tower
963
(52%)
Bush
604
(74%)
Sanders
858 (46%)
Bentsen
212
(26%)
Precinct 38
Nixon
834 (58%)
Nixon
628
(52%)
McGovern
596
(42%)
Humphrey
399
(33%)
Wallace
180
(15%)
Grover
776
(55%)
Briscoe
453 (32%)
Tower
696
(49%)
Bush
657
(69%)
Sanders
677 (48%)
Bentsen
299
(31%)
LOWER-INCOME WHITE VOTERS
Precinct 162, a lower income white precinct, gave the President an impressive
63% of its vote this year, compared to his 27% showing in 1968. The
results suggest that the voters here could not take McGovern's liberal
views on such issues as welfare, even though McGovern's fellow Democrat,
Barefoot Sanders, carried the precinct by 60%.
Precinct 162
Nixon
686
(63%)
Nixon
523
(27%)
McGovern
397
(37%)
Humphrey
747
(38%)
Wallace
689
(35%)
Houston, Texas
Page 5
Grover
545 (51%)
Briscoe
514 (48%)
Tower
417
(40%)
Bush
587 (46%)
Sanders
626 (60%)
Bentsen
698 (54%)
UPPER-INCOME WHITE VOTERS
The affluent white neighborhoods of Houston, usually generous to Republican
candidates, outdid themselves in 1972. Precinct 217, adjacent to western
Houston's Buffalo Bayou, is indicative of the President's massive support
among these voters.
Precinct 217
Nixon
1,259 (90%)
Nixon
1,016 (81%)
McGovern
140 (10%)
Humphrey
170 (14%)
Wallace
61 ( 5%)
Grover
969 (70%)
Briscoe
397 (28%)
Tower
1,126 (80%)
Bush
931 (76%)
Sanders
275
(20%)
Bentsen
293 (24%)
CONCLUSION
Results from the above precincts and the survey (see below) based on
election returns from key precincts in Harris County reveal that:
- the President led other Republicans on the ticket among young
voters, Mexican-American voters, affluent, middle income, and
lower income whites;
- none of the Republican candidates did exceptionally well among
black voters;
- the President scored a particularly heavy success among white labor
voters by running almost 10-20 points ahead of the gubernatorial and
senatorial candidates.
Source: Houston Chronicle
November 8, 1972
Voter Analysis
President
U.S. Senate
QUALIFIED
VOTED
MCGOVERN
NIXON
JENNESS
SANDERS
TOWER
LEONARD
AMAYA
OUTH
31384
20605-65.6%
6839-33.7%
13382-65.9%
64- 0.3%
8875-44.1%
10877-54.1%
143-0.7%
198- 0.9%
3106-47.1%
3417-51.8%
23-0.3%
38-0.5%
HITE LABOR
10104
6769-66.9%
1972-29.8%
4621-70.0%
7- 0.1%
11040-95.2%
421-3.6%
60-0.5%
66-0.5%
BLACK
20847
12606-60.4%
11621-95.5%
510- 4.1%
26- 0.2%
4264-68.2%
1239-19.8%
49-0.7%
697-11.1%
EXICAN-AMERICAN
13779
6909-50.1%
4621-69.2%
2024-30.3%
24- 0.3%
4816-30.5%
10856-68.8%
45-0.2%
59-0.3%
IDDLE
INCOME WHITE
22426
16080-71.7%
2972-18.7%
12874-81.1%
14- 0.0%
3840-33.1%
7423-64.1%
27-0.2%
278-2.4%
FFLUENT WHITE
19404
11910-61.3%
2949-25.2%
8707-74.5%
22- 0.1%
4010-55.5%
3039-42.1%
39-0.5%
130-1.8%
OW INCOME WHITE
12319
7574-61.4%
3064-41.3%
4322-58.3%
15- 0.2%
5644-49.6%
5582-49.1%
53-0.4%
81-0.7%
Governor
BRISCOE
GROVER
LEONARD
MUNIZ
Page 6
YOUTH
6368-32.0%
11816-59.4%
573- 2.8%
1124- 5.6%
WHITE LABOR
2470-37.5%
3857-58.5%
87-1.3%
168-2.5%
Houston, Texas
BL/CK
10681-91.6%
644-5.5%
98- 0.8%
236- 2.0%
MEXICAN-AMERICAN
3581-56.1%
1375-21.5%
93-1.4%
1331-20.8%
MIDDLE INCOME WHITE
3739-24.0%
11275-72.4%
165- 1.0%
380- 2.4%
AFFLUENT WHITE
3554-30.8%
7253-62.9%
109-0.9%
607- 5.2%
LOW INCOME WHITE
3528-47.3%
3543-47.5%
77-1-0%
302-4.0%
A
Republican
National
Committee.
November 28, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
GORDON STRACHAN
FROM:
ED DeBOLT
ed
RE:
ELECTION '72: THE CITIES
Enclosed is a copy of the
latest edition of the Political/Research Division's series
on the 1972 elections in the big cities. The 1972 election
returns have been analyzed in key demographic and voter bloc
wards and precincts. If significant political boundary
changes have not occurred, comparisons are made with 1968
election data. Where available, city-wide ward results
have been provided.
/st
enc.
CC: Senator Bob Dole
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast, Washington, D.C. 20003. (202) 484-6500.
ELECTION
72
Election
Report
The Cities
Pittsburgh
POLITICAL/RESEARCH DIVISION Republican National Committee, Bob Dole, Chairman
RNC RESEARCH DIVISION
November 28, 1972
ELECTION '72
BIG CITIES REPORT
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Introduction
President Nixon became the first Republican President to carry Allegheny County
in a Presidential race since Eisenhower accomplished the feat in 1956. The
President's 89,000 vote majority (370,281 to 291,283) can be attributed to the
fact that he kept his losses in the city of Pittsburgh to a minimum. The
President lost Pittsburgh by a scant 14,699 votes as against a 81,196 deficit in
the city four years ago.
The figures and percentages were:
1972
1968
Nixon
89,769
46.2%
Nixon
57,681
25.8%
McGovern
104,468
53.8%
Humphrey
138,877
62.2%
Total
194,237
100.0%
Wallace
24,931
11.2%
Other
1,721
.8%
Total
223,210
100.0%
An analysis of the ward returns for both 1968 and 1972 show exactly what trends
were at work in Pittsburgh to create the larger GOP vote this year.
The Black Vote--Third Ward
The third ward is part of Pittsburgh's inner city. It is located close to the
confluence of the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers or "Golden Triangle" area.
Inner-city wards such as this one are continually losing population. George
McGovern, as do most Democrats, carried the ward by a large margin, but voter
turnout was down dramatically--by nearly 40%. This development in black areas of
the city severely curtailed McGovern's victory margin in the city and doubled
the President's percentage share of the vote.
1972
1968
Nixon
343
19.8%
Nixon
267
9.2%
McGovern
1,387
80.2%
Humphrey
2,593
89.8%
Total
1,730
100.0%
Wallace
19
.7%
Other
8
.3%
Total
2,887
100.0%
Fifth Ward
This inner city ward showed the same trend at work--lower turnout nearly
all at the expense of McGovern. Turnout in this ward was down by nearly 23%.
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Page 2
1972
1968
Nixon
991
13.6%
Nixon
712
7.5%
McGovern
6,318
86.4%
Humphrey
8,626
91.0%
Total
7,309
100.0%
Wallace
72
.8%
Other
64
.7%
Total
9,474
100.0%
Thirteenth Ward
The 13th ward (Homewood--Brushton) is another Black ward located on the extreme
eastern edge of the city. The returns there confirm the universality of the
low turnout trend of black voters in the city. Turnout was down by over 21%.
1972
1968
Nixon
870
13.4%
Nixon
695
8.4%
McGovern
5,609
86.6%
Humphrey
7,352
89.3%
Total
.
6,479
100.0%
Wallace
123
1.5%
Other
62
.8%
Total
8,232
100.0%
Polish--Hard Core Democrat.
In the 16th and 17th wards in the South Side, near the Jones and Laughlin
Steel Corporation mill, President Nixon lost roughly by 4 to 1 in 1968. But
in those Democratic bailiwicks this year he lost by only 1321 votes out of
approximately 10,000 cast.
Sixteenth Ward--1972
1968
Nixon
2,465
41.6%
Nixon
1,114
15.6%
McGovern
3,457
58.4%
Humphrey
4,958
69.5%
Total
5,922
100.0%
Wallace
1,009
14.1%
Other
54
.8%
Total
7,135
100.0%
Seventeenth Ward
1972
1968
Nixon
1,917
46.0%
Nixon
733
14.5%
McGovern
2,246
54.0%
Humphrey
3,640
72.0%
Total
4,163
100.0%
Wallace
628
12.4%
Other
53
1.1%
Total
5,054
100.0%
The results in the 16th and 17th indicate widespread blue collar defections
from the Democrats. No doubt symptomatic of the defection was the United
Steel Workers Union and I.W. Abel who took a "neutral" stance at the top of the
ticket. Other Democratic candidates with the active support of this union went
on to win the election and scored well in traditionally Democratic areas like
the 16th and 17th wards.
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Page 3
Liberal Establishment Jewish Students
Fourteenth Ward
One area in Pittsburgh where the voter turnout exceeded 1968 totals was the 14th
ward, located on the extreme eastern edge of the city. The 14th is the
largest ward in the city and has a large Jewish and student population. McGovern
should have scored well here but he didn't.
1972
1968
Nixon
10,095
45.1%
Nixon
6,936
31.4%
McGovern
12,273
54.9%
Humphrey
13,983
63.2%
Total
22,368
100.0%
Wallace
971
4.4%
Other
226
1.0%
Total
22,116
100.0%
Conclusion
Few cities indicate more clearly the demise--for this election at least--
of the traditional Democratic coalition. Blacks did not turn out in sufficient
numbers; blue collar workers left the party in mass at the top of the ticket and
traditional liberals--Jewish and young student voters -did not provide significant
victory margins. Whether the disintegration is permanent or a passing phenomenon
remains to be seen.
President Vote By Wards
Here is how Pittsburgh's
10th
4,977
4.8.19
22nd
777
813
wards voted for President:
11th
4.730
3,874
23rd
889
931
Ward
McGovern Nixon
12th
4.919
1,131
24th
1.445
1.837
First
852
561
13th
5,609
870
25th
1,631
1,022
Second
376
609
14th
12,273
10.095
26th
3,439
4,207
Third
1,387
343
15th
4,750
4,162
27th
3,154
4.632
Fourth
5,473
3,502
16th
3,457
2,465
28th
2,524
3,034
Fifth
6,318
991
17th
2,246
1,917
29th
2,647
3,651
Sixth
1,698
1,259
18th
2,942
2,435
30th
1,204
1,214
Seventh
4,187
4,065
19th
7,053
10,026
31st
1,211
1,790
Eighth
2,742
3,142
20th
3,983
5,134
32nd
1,526
2,407
Ninth
2,765
2,233
21st
1,265
425
Total
101,463
89,769
Source:
Pittsburgh Press
November 8, 1972
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Page 4
Q
13
Poste
12
14
=
31
"WITH
AINEN
7
10
15
Penn
Mossfield
8
Fifth
ewilos
Neville
Boundary
6
Centre
Glass Run
4
RIVER
9
N
91
Run
5
Wyandotte
MONONOM
Backs
12 's
17
3
24
Fifth
MT.
OLIVER
29
of
Liberty
Lucina
I
30
23
2
32
18
26
22
Brookline
Bull
25
Pennsylvania
19
Island
21
RIVER
&
27
20
27
28
20
OHIO
4
Berry
CRAFTON
UNDISSIGON
UMOIT
INGRAM
Middletown
28
to
Creak
Charliers
orliers
Charli
Pittsburgh
Ward Boundaries
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Page 5
Pittsburgh
PRESIDENT 1968
1960 Census
Total
Percentage Total Vote
Population
Ward
Vote
Republican
Democratic
AIP
Other
Plurality
Rep.
Dem.
AIP
6,155
WARD 1
1,470
213
1,020
169
16
747 D
18.5%
69.0%
11.4%
2,200
MAKU 2
1,224
546
618
56
4
72 0
44.6%
50.5%
4.6%
10,143
WARD 3
2,867
257
2,593
19
8
2,326 0
9.2%
89.8%
.7%
26,477
WARD 4
8,781
2,403
5,601
617
100
3,138 D
28.0%
63.8%
7.0%
30,266
MAKU 5
9,474
712
6,626
72
64
7,914 D
7.5%
91.0%
.8%
9,856
WARD 6
3,923
567
2,838
491
27
2,271 D
14.5%
72.3%
12.5%
18,177
WARD 7
0,009
3,0)4
3,920
445
100
316 D
44.7%
48.6%
5.5%
17,821
WARD c
0,083
2,232
3,506
693
52
1,274 D
33.4%
52.5%
13.4%
13.679
MARU 9
5,677
958
3,865
802
52
2,907 D
16.9%
68.12
14.1%
25,125
WARD 10
11,119
2,430
7,177
1,434
78
4,747 D
21.9%
64.5%
12.9%
23,432
WARD 11
8,663
2,805
4,947
849
62
2,142 D
32.4%
57.1%
9.8%
23,767
WARD 12
7,940
870
6,531
479
60
5,661 D
11.0%
82.3%
6.0%
26,923
WARD 13
8,232
695
7,352
123
62
6,657 D
8.4%
89.3%
1.5%
47,301
WARD 14
22,116
6,736
13,983
971
226
7,047 D
31.4%
63.2%
4.4%
29,540
WARD 15
10,297
2,036
6,658
1,516
87
4,622 D
19.81
64.7%
14.7%
23,300
WARD 16
7,135
1,114
4,958
1,009
54
3,844 D
15.6%
69.5%
14.1%
13,011
WARD 17
5,054
733
3,640
628
53
2,907 D
14.5%
72.0%
12.4%
18,907
WARD 18
6,630
1,492
4,286
771
51
2,794 0
22.6%
64.9%
11.7%
47,187
WARD 19
19,065
6,076
10,096
2,780
113
4,020 D
31.9%
53.0%
14.6%
24,837
WARD 20
10,346
3,453
5,343
1,495
55
1,890 D
33.4%
51.6%
14.5%
#
15,458
WARD 21
2,040
379
1,964
264
33
1,585 D
14.4%
74.4%
10.0%
11,074
WARD 22
2,097
571
1,179
320
27
6C8 D
27.2%
56.2%
15.3%
10.038
MARD 23
2,802
607
1,613
497
25
946 D
23.8%
57.6%
17.7%
11,382
WARD 24
4,046
1,124
2,154
749
19
1,030 D
27.8%
53.2%
18.5%
14,298
WAKD 25
3,934
775
2,624
500
35
1,849 D
19.7%
66.7%
12.7%
23,401
HARD 20
9,985
3,445
4,810
1,654
76
1,365 D
34.5%
48.2%
16.6%
23,485
WARD 27
9,021
2,958
4,327
1,679
57
1,369 D
32.8%
48.0%
18.6%
14,453
WARD 28
5,914
2,094
2,982
813
25
888 D
35.4%
50.4%
13.7%
16,604
WARD 29
7,342
2,191
4,014
1,099
38
1,823 D
29.8%
54.7%
15.0%
7,353
WARD 30
2,881
780
1,724
361
16
944 D
27.1%
59.8%
12.5%
8,055
WARD 31
3,459
1,010
1,792
635
22
782 D
29.2%
51.8%
18.4%
10,127
WARD 32
4,326
1,425
2,136
741
24
711 D
32.9%
49.4%
17.1%
604,332
TOTAL
223,210
57,681
138,877
24,931
1,721
81,196 D
25.8%
62.2%
11.2%
Source: America Votes No. 8, Scammon
ELECTION
72
Election
Report
The Cities
Milwaukee
POLITICAL/RESEARCH DIVISION Republican National Committee, Bob Dole, Chairman
RNC RESEARCH DIVISION
NOVEMBER 27, 1972
ELECTION '72
BIG CITIES REPORT
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Introduction
President Nixon lost Milwaukee to Senator McGovern but by a sharply reduced
margin from the 1968 results. The President garnered 106,612 (42.4%) votes
to McGovern's 145,024 (57.6%). The 1968 figures were Nixon 89,553 (34.9%). Humphrey
142,047 (55.4%), and Wallace 23,917 (9.3). A look at selected wards in the
city show some of the trends at work.
Milwaukee, for the purposes of socio-political analysis has traditionally
been divided by the Milwaukee River which bisects the city. Although Germans
are scattered throughout the city, the north side is generally considered the
German area while the south side has been the haven for Polish Americans.
These Polish voters have been studied as representative of what is "happening"
politically among "ethnics" since 1964 when they gave George Wallace a near
majority in the presidential primary.
The cleavage in the city is best illustrated by the two Congressmen whose
districts comprise part of Milwaukee. Congressman Zablocki, representing
south Milwaukee, has tended to support the war under both the Johnson and
Nixon administrations and has taken a hard line on crime. In 1970, the ADA
gave him a rather low mark of 44.
His northern counterpart -- Henry Reuss -- is one of the most liberal members
of the house in the tradition of "progressive" Wisconsin politics. The Con-
gressman's ADA ratings range in the 85-100% area. They are an accurate re-
flection of the Congressman's performance.
Presidential Vote -- 1968-1972
Because of a change in ward boundaries between 1968 and 1972, comparisons are
extremely difficult to make. Several wards have maintained, however, essentially
the same population composition to make comparisons meaningful. What follows
is a comparison of only those wards.
The Black Vote -- Ward One
Ward One in northeast Milwaukee has maintained its essential population com-
position as it had in 1968. It is for the most part a black ward although
in the northern part of the ward the balck percentage of the total population
drops to as low as 20%.
4972
1968
Nixon
1,815
15%
Nixon
2,720
21.4%
McGovern
10,247
85%
HHH
9,248
72.6%
Wallace
712
5.6%
Other
58
.4%
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Page 2
Polish Vote--Eighth Ward
The Eighth Ward has maintained its essentially Polish composition since 1968
in spite of boundary changes. The returns show the Democrats maintaining the
same percentage of votes as 1968 but a heavier turnout resulted in substantially
more votes for President Nixon. In addition, the absence of Governor Wallace
from the ballot apparently helped the President's vote.
1972
1968
Nixon
6,430
40.9%
Nixon
3,349
28.0%
McGovern
9,264
59.1%
HHH
7,153
59.7%
Wallace
1,420
11.9%
Other
55
.4%
Blue Collar Twelfth Ward
The new and old 12th wards are substantially the same. The 12th is basically
blue collar--low income, composed of varied ethnic groups including Spanish,
Polish and Slavic derivative elements. Again the Democratic percentage of the
vote remained the same, but the GOP percentage increased almost exactly by the
percentage Wallace received in 1968.
1972
1968
Nixon
4,033
33.2%
Nixon
1,698
19.5%
McGovern
8,107
66.8%
HHH
5,852
67.2%
Wallace
1,108
12.7%
Other
49
.4%
Youth Vote--Third Ward
The 3rd Ward borders on Lake Michigan and is the home of the Milwaukee
branch of the University of Wisconsin. The area is heavily populated with students,
faculty members and provides a good indication of the college youth vote, if
not, working class young. Over 5,000 more people voted this year in
this ward and their votes apparently all went to Senator McGovern.
1972
1968
Nixon
7,751
37.5%
Nixon
7,116
44.6
McGovern
12,917
62.5%
HHH
7,779
48.7
Wallace
930
5.8
Other
142
.9
Conclusion
The McGovern organization in Wisconsin was one of the best he had in the nation.
In Milwaukee, gains among traditionally liberal elements of the voting popula-
tion, helped the Senator actually receive more votes than Hubert Humphrey
in 1968. However, because of GOP gains, possibly from Wallace voters of
1968 among others, McGovern's victory margin was sharply reduced from Humphrey's
performance.
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Page 3
1972 Results--Milwaukee*
Ward
Nixon
%
McGovern
%
Total Vote
1
1,815
(15.0)
10,247
(85.0)
12,062
2
8,656
(47.7)
9,482
(52.3)
18,138
3
7,751
(37.5)
12,917
(62.5)
20,668
4
4,053
(35.8)
7,279
(64.2)
11,332
5
12,963
(57.8)
9,459
(42.2)
22,422
6
1,710
(16.7)
8,530
(83.3)
10,240
7
3,923
(31.0)
8,741
(69.0)
12,664
8
6,430
(41.0)
9,264
(59.0)
15,694
9
7,415
(49.3)
7,623
(50.7)
15,038
10
3,904
(37.0)
6,637
(63.0)
10,541
11
9,123
(49.4)
9,334
(50.6)
18,457
12
4,033
(33.2)
8,107
(66.8)
12,140
13
7,965
(45.0)
9,754
(55.0)
17,719
14
7,768
(42.0)
10,708
(58,0)
18,476
15
9,940
(55.5)
7,974
(44.5)
17,914
16
9,163
(50.5)
8,968
(49.5)
18,131
106,612
(42.4)
145,024
(57.6)
251,636
*
Figures include only major party vote
Republican
National
Committee.
November 24, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
GORDON STRACHAN
FROM:
ED DeBOLT
ed
RE:
ELECTION '72: THE CITIES
Enclosed are initial studies of the presidential
vote in four of the nation's largest cities: Boston, Chicago, New York
and Philadelphia.
In each report, we have identified and
analyzed the vote in key wards and precincts. In most cases, com-
parisons have been made with 1968 results. Where available, city-
wide ward results for 1968 and 1972 have been provided.
/jg
enc.
cc: Senator Bob Dole
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast, Washington, D.C. 20003. (202) 484-6500.
ELECTION
72
Election
Report
The Cities
Boston
POLITICAL/RESEARCH DIVISION Republican National Committee, Bob Dole, Chairman
RNC RESEARCH DIVISION
NOVEMBER 22, 1972
ELECTION '72
BIG CITIES REPORT
Boston, Massachusetts
Introduction
The days of the late Mayor James Michael Curley are gone for-
ever in Boston. Migration by Boston's renowned Irish from
the core city, an increasing black population, and an incred-
ible influx of voting college students who attend the 52 colleges
and universities of the area have drastically altered the politi-
cal composition of the city. These factors have not, however,
changed it's Democratic inclinations. The President did fare
better in Boston in 1972 than he did in 1968. In 1968, he re-
ceived 18.3% of the vote, but still lost all of Boston's twenty-
two wards.
According to the United States Department of Commerce Bureau of
Census, Boston is a younger, richer and better educated city than
it was ten years ago. And, not surprisingly in light of the stu-
dent population, Boston has a high mobility rate.
The following analysis gives an indication of the Boston vote in
1972. Ward boundaries have not changed in the last four years,
facilitating comparison of voting statistics over several years.
However, the obvious limitation should be recognized --- popula-
tion shifts may after the political behavior of a given ward
from year to year.
THE BLACK VOTE
Ward 12, in the heart of the city, is predominately black.
Based upon near complete returns appearing in the Boston
Globe (all ward totals for this report are based upon Globe
figures which are unofficial), Ward 12 results in 1972 were:
Nixon
571 (14%)
Brooke
3,112 (86%)
McGovern
3,618 (86%)
Droney
500 (14%)
Both the President and Senator Brooke bettered their previous
showing in this ward for their last election. (Nixon-Humphrey
figures are for 1968. Brooke-Peabody figures are for 1966).
Nixon
378 ( 6%)
Brooke
859 (85%)
Humphrey
5,524 (92%)
Peabody
5,021 (15%)
Even though both the President and Brooke did better than their
previous race, neither indicates a substancial shift of Boston's
black electorate to non-black Republican candidates.
Boston, Massachusetts
page 2
THE ITALIAN VOTE
Ward 1 contains a large number of Italian voters. The 1972 re-
sults were:
Nixon
4,278 (31.5%)
Brooke
4,266
(41%)
McGovern
9,299 (68.5%)
Droney
6,180
(59%)
In previous races, Ward 1 voted:
Nixon
2,094 (15%)
Brooke
4,335 (37%)
Humphrey
11,129 (79%)
Droney
7,336 (63%)
Results reveal a two-fold increase in support for the President
in 1972 over the 1968 election. That the President made signi-
ficant inroads into the Italian ethnic vote as confirmed by the
results in Precinct 1 of Ward 1, considered to be a bellweather
precinct for middle income Italian voting behavior. The vote
there was:
Nixon
277 (29.7%)
McGovern
652 (70.0%)
THE IRISH VOTE
Ward 13 is predominately Irish. In 1972, it voted:
Nixon
2,083 (32%)
Brooke
2,653 (50.5%)
McGovern
4,355 (68%)
Droney
2,607 (49.5%)
Both the President and Senator Brooke did significantly better
in 1972 than in the prior races when they received:
Nixon
1,009 (13%)
Brooke
2,856 (37%)
Humphrey
6,378 (79%)
Peabody
4,773 (61%)
Glancing at three bellweather low to middle income Irish precincts
in Ward 13 reveals the general accuracy of Ward 13 as an indication
of Irish support:
Pct.7
Pct.8
Pct.9
Nixon
287 (34%)
293 (32%)
305 (35%)
McGovern
541 (65%)
627 (68%)
565 (65%)
The lower ward percentage is probably due to an increase in Ward
13's black population.
THE YANKEE WASP VOTE AND YOUTH VOTE
Ward 5 has traditionally been a high income, Yankee WASP terri-
tory though some influx of students has been experienced in re-
cent years. In 1972, Ward 5 voted:
Boston, Massachusetts
page 3
Nixon
2,221 (31%)
Brooke
3,986
(71%)
McGovern
5,026 (69%)
Droney
1,610
(29%)
In previous races, Ward 5 voted:
Nixon
4,389 (39%)
Brooke
6,582 (72%)
Humphrey
6,681 (59%)
Droney
2,515 (28%)
McGovern's appeal to the liberal, affluent voter combined with
strong Boston youth support is indicated here where the President
actually ran behind his 1968 showing while Brooke remained rela-
tively stable.
The lopsided nature of the youth vote was shown by the Boston
Globe (November 8, 1972) which conducted a survey of two key
precincts on the morning of the election. The Globe asked
young voters their preference at the polls. In Ward 5, Precinct
10 where over half of the registered voters are 20 years of age or
under, the Globe survey revealed:
Nixon
22 (10%)
Students
169 (75%)
18-21 yrs.
174 (71%)
McGovern 205 (90%)
Non-Students
56 (25%)
22-25 yrs.
70 (29%)
Conclusion
The results from Boston indicate two major reasons for McGovern's
relatively good showing when compared to the rest of the country.
First, traditional Democratic loyalties still steeped some-
what in the Camelot myth prevented landslide Democratic defec-
tions to the President. Second, and most important, a huge
and overwhelmingly pro-McGovern student youth vote with its
preoccupation on the Viet Nam issue saved McGovern the embar-
rassment of a much closer contest and, perhaps, a narrow defeat.
Among the Italian and Irish voters, the President improved
significantly his showing over previous races, though still
falling short of a majority. And among Boston's black voters,
the President failed to make any large gains of consequence,
even though Edward Brooke was carrying black precincts by
enormous margins.
Boston, Massachusetts
page 4
CARISO
River
2
1
3
with
22
Combridge
Charles River
Boston
Commonwealth
5
Horbor
21
Boylston
4
Tremont
6
Commonweal
9
8
10
7
Perhias
/
11
13
Thensing
19
12
Mill
15
forwagn
FRANKLIN
allondols
PARK
Blue
ConterBury
14
B H R R.
MAR
16
Neponser
20
Walk
"
Wathington
Hill
Derchester
/
Terms
River
18
NEDONSE:
Boston
Word Boundaries
Boston Vote by Precincts
November 8, 1972
Boston Globe
WARD 10
PRESIDENT
US SENATE
WARD 5
Pct. Nixon (R) McGovern (D) Brooke (R) Droney (D)
383
1
136
330
238
135
2
428
921
722
2
205
538
377
219
WARD 1
3
431
814
834
251
367
3
192
569
243
353
347
1742
756
1
275
649
263
420
4
545
810
913
291
4
134
457
239
55
2
248
617
206
369
5
5
174
571
233
338
367
6
470
739
761
318
3
252
642
267
3936
6
99
292
154
123
4
182
534
211
304
222
WARD 6
7
134
404
302
111
5
255
731
261
480
201
336
179
227
8
238
378
294
214
382
1
297
9
453
643
512
401
6
251
587
260
412
2
211
448
215
7
308
611
316
3
232
422
204
313
WARD 11
8
316
618
329
431
4
249
389
200
294
404
267
1
84
229
171
86
9
300
577
300
257
389
223
284
465
5
2
45
434
314
61
10
257
699
6
358
519
286
405
11
396
889
412
621
419
3
62
507
412
65
7
332
540
276
239
161
12
410
715
357
572
380
556
317
433
4
166
323
13
1045
575
658
8
544
5
222
452
354
203
528
9
420
653
359
14
225
295
6
158
310
159
202
300
385
WARD 7
7
248
467
319
276
Total
4278
9299
4266
6180
573
312
464
8
291
512
298
349
1
405
445
715
368
462
9
201
419
179
313
WARD 2
2
608
10
288
589
306
375
272
3
418
827
328
1
180
323
174
362
597
283
452
4
WARD 12
2
229
619
354
369
6
256
588
232
396
3
360
689
316
592
391
1
87
482
405
57
773
374
7
274
4
321
621
284
508
8
231
456
209
327
2
108
807
733
78
5
310
665
277
551
9
307
568
305
440
3
80
357
314
97
297
4
78
385
329
63
6
275
484
257
480
10
277
421
335
7
390
168
332
5
43
376
321
853
196
3225
6007
2991
4189
:6
63
373
329
49
Total
3791
1830
3104
7
112
838
681
103
Total
1871
571
3618
WARD 3
WARD 13
3112
200
WARD 8
1
381
642
393
342
133
1
71
356
228
104
1
95
426
236
2
380
554
318
308
128
2
45
146
93
68
2
92
208
114
337
330
60
3
122
419
319
141
3
400
498
3
65
319
231
4
518
527
340
323
4
42
270
177
47
4
148
252
170
150
656
362
178
6
296
551
357
367
6
466
740
5
129
347
176
7
278
458
356
228
103
7
287
541
273
389
6
67
38
54
8
254
282
304
7
74
239
180
65
8
284
617
271
442
150
9
305
565
326
380
WARD 4
WARD 9
10
525
908
616
3
566
1
202
536
386
204
1
79
206
117
93
20
WARD 14
2
521
487
560
206
2
79
339
245
71
80
660
514
115
3
121
455
370
116
4
308
53
1
55
240
77
101
2
85
805
647
102
4
99
426
334
5
84
527
379
5
116
110
4
72
390
289
97
300
231
238
72
187
5
39
345
6
314
392
387
7
261
539
456
205
Boston, Massachusetts
8
274
651
470
259
page5
9
105
353
237
119
10
221
624
509
211
Boston Vote by Precinct
US SENATE
November 8 1972
PRESIDENT
Boston Globe
Pct. Nixon (R) McGovern (D) Brooke (R) Droney (D)
WARD 18
6
51
451
347
67
1
380
926
431
614
7
49
439
342
62
2
141
535
339
223
8
61
362
291
71
3
181
577
443
307
9
33
259
265
57
4
451
778
502
517
11
20
321
236
33
5
447
619
438
472
WARD 21
12
28
212
170
331
6
493
674
505
493
1
214
607
407
163
7
13
39
304
227
58
330
561
315
418
2
101
629
302
260
14
42
436
340
55
8
686
988
685
677
3
220
654
450
274
9
305
444
304
353
4
200
543
349
246
WARD 15
10
610
765
586
588
5
211
685
392
318
1
222
478
297
325
11
324
676
437
397
6
263
490
356
290
317
179
217
12
442
643
3
141
442
426
7
233
607
370
395
13
261
327
4
252
253
396
671
384
539
8
264
720
444
332
5
253
519
298
365
14
295
324
292
240
9
300
842
553
477
283
151
214
15
393
553
6
160
427
378
10
310
716
472
361
16
245
408
589
528
600
536
483
7
12
243
549
389
260
216
203
192
234
17
541
777
296
471
638
8
13
289
881
540
413
389
19
490
869
454
446
9
234
403
228
14
145
507
337
196
20
503
905
541
638
15
224
551
405
203
21
429
795
479
435
16
285
539
398
302
WARD 16
22
534
746
509
601
1
295
430
282
365
WARD 19
WARD 22
2
203
372
218
270
1
262
398
269
253
1
301
678
411
419
3
318
616
314
419
2
810
714
774
528
2
271
670
339
437
4
319
687
333
596
3
241
339
265
235
3
373
780
497
496
5
346
623
348
508
4
295
129
333
269
4
279
536
362
356
6
375
734
445
539
5
313
407
358
243
5
193
440
261
270
7
365
706
372
591
363
244
314
8
384
484
6
338
549
363
6
158
480
423
524
9
475
7
296
677
387
487
7
329
724
447
408
806
469
668
10
577
471
8
268
428
302
289
8
361
792
625
401
329
309
9
260
348
294
219
9
271
729
481
403
11
439
716
415
609
10
394
694
418
483
10
333
729
423
495
12
252
455
265
353
11
309
483
360
375
11
225
495
293
352
12
301
509
306
390
12
289
626
296
496
Total
4139
7246
4154
5873
13
251
432
285
290
13
200
177
230
361
WARD 17
WARD 20
1
60
291
210
91
239
2
450
594
506
419
2
209
310
194
3
285
645
408
398
3
498
516
474
393
4
604
799
511
725
4
423
488
449
358
5
49
195
140
66
5
494
709
540
508
365
6
556
700
572
515
6
313
487
320
7
112
263
141
183
7
326
541
347
388
8
209
410
257
289
8
356
532
271
406
9
287
340
267
270
9
499
571
520
382
10
10
630
699
637
510
263
518
360
335
11
147
177
143
176
11
348
410
395
272
12
203
452
236
339
13
347
492
341
377
13
308
493
386
387
15
548
708
536
533
14
233
16
702
878
698
670
456
241
350
17
655
841
646
641
Total
3282
5836
3814
4213
18
329
529
410
320
Boston, Massachusetts
19
391
387
page
6
20
591
841
719
531
ELECTION
72
Election
Report
The Cities
Chicago
POLITICAL/RESEARCH DIVISION Republican National Committee, Bob Dole, Chairman
RNC RESEARCH DIVISION
NOVEMBER 22, 1972
ELECTION '72
BIG CITIES REPORT
Chicago, Illinois
Introduction
Signs of erosions appeared in the Daley domain after this year's
votes were counted in Chicago. Not only did President Nixon
receive 43% of the Chicago vote (compared to his 1968 showing
of 31,5%), but Daley favorite Edward V. Hanrahan lost his bid
for reelection as State's Attorney for Cook County.
Until recently, the Daley machine has been able to exert tight
control over Chicago's population, including large communities
of blacks, Polish, Italians and Greeks. The extent to which
Daley's control has eroded is revealed inthe following analy-
sis.
(Note: since the 1970 election, Chicago's ward boundaries have
been withdrawn. Vote totals from 1972 wards are compared to to-
tals from wards in the same area during the 1968 and 1970 elec-
tions.)
THE BLACK VOTE
Daley's major loss in Chicago came in black areas where State's
Attorney Hanrahan's involvement in the case of the police slay-
ing of two Black Panthers was extremely unpopular. Hanrahan
lost ten of the black Southside wards to his Republican opponent
Bernard Carey, as well as losing the heavily black 29th ward
in west central Chicago.
In a race characterized by low voter turnout by blacks, the
President was unable to make any significant inroads into black
Democratic strength.
Ward 20
With 90 per cent of the precincts reporting, this ward, which
is approsimately 90% black, voted as follows:
Nixon
1,810 ( 9%)
Carey
9,316 (54%)
McGovern
17,844 (91%)
Hanrahan
7,830 (46%)
Ogilvie
3,032 (17%)
Percy
8,140 (45%)
Walker
14,961 (83%)
Pucinski
9,804 (55%)
In 1968, the vote in ward 20 was:
Nixon
1,585 ( 6%)
Humphrey
24,904 (94%)
Chicago, Illinois
page 2
Ward 24
Ward 24 is approximately 99% black. With 94 per cent of the
precincts reporting, its 1972 vote was as follows:
Nixon
803 ( 5%)
Carey
5,891 (40%)
McGovern
15,711
(95%)
Hanrahan
8,925 (60%)
Ogilvie
1,266 ( 8%)
Percy
3,774 (24%)
Walker
14,222 (92%)
Pucinski
11,690 (76%)
In 1968, Ward 24 returns were:
Nixon
369 ( 2%)
Humphrey
16,498 (98%)
Ward 29
Ward 29 is 85-90 per cent black and, with approximately 85
per cent of the precincts reporting, the 1972 vote was:
Nixon
1,333
( 9%)
Carey
6,774
(50.2%)
McGovern
13,542
(91%)
Hanrahan
6,719
(49.8%)
Ogilvie
1,950
(14%)
Percy
5,344
(38%)
Walker
12,050
(86%)
Pucinski
8,730
(62%)
In 1968, Ward 29 returns were:
Nixon
597 ( 3%)
Humphrey 19,570 (97%)
The voting was similar in every black ward of Chicago. The
President trailed the ticket, while Carey made by far the strong-
est showing, winning eleven black wards, followed by Percy and
Ogilvie. While the President's percentage of the vote was invar-
iably better than his 1968 contest, it appears that low voter
turnout decreased slightly the usually enormous Democratic mar-
gins in statewide races.
THE JEWISH VOTE
Wards 49 and 50 in the northernmost part of Chicago are 80-
85 per cent Jewish. While Carey and Percy carried them, the Pres-
ident and Ogilvie lost them. However, the President and Gov-
ernor Ogilvie overall improved their showing over previous elec-
tions.
Ward 49
Nixon
13,016 (41%)
Carey
18,258
(58%)
McGovern
18,871 (59%)
Hanrahan
12,996
(42%)
Ogilvie
12,312 (39%)
Percy
20,333
(65%)
Walker
19,292 (61%)
Pucinski
11,174
(35%)
(Based upon 90 per cent precincts reporting)
Chicago, Illinois
page 3
In 1968, the results were:
Nixon
16,603 (38%)
Humphrey
25,742 (59%)
Ogilvie
17,327 (40%)
Shapiro
25,897 (60%)
Ward 50
Nixon
13,624 (42%)
Carey
16,818 (51%)
McGovern
19,175 (58%)
Hanrahan
16,117 (49%)
Ogilvie
12,397 (35%)
Percy
19,634 (59%)
Walker
23,055 (65%)
Pucinski
13,547 (41%)
(Based upon 90 per cent precincts reporting)
While in 1968, the results were:
Nixon
13,618 (29%)
Humphrey
31,898 (68%)
Ogilvie
13,509 (29%)
Shapiro
32,711 (71%)
In those two Jewish wards, Ogilvie trailed the ticket. However,
both Carey and Percy ran well ahead of the President. Results
from Ward 50 support national indications of large scale defec-
tions by Jewish voters to the President.
THE POLISH VOTE
Chicago's Ward 35 is approximately 60 per cent Polish. In 1968,
the President barely lost Ward 35. In 1972, the President hand-
ily defeated McGovern, indicating a significant gain for the Pres-
ident among this Eastern European ethnic group.
Ward 35
Based upon 87 per cent of the precincts reporting, the 1972 results
were:
Nixon
16,563 (63%)
Carey
11,671 (45%)
McGovern
9,927 (37%)
Hanrahan
14,301 (55%)
Ogilvie
12,706 (48%)
Percy
12,249 (46%)
Walker
13,513 (52%)
Pucinski
14,249 (54%)
In 1968, Ward 35 voted:
Chicago, Illinois
page 4
Nixon
13,640 (45.0%)
Humphrey
13,706 (45.2%)
The President was the only Republican to carry Ward 35 in 1972 ----
further testimony to the ethnic flight from George McGovern.
THE ITALIAN VOTE
Ward 25 is the home of Alderman Vito Marzullo, a Democrat who
cast his first Republican vote this year for the President. The
ward is approximately three-quarters Italian and, while Marzullo
did not carry the ward for the President this year, the vote was
far closer than 1968.
Ward 25
With 96 of the precincts reporting, the results were:
Nixon
7,120 (44%)
Carey
2,603 (26%)
McGovern
9,039 (56%)
Hanrahan
7,427 (74%)
(60% returns)
Ogilvie
6,106 (39%)
Percy
4,362 (28%)
Walker
9,560 (61%)
Pucinski
11,004 (72%)
In 1968, Ward 25 results were:
Nixon
3,448 (16%)
Humphrey
16,547 (77%)
Once again, as in the Polish ward, the President led all other
Republicans on the ticket, signalling a widespread attraction
to the President by Italian voters.
THE BLUE COLLAR VOTE
Ward 10 is the home of much of Chicago's steel industry. As such,
it is approximately 90 per cent blue collar with many union house-
holds. With almost 97 per cent of the precincts reporting, the
President appears to have won the 10th Ward in 1972 an unpre-
cedented showing considering his 30% of the vote there in 1968.
Ward 10
Nixon
13,675 (51%)
Carey
9,886 (38%)
McGovern
13,079 (49%)
Hanrahan
16,051 (62%)
Ogilvie
11,190 (43%)_
Percy
12,562 (48%)
Walker
15,070 (57%)
Pucinski
13,560 (52%)
Chicago, Illinois
page 5
In 1968, Ward 10 voted:
Nixon
9,742 (29.7%)
Humphrey
17,343 (52.8%)
Wallace
5,579 (17.0%)
Conclusion
The 1972 election returns from Chicago revealed real gains by
the President over his 1968 vote among virtually every major
ethnic group in the city, with the exception of black voters,
among whom his showing was better in 1972 than in 1968, but still
at: the bottom of the ticket in a low turnout contest.
Contributing to the President's best showing in Chicago were the
luke-ward support of Mayor Daley for George McGovern, a success-
ful appeal to ethnic voters, and lower than usual turnout among
key Democratic groups such as blacks. The local Hanrahan-Carey
contest appears to have had little or no effect upon the Presiden-
tial race, or vice-versa, since Carey lost every ward but one
that the President carried.
Additionally, McGovern did manage to maintain the lead in the
liberal, affluent North Shore wards where Senator Percy did well.
However, massive defections among blue collar voters contributed
to exceptional support for the President in industrial areas
such as the Tenth Ward.
Chicago, Illinois
page 6
Chicago
Wards
NIXON
15
McGOVERN
Vote by Wards
for President
Pcts. Pcts. in
Ward
McGovern
Nixon
Rpid. Ward
1
10,559
5,726
42
47
WN
16,489
1,870
51
56
13,770
1,110
44
54
17,026
2,340
56
61
5
19,933
4,058
55
63
6
19,504
2,091
62
74
13,687
7,018
55
64
20,187
2,715
11.920
9,090
53
57
10
13,079
13,675
60
62
15,084
11,007
67
12
10,888
16,748
63
69
13
10,194
23,108
78
14
9,986
12,654
54
62
15
10,900
14,023
64
69
16
15,011
1,023
43
17
18,496
1,185
57
18
13,649
15,917
65
69
19
9,706
22,694
71
20
17,844
1,810
60
67
21
19,882
2,163
54
68
22
11,336
7,825
53
58
23
10,344
21,937
65
66
24
15,711
803
51
54
9,039
7,120
46
48
26
12,697
7,168
50
53
27
10,767
21,104
41
52
28
12,223
1,019
39
46
29
13,542
1,333
41
48
30
9,980
13,811
62
70
31
10,460
5,845
40
54
32
12,093
8,009
53
55
33
9,718
10,532
52
56
34
20,478
3,067
56
59
35
9.927
16,563
69
79
36
10,757
21,976
82
37
12,632
10,143
61
69
33
10,650
20,665
67
7)
39
12,729
9,328
70
74
40
13,398
15.389
63
72
41
11,203
27,445
78
80
42
13.720
10,454
53
64
43
16,950
13,775
64
73
44
13,390
11,499
59
64
45
11,554
22.953
74
71
46
13,089
9,945
54
54
47
1.437
16,056
to
69
48
11,977
11,251
52
59
49
18.871
13,016
€9
70
50
19,175
13,624
78
87
TOTAL
677,631
505,703 2,906
3,209
Source: Chicago Tribune
11/9/72
ELECTION
72
Election
Report
The Cities
Philadephia
POLITICAL/RESEARCH DIVISION Republican National Committee, Bob Dole, Chairman
RNC RESEARCH DIVISION
NOVEMBER 22, 1972
ELECTION '72
BIG CITY REPORT
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Introduction
An indication of the size of President Nixon's election day victory can
be illustrated by examining the ward returns in the city of Philadelphia.
The President registered gains among many of the city's voting blocs. As
a result President Nixon lost the city by only 89,000 votes compared to
a 272,000 deficit in 1968.
The President's votes were drawn chiefly from Northeast and South Phila-
delphia, the areas that formed the base of Mayor Frank Rizzo's political
strength. The President also carried several wards that Mayor Rizzo was
not able to carry in 1971 -- ward 9 in Chestnut Hill for example and the
18th ward in Fishtown.
In Mayor Rizzo'shome ward, the 50th, the President was defeated about
two-to-one, but this was considerably better than his 1968 vote. The
Mayor narrowly missed carrying his home ward in 1971.
What follows are some comparisons that clearly show the cleavage (that
has developed in recent years) between black Philadelphians and the city's
blue collar ethnic vote.
BLACK VOTERS
In 1971, Philadelphia's black voters deserted their normal Democratic voting
habits and voted for liberal Republican Thatcher Longstreth. In 1972 black
wards returned to their Democratic loyalties.
Ward 28, North Philadelphia, overwhelmingly black.
1972 Presidential race
Nixon
493
8.4%
McGovern
5,401
91.6
1971 Mayoralty
Rizzo
1,187
23.3%
Longstreth
3,901
76.7
1968 Presidential
Nixon
613
8.0%
Humphrey
6,980
91.1
Wallace
27
.4
Other
43
.5
Philadelphia, PA
Page 2
Ward 3, West Philadelphia
1972 Presidential race
Nixon
1,072
11.3%
McGovern
8,382
88.7
1971 Mayoralty
Rizzo
1,831
20.4%
Longstreth
7,129
79.6
1968 Presidential
Nixon
1,332
11.4%
Humphrey
9,962
85.5
Wallace
241
2.1
Other
113
1.0
BLUE COLLAR
As was the trend across the country, numerous blue-collar areas of Philadelphia
turned out election day majorities for the President. Ward 33 is a good example
of the breakdown of Democratic loyalties among members of this voting bloc.
Ward 33, Kensington
1972 Presidential
Nixon
7,392
59.2%
McGovern
5,084
40.8
1971 Mayoralty
Rizzo
9,347
72.9%
Longstreth
3,470
27.1
1968 Presidential
Nixon
4,547
32.8%
Humphrey
7,355
53.1
Wallace
1,905
13.8
Other
38
.3
Philadelphia, PA
Page 3
ITALIANS
In the city's Italian neighborhoods, President Nixon was able to win over
60% of the vote. Thacher Longstreth was barely able to garner 20% in most
of these neighborhoods in 1971 on the GOP ticket. The President's vote
was a considerable improvement over his 1968 totals which averaged about
37%.
Ward 39, South Philadelphia, Italian
1972 Presidential
Nixon
15,206
63.2%
McGovern
8,860
36.8
1971 Mayoralty
Rizzo
19,797
83.4%
Longstreth
3,930
16.6
1968 Presidential
Nixon
9,858
38.2%
Humphrey
12,280
47.6
Wallace
3,367
13.1
Other
77
1.1
JEWISH VOTERS
Two Jewish wards in the Oxford Circle area were the only wards to go for
McGovern in northeast Philadelphia. However, their margins for the Senator
were sharply reduced from the vote totals they gave Hubert Humphrey in 1968.
Rizzo won the wards -- also by relatively small margins.
Ward 53, Northeast Philadelphia
1972 Presidential
Nixon
6,590
45.4%
McGovern
7,933
54.6
1971 Mayoralty
Rizzo
7,844
56.2%
Longstreth
6,110
43.8
1968 Presidential
Nixon
4,219
28.6%
Humphrey
9,776
66.3
Wallace
709
4.8
Other
46
.3
Philadelphia, PA
Page 4
Ward 54, Northeast Philadelphia
1972 Presidential
Nixon
5,958
39.9%
McGovern
8,992
60.1
1971 Mayoralty
Rizzo
8,376
58.5%
Longstreth
5,943
41.5
1968 Presidential
:
Nixon
3,236
21.9%
Humphrey
10,956
74.1
Wallace
537
3.6
Other
57
.4
Ward 50, Mount Airy, Mayor Rizzo's Home Ward
1972 Presidential
Nixon
4,112
29.3%
McGovern
9,920
70.7
1971 Mayoralty
Rizzo
6,086
44.0%
Longstreth
7,756
56.0
1968 Presidential
Nixon
4,731
26.8%
Humphrey
12,118
68.6
Wallace
690
3.9
Other
113
.7
Line
58
CHECK
66
Creat
63
I
57
56
North
50
1
FORMOID
9
10
53
64
65
22
CHECK
Contor
54
City
in
59
Wister
Broad
61
Wissonic
Cherres
17
Reading RR
35
55
Oiney
62
12
21
49
42
41
Wingohoc
23
13
5th
33
Venanga
43
7
38
RR
11
Somerse
2nd
45
Lehigh
37
6th
25
28
16
19
Line
Susque honne
31
52
City
33rd
32
Montgomery
20
WORKS
18
47
Parkside
29
Broad
Moster
Girord
Poplor
34
15
14
CODES
6
09
4
24
Sp Gorden
Creek
44
#
Morket
5
8
]
60
Larchwood
21
Lombord
South
46
30
3
Washington
2
51
Whorton
36
Moore
1
1972 PRESIDENTIAL RACE
Miflin
B
48
Cobbs Creek
Nixon
26
Broad
39
McGovern
40
Darby Creek
Philadelphia
Ward Boundaries
Bock Channel
Bow Creek
WARD
NIXON McGOVERN
WARD
NIXON McGOVERN
WARD
NIXON McGOVERN
1,630
4,742
/
24
572
5,024
46
1,905
8,632
5,685
5,161
47
943
6,545
Please see next page for
1,072
8,382
25
7,017
4,705
48
6,927
5,004
1,204
8,622
25
8,259
4,273
49
5,570
7,356
McGovern totals in Wards
5
3,315
6,115
27
2,121.
6,770
50
4,112
9,000
732
5,706
28
493
5,401
51
1,989
6,93%
7
5,929
4,083
29
855
4,403
52
3,977
11.78
8
7,203
10,344
30
6,187
4,455
53
6,590
7,933
60-66.
9
5,288
4,661
31
5,171
3,258
54
5,958
1.777
10
2,355
8,387
32
285
7,678
55
10,484
6,116
11
977
5,481
33
7,392
5,084
56
10,393
9,527
12
3,074
6,854
34
8,246
13,168
57
9,156
6,275.
13
2,234
6,263
35
11,348
6,035
58
12,763
9.371
14
528
2,578
36
4,812
13.515 59
2,763
7.671
15
4,797
5,850
37
792
4,374
60
912
7,925
16
690
6,004
38
3,263
4,852
61
9,335
6.317
17
2,077
8,511
37
15,706
8,830
62
9,127
5,117
18
4,056
2,891
40
12,219
9,311
63
7,756
s.cr:
3.71
19
2,116
3,180
4)
7.309
4,675
64
6,073
1"
20
515
2,518
42
8,108
6,105
65
5,790
21
14,924
7,658
3
3,774
5,596
66
15,714
2,688
10,539
44
1,171
5.775
CLAIM
6,485
5,066
45
7,518
5,311
TOTALS
343,066
McGovern Totals for Wards 60-66
Ward
McGovern
60
7926
61
6332
62
5749
63
5042
64
3785
65
3921
66
7990
432,330
Line
58
OF
66
Creat
Group
Filmere
57
56
50
Wissohickon
1
9
10
53
64
65
22
54
$
59
Wister
Brood
61
35
55
Oiney
17
21
WISSING
12
RR
62
49
42
41
Wingohock
23
If
13
33
Venango
43
7
38
II
Somerset
2nd
45
Lehigh
37
25
28
16
Susque honno
19
Line
52
31
City
33rd
32
Montgomery
20
18
47
Brood
Moster
Lancoster
29
Girord
Popior
34
59th
14
CODE
54th
IS
6
Creek
60th
4
44
24
Sp. Gorden
Market
5
8
60
Lorchwood
45th
27
Lombord
South
46
3
00
Washington
2
51
Wharlon
36
STAR
Moore
1
1972 MAYORALITY RACE
RR
Million
48
Rizzo
Cobr Creek
Brood
39
26
Longstreth
40
Darby Creek
Philadelphia
Ward Boundaries
Bock Channel
Bow Creek
OGAI
Philadelphia
PRESIDENT 1968
1960 Census
Total
Percentage Total Vote
Population
Ward
Vote
Republican
Democratic
AIP
Other
Plurality
Rep.
Dem.
AIP
MANU 1
11,055
5,132
5,127
1,426
170
5R
43.3%
43.2%
12.06
AAKU 2
12,112
5,029
6,157
776
150
1,128 D
41.56
50.8%
6.4%
MARD 3
11,548
1,332
9,962
241
113
8,630 D
11.4%
85.5%
2.16
MAKU 4
12,437
979
11,320
64
74
10,341 D
7.9%
91.0%
.5%
MAKU 5
10,248
3,979
5,765
352
152
1,786 D
38.8%
56.3%
3.4%
WARD 0
9,048
712
8,252
35
49
7,540 D
7.9%
91.2%
.4%
WARD 7
11,624
3,755
6,228
1,798
43
2,473 0
31.8%
52.7%
15.2%
WARD b
14,648
5,424
0,035
378
211
3,211 U
37.0%
59.02
2.6%
MAKU s
9,720
4,900
4,443
311
66
465 R
50.5%
45.7%
3.2%
WAKU 10
13,764
3,024
9,433
593
114
5,809 D
26.3%
68.5%
4.3%
WARU 11
0,951
1,534
7,017
307
73
5,463 D
17.41
78.4%
3.4%
WARD 12
11,737
3,498
7,297
782
160
3,799 D
29.8%
62.2%
6.7%
WARD 13
10,079
2,570
7,132
875
102
4,562 D
24.1%
66.8%
8.2%
hard 14
4,689
597
4,000
27
57
3,411 D
12.7%
85.5%
.6%
WARD 15
8,538
2,629
5,204
655
50
2,575 D
30.8%
61.0%
7.7%
WARD 16
7,697
457
7,198
13
29
6,741 D
5.97
93.5%
.2%
WARD 17
12,919
2,182
10,288
375
74
3,106 D
16.9%
79.6%
2.9%
WARD 18
8,911
3,350
4.238
1,158
115
938 D
37.6%
48.12
13.0%
WAKU 49
7,635
2,047
4,721
816
51
2,674 D
26.8%
61.8%
10.7%
WAKD 20
4,002
420
3,542
13
27
3,122 0
10.5%
88.5%
.3%
WARD 21
24,149
11,811
9,586
2,588
164
2,225 R
48.9%
39.7%
10.7%
WARD 22
14,707
3,110
11,159
258
180
8,049 D
21.1%
75.9%
1.8%
WARD 23
12,279
4,840
6,151
1,220
62
1,305 D
39.5%
50.1%
9.9%
WARD 24
0,915
698
6,038
23
156
5,340 D
10.1%
87.3%
.3%
WARD 25
12,224
3,904
6,607
1,671
42
2,703 D
31.9%
54.0%
13.7%
WARD 26
12,513
5,305
5,497
1,510
121
112 D
43.0%
43.9%
12.1%
WARD 27
7,010
2,000
4,686
193
123
2,678 D
28.6%
66.8%
2.8%
WARD 28
7,663
613
6,980
27
43
6,367 D
8.0%
91.1%
.4%
WARD 29
7,138
753
6,285
70
30
5,532 D
10.5%
88.0%
1.0%
WARD 30
7,930
1,132
6,581
96
121
5,449 D
14.31
83.0%
1.2%
WARD 31
9,850
3,510
4,946
1,358
36
1,436 D
35.6%
50.2%
13.8%
MARU 32
12,792
1,061
11,575
18
138
10,514 D
8.3%
90.5%
.1%
WARD 33
13,845
4,547
7,355
1,905
38
2,808 D
32.8%
53.1%
13.8%
WARD 34
23,171
6,122
15,751
1,119
179
9,629 D
26.4%
68.0%
4.8%
WARD 35
18,109
7,836
8,066
2,163
44
230 D
43.3%
44.5%
11.9%
WARD 30
21,825
3,818
16,387
1,405
215
12,569 D
17.5%
75.1%
6.4%
WARD 37
7,939
1,238
6,407
222
72
5,169 D
15.6%
80.7%
2.8%
WARD 30
10,137
3,124
6,072
864
77
2,948 D
30.8%
59.9%
8.5%
WARD 39
25,781
9,858
12,280
3,367
276
2,422 D
38.2%
47.6%
13.1%
WARD 4C
23,379
7,537
12,034
3,636
172
4,497 D
32.2%
51.5%
15.6%
WARD 41
12,854
4,834
6,258
1,728
34
1,424 D
37.6%
48.7%
13.4%
WARD 42
15,901
5,580
8,232
1,987
102
2,652 D
35.1%
51.8%
12.5%
hake 43
11,865
3,492
6,895
1,352
126
3,403 D
29.4%
58.1%
11.4%
WARD 44
8,266
833
7,202
155
76
6,369 D
10.1%
87.1%
1.9%
WARD 45
13,460
4,547
6,891
1,976
46
2,344 D
33.8%
51.2%
14.7%
HARD 46
11,717
2,245
9,038
281
153
6,793 D
19.2%
77.1%
2.4%
WARD 47
6,185
470
5,687
6
22
5,217 D
7.6%
91.9%
.1%
WARD 48
13,139
5,019
6,433
1,553
134
1,414 D
38.2%
49.0%
11.8%
WARD 49
15,863
4,949
9,820
956
138
4,871 D
31.2%
61.9%
6.0%
WARD 50
17,652
4,731
12,118
690
113
7,387 D
26.8%
68.6%
3.9%
WARD 51
12,636
3,125
8,231
1,179
101
5,106 D
24.7%
65.1%
9.3%
WARD 52
17,032
3,147
13,535
234
116
10,388 D
18.5%
79.5%
1.4%
WARD 53
14,750
4,219
9,776
709
46
5,557 D
28.6%
66.3%
4.8%
WARD 54
14,786
3,236
10,956
537
57
7,720 D
21.9%
74.1%
3.6%
WARD 55
17,234
7,233
8,057
1,900
44
824 D
42.0%
46.8%
11.0%
WARL so
20,464
0,691
12,472
1.165
76
5,781 C
32.8%
61.12
5.71
WARD 57
15,425
5,627
8,235
1,515
48
2.608
D
36.5%
53.4%
9.8%
MARD 50
16,250
7,603
9.189
1.324
54
1.506 C
42.0%
50.2%
7.2%
WARE 54
11.85c
3.0c7
8,2t1
353
135
5.194 C
25.9%
69.71
3.3%
WARD or
11,33C
950
10.223
74
83
5.273 C
8.41
90.2%
.7%
WARD 61
16,525
7,010
8,036
1,428
51
1,026 D
42.4%
48.6%
8.6%
MARD 62
15,461
6,301
7,338
1,777
45
1,037 0
40.8%
47.5%
11.5%
WARD 63
13,174
5,781
6,424
909
60
643 D
43.9%
48.8%
6.9%
WARD 64
10,528
4,552
5,060
860
56
508 D
43.2%
48.1%
8.2%
WARD 65
10,062
3,492
5,171
1,324
75
1,679 D
34.7%
51.4%
13.2%
WARD 66
20,937
8,250
9,770
2,782
135
1,520 D
39.4%
46.7%
13.3%
2,002,512
TOTAL
850,117
254,153
525,768
63,506
6,690
271,615 D
29.9%
61.8%
7.5%
Source: America Votes #8, Scammon.
ELECTION
72
Election
Report
The Cities
New York City
POLITICAL/RESEARCH DIVISION Republican National Committee, Bob Dole, Chairman
RNC RESEARCH DIVISION
NOVEMBER 22, 1972
ELECTION '72
BIG CITIES REPORT
New York, New York
Introduction
An analysis of selected assembly districts indicates that the Nixon nation-
wide landslide reached even into the Democratic bastion of New York City.
Although it was not enough to carry "Gotham," the GOP vote total continued to
show Republican trends among several major voting blocks--notably New York's
Catholic vote. Catholic Districts in Brooklyn, Queens and Staten Island showed
Nixon majorities ranging from 66.2% to 76.7%.
At the same time gains were made in traditionally Democratic areas. Some gains
were registered among the city's black population while more significant gains
were accomplished in Jewish areas. It is interesting to note that in several
black areas of the city, the President's vote matched that of Senator Javits
in his 1968 Senatorial race.
What follows is an analysis of the black, Catholic, Jewish, and silk-stocking
voting districts of New York.
Note:
- All 1972 vote totals and percentages for President Nixon and Senator
McGovern include the votes they received on the conservative and liberal
tickets respectively. The 1972 figures do not include votes received by
minor party candidates.
- The New York legislature redistricted itself in 1965, 1966, and twice
since 1968. Comparisons have been made in only those Assembly Districts
that retained a somewhat similar population composition as they had in
the past, even though possessing different boundaries than before.
The Catholic Vote
The 1968, President Nixon's eighteen top assembly districts in New York City
were predominantly Catholic districts. An examination of the President's per-
formance in several of these districts indicate that the Catholic trend away
from "liberal" Democrats to the GOP is continuing. It is interesting to note
that in these Catholic Assembly Districts George Wallace ran as much as 5% ahead
of his city-wide average in 1968.
New York, New York
(Catholic Vote cont'd.)
Page 2
Assembly
1972
1968
District
Nixon
McGovern
Nixon
HHH
Wallace
49th Brooklyn
76.7%
23.3%
61%
32%
7%
(Bay Bridge)
50th Brooklyn
73.9%
26.1%
60%
33%
7%
(Bay Bridge)
20th Queens
66.2%
33.8%
56%
36%
8%
(Cambria, Hollis,
now the 23rd)
6lst Richmond
73.4%
26.6%
53%
38%
9%
(Staten Island
was the 59th)
25th Queens
66.8%
33.2%
51%
44%
5%
(Douglaston
was the 22nd)
The Black Vote
George McGovern and the Democratic Party continued their hold on black voters
as evidenced by selected results in New York City. However, the GOP vote did
increase by an average of 7% in these districts.
Assembly
1972
1968
District
Nixon
McGovern
Nixon
HHH
Wallace
70th--South
16.9%
83.1%
10.9%
87.2%
.8%
Harlem
72nd--Central
18.3%
81.7%
6.9%
91.3
.3%
Harlem
78th--Crotona
13.7%
86.3%
8.7%
89.3%
.8%
Park
The higher percentages received by the President almost match the black vote
received by Senator Javits in his 1968 race.
Assembly
District
Javits, 1968*
Nixon 1972
70
17%
16.9%
72
18%
18.3%
78
18%*
13.7%
*
These totals do not include the small vote won by the Senator on the Liberal
Party ticket
New York, New York
Page 3
Jewish Vote
The districts below are heavily Jewish lower-middle and middle-income urban
residential neighborhoods. However, these districts are undergoing change--
becoming more Black and Puerto Rican--thus affecting year to year comparisons.
Note, however, the rather constant increase in the Republican share of this vote.
Republican Share of the Total Vote for President
1964-1972
Assembly
District
1964
1968
1972
76 Bronx
(Morrisania--Tremont)
19%
22%
27.7%
61 Manhattan
17%
23%
32%
(Lower East Side--
now the 63rd A.D.)
40 Brooklyn
8%
16%
24.9%
(East Flatbush--
Brownsville--East
N.Y.)
41 Brooklyn
18%
31%
51.1%
(Crown Heights--
East Flatbush)
48 Brooklyn
23%
32%
58.2%
(Borough Park)
Some selected precinct results in other Jewish areas reaffirm an increasing
willingness to vote for the GOP.
Assembly District 27, precinct 24--Middle-income-Jewish
Nixon
330
56.7%
McGovern
250
42.9%
Other
2
.4%
Total
582
100%
Assembly District 47
precinct 8--Jewish
Nixon
302
42.7%
McGovern
406
57.3%
Other
0
0
Total
708
100%
New York, New York
Page 4
Silk Stocking Analysis
Kevin Phillips attempted to show in his "Emerging Republican Majority" a
trend away from the GOP in so-called silk-stocking Districts in the North-
east United States. However, an examination of the 66th Assembly District which
includes Park and Fifth Avenues shows a steady increase of the GOP share of
the vote from the low point reached in 1964.
Assembly District
1968
1964
1968
1972
26th--Manhattan
57%
28%
38%
48%
President Nixon's share of the vote in the 66th equaled his city-wide average
of 48.4% of the vote although the vote for the President did not reach the %
he garnered against JFK in 1960.
The City Vote for Preside nf Complete
MANHATTAN
Nixon
McGovern
* A.D.
Rep.
Con.
Total
Dem.
Lib.
Total
€2 Lower Manhattan- Part Richmond
7,068
585
7,653
8,746
723
9,469
63 Lower East Side
9,053
862
9,915
19,371
1,655
21.026
64 Greenwich Village-West Side
15,554
1,617
17,171
35,270
3,907
39,177
65 East Side-Gramercy Park-UN
23,589
2,708
26,297
29,904
3,575
33,479
86 East, West Midtown
25,162
1.924
27,086
26,930
3,025
29,955
€7 West Side-Lincoln Center
14,584
1,295
1.5,879
20,403
2,650
32,053
68 Yorkville-East Harlem
18,153
1,681
9,834
24,841
2,316
27,157
€9 West Side (S2-109)
10,157
942
/1,099
33,660
3,728
37,388
70 South Harlem
4,025
374
4,399
20,440
1,143
21,583
West Side Fort Washington
8,765
878
9,643
24,104
2,297
26,401
72 Central Harlem
4,729
479
5,208
21,989
1,233
23,222
73 Washington Heights-Inwood
18,452
2,738
21,190
21,SS3
2,055
23.938
74 Upper Harlem- City College
3,136
357
3,493
27,156
1,532
28,999
Totals
163,427
16,440
179,867
323,997
29,850
353,847
McGovern's majority, 173,980
BROOKLYN
Nixon
McGovern
Rep.
Con.
Total
Dem.
Lib.
Total
A.D.
*
38 East New York-Part in Queens
9,458
1,432
10.890
4,357
296
4.653
39 Fiatlands-Canarsie-East New York
19,891
2,558
22,449
21,786
1,369
23,155
40 East Flatbush-Erownsville- East N. Y.
3,300
935
4.235
11,979
730
12,709
41 Crown Heights-East Flatbush
18.127
3,431
21,558
19.249
1,323
20.572
42 Midwood-Sheepshead Bay
27,598
4,066
31,664
21.079
1,656
22,735
43 Flatbush-Midwood
14.459
1,634
16,093
20,388
1,568
21,956
44 Flatbush-Parkville
18,509
1,707
20,216
23,223
1,874
25,097
45 Sheepshead Bay-Neck Road
21,402
2,078
23,480
32,026
2,545
34,571
45 Coney Island-Sea Gate
18.586
1,538
20,124
26,251
1,887
28,138
47 Bensonhurst-Bath Beach
23.668
2,297
25,965
19,050
1,336
20,386
48 Berough Park
23,897
2,278
26,175
17,371
1,397
18,768
4? Fort Hamilton-Bay Ridge
31,303
2,661
33,964
9,722
560
10,232
50 Bay Ridge-Borough Park
28,610
3,031
31,641
10,604
567
11.171
51 South Brooklyn-Bay Ridge
22,345
2,303
24,648
12,909
845
13,754
52 Brooklyn Heights-South Brooklyn
14,512
1,580
16,092
16,089
1,467
17,556
53 Bedford Stuyvesant-Crown Heights
2,842
259
3,101
16.220
1,486
17,706
54 Bushwick-Brownsville
2,142
227
2,369
11,183
976
12,159
55 Bedford Stuyvesant-Bushwick
2,238
211
2,449
13,939:
1,118
15,057
Page 5
56 Bedford Stuyesant
2,674
251
2,925
16,646
1,267
17,913
57 South Williamsburg-Fort Greene
7,845
930
8,775
12,770
2.329
15,090
5S Greenpoint-Williamsburg
15,795
1,916
17,711
8.232
2,252
10,484
E2 Ridgewood-Eushwick
6,608
699
7,307
1,439
10,051
335.809
38,022
378,831
353,685
30,287
383.972
Totals
New York, New York
No Govern's majority, 10,141
*
A.D.
-
Assembly District
*
A.D.
Assembly District
THE BRONX
McGovern
Nixon
*
A.D.
Total
Dem.
Lib.
Total
Rep.
Con.
5,647
602
6,249
15,567
1,096
16.663
75 Mott Haven-South Bronx
76 Morrisania-Tremont
637
8,027
19,671
1,247
20,918
7,340
3,893
450
3,843
15,005
814
15,819
7. Lower Bronx-Hunts Point
14,761
749
15,510
78 Crotona Park-Southern Boulevard
2,239
228
2,467
79 West Farms
2.854
260
3,114
12,773
698
13,471
30,807
5,608
36,415
9,489
757
10.246
80 City Island-Morris Park
26,327
39,482
3,175
42,657
81 Pelham Parkway-Co-op City
23,460
2,867
2,375
15,639
16,621
1,211
17,832
82 University Heights-Kingsbridge
13,264
23,763
3,880
27,642
21,854
1,793
23,647
83 Bedford Park
2,581
16,924
24,924
2,480
27,404
84 Highbridge-Riverdale
14,343
3,836
24,000
20,400
1.393
21,793
S5 Parkchester-Pelham
20,164
23,107
26,794
18,426
1,371
19,797
86 Riverdale-North Bronx
3,687
27,061
197,441
228,973
16,784
245,757
Totals
170,380
McGovern's majority, 48,316
QUEENS
Nixon
McGovern
Con.
Total
Dem.
Lib.
Total
A.D.
Rep.
19.079
3,058
22,137
19,659
1.652
21.311
22 Rockaway-Rosedale
4,849
31.229
14.371
1,549
15,920
23 Jamaice-Fayside
26.380
21.238
23.991
29,377
3.529
32,906
24 Dougalston-Little Neck
2,753
30.501
6.186
36,687
16,380
1,848
18.228
25 Little Neck-Bayside
22.501
3.379
25.970
24,390
2.696
27,056
26 College Folnt-Whitestone
26.714
27 Jamaica-St. Albans
18,012
2.449
20,461
24.189
2.525
23,778
29,242
2.910
32.152
25 Fluscing-Forest Hills
21,247
2,531
29 Suringfield Gardens- St. Albans
6,763
938
7,701
25,930
2,821
28.751
00 Middle Village-Glendale
3,101
(24,093
17,508
1,623
19.131
20,992
31 Forest Hills-Richmond Hill
29,024
4,914
:33,938
12,076
1,164
13.240
16,018
21,759
1,709
23.468
32 Wocdhaven-Howard Beach
13,774
2,244
33 Maspoth-Elmhurst
32,768
6,024
138,792
8,930
889
9,819
34 Jackson Heights-Corona
15,957
2,143
18,100
16,030
1,402
17.432
35 Astoria-College Point
25,826
30,307
11,818
1,130
12.948
4,481
20,190
2,488
22,678
12,923
1,291
14.214
36 Lonz Island City-Woodside
37 Long Island City-Maspeth
26,967
4,281
30,348
9,961
868
10.830
38 Woodhaven
14,850
2,351
17,201
3,820
492
4.312
Totals
365,259
4.23,429
298,363
30,099
328,462
58,170
Nixon's majority, 94,967
RICHMOND
9 Page
Nixon
McGovern
Rep.
Total
Dem.
Lib.
Total
*
A.D.
Con.
7,923
39,371
9,779
918
10,697
60 Tottenvile-South Beach
31,448
11,610
995
12,605
61 New Brighton-Westerleigh
29,413
5,359
34,772
62 St. George-Tompskinsville
9,147
1,386
10,533
5,295
529
5,824
New York, New York
70,008
14,668
84,676
26,684
2,442
29,126
Totals
Nixon's majority, 53,550
NINON
GOVERN
Rep.
Con
Total
Dem.
Lib.
Total
City
1,104.883
154,361
1,259,244
1,231,702
109,462
1,341,164
Republican
National
Committee.
November 22, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
GORDON STRACHAN
FROM:
ED DeBOLT
W
RE:
PRECINCT REPORT
The attached report contains 1972
Presidential election results for over 40 selected precincts around
the country. The returns from these various precincts give an
indication of voting trends in heavy Democrat areas as well as a
number of ethnic, youth and blue collar precincts.
Election returns from selected precincts
in Cuyahoga County, Ohio and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania are still
unavailable but will be forwarded to you just as soon as they are
obtained. Portions of these precinct returns will also be utilized
in compiling the big city reports due to you beginning next week.
/jg
attachment
cc: Senator Bob Dole
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast, Washington, D.C. 20003. (202) 484-6500.
RNC Political/Research Division
11/21/72
1972 SELECTED PRECINCT VOTE RETURNS
tegory
Description
State
County
City
Polit. Sub-Div.
Nixon
%
McGovern
%
Other
%
-mocrat Straight Demo, row houses
Penn.
Allegheny
Pittsburgh
Ward 16, Prec. 5
170
37.2
278
60.8
9
2
Heavy Demo, 2 to 1 HHH
Wisc.
Milwaukee
Cudahy
Ward .,Prec. 1
959
46.7
1,030
50.2
61
3.1
Heavy Demo, 2 to 1 HHH
Wisc.
Milwaukee
Milwaukee
Ward 3, Prec. 2
306
33.8
582
65.5
14
.7
thnic
Lower-middle Irish
Mass.
Suffolk
Boston
Ward 13, Prec. 7
287
34.3
541
64.8
8
.9
Lower-middle Irish
Mass.
Suffolk
Boston
Ward 13, Prec. 8
293
31.6
627
67.7
5
.7
Lower-middle Irish
Mass.
Suffolk
Boston
Ward Prec. 9
305
34.8
565
64.7
5
.5
Middle Irish
Mass.
Norfolk
Quincy
Ward 5
4,577
46.5
5,221
53.0
42
.5
Middle-upper Irish
Mass.
Norfolk
Milton
Prec. 6
1,231
48.7
1,282
50.7
11
.6
Mixed Irish
Mass.
Norfolk
Dedham
Prec. 4
1,175
46.1
1,350
53.0
22
.9
Middle Italian
Mass.
Suffolk
Boston
Ward ,Prec. 1
277
29.7
652
70.0
2
.3
Middle Italian
Mass.
Suffolk
Boston
Ward 1
4,308
31.4
9,326
68.1
57
.5
Middle Italian
Mass.
Suffolk
Boston
Ward 3,Prec. 1
381
36.8
642
62.3
10
.9
Lower end Jewish
N.Y.
Bronx
--
A.D. 81, Prec. 37
141
28.8
345
70.4
4
.8
Lower end Jewish
N.Y.
Bronx
--
A.D. 81, Prec. 42
152
32.2
314
66.5
6
1.3
Lower end Jewish
N.Y.
Kings
--
A.D. 47, Prec. 8
302
42.7
406
57.3
--
--
Middle Jewish
N.Y.
Kings
--
A.D. Prec. 13
231
42.1
317
57.7
1
.2
Middle Jewish
N.Y.
Queens
--
A.D. Prec. 24
330
56.7
250
42.9
2
.4
Middle Jewish
N.Y.
Queens
--
A.D. 28, Prec. 52
356
42.1
490
57.9
--
--
Polish (95%)
Mich.
Wayne
Hamtramck
A.D. 19, Prec. 11
165
51.7
149
46.7
5
1.6
Polish (95%)
Mich.
Wayne
Hamtramck
A.D. Prec. 35
117
45.2
142
54.8
-
--
Polish (95%)
Mich.
Wayne
Hamtramck
A.D. 19,Prec. 38
127
40.6
175
55.9
11
3.5
Low Span.Amer. (85%)
Cal.
Los Angeles
Los Angeles
Prec. 923
138
35.8
241
62.4
7
1.8
Low Span.Amer. (75%)
Cal.
Los Angeles
Los Angeles
Prec. 1,858
74
26.4
198
70.7
8
2.9
Low Span.Amer. (86%)
Cal.
Los Angeles
Los Angeles
Prec. 2,720
51
19.5
204
78.2
6
2.3
Low Span.Amer. (60%)
Texas
Bexar
San Antonio
Prec. 204
227
19.0
961
80.5
6
.5
Low Span.Amer. (75%)
Texas
Bexar
San Antonio
Prec. 102
69
23.8
220
75.9
1
.3
High Span.Amer. (74%)
Cal.
Los Angeles
Los Angeles
Prec. 4
266
70.0
105
27.6
9
2.4
High Span.Amer. (63%)
Cal.
Los Angeles
Los Angeles
Prec. 24
335
70.4
135
28.4
6
1.2
High Span.Amer.(54%)
Cal.
Los Angeles
Los Angeles
Prec. 27
225
71.9
87
27.8
1
.3
High Span.Amer.(50%)
Texas
Bexar
San Antonio
Prec. 143
557
68.2
258
31.6
2
.2
High Span.Amer. (60%)
Texas
Bexar
San Antonio
Prec. 213
452
48.5
479
51.4
1
.1
High Span.Amer. (60%)
Texas
Bexar
San Antonio
Prec. 226
786
47.7
856
51.9
7
.4
Yankee WASP
Mass.
Essex
Manchester
--
1,620
56.9
1,215
42.7
9
.4
Yankee WASP
Mass.
Middlesex
Weston
---
3,742
61.9
2,263
37.4
31
.7
Yankee WASP
Mass.
Norfolk
Dover
--
1,802
69.5
778
30.0
11
.5
RNC Political/Research Division
age 2
ategory
Description
State
County
City
Polit. Sub-Div.
Nixon
%
McGovern
%
Other
%
outh
Col. student (62%18-20)
Mich.
Washtenaw
Ann Arbor
A.D.53,Ward 1,Prec.3
273
18.5
1,190
80.6
12
.9
Col. student (47%18-20)
Mich.
Washtenaw
Ann Arbor
A.D.53,Ward 1,Prec.8
283
26.1
796
73.4
5
.5
Col.student(67%18-20)
Mich.
Washtenaw
Ann Arbor
A.D.53,Ward 2,Prec.3
317
26.6
864
72.6
9
.8
Blue collar under 30
Mich
Oakland Madison Heights A.D.15,Ward 1,Prec.16 466
57.6
322
39.8
21
2.6
Inion
$10-14,000
income (UAW)
Mich.
Wayne
Garden City A.D.33,Prec.4
450
60.0
254
33.9
46
6.1
$10-14,000
income (UAW)
Mich.
Wayne
Lincoln Park
A.D.30,Prec. 1
449
54.8
354
43.2
16
2.0
$10-15,000
income (B.Col.)
Penn.
Allegheny
Pittsburgh
Ward 16, Prec. 6
266
44.0
325
53.8
13
2.2
$10-15,000
income (B.Col.)
Penn.
Allegheny
Pittsburgh
Ward 17,Prec.4
263
42.1
353
56.5
9
1.4
$10-15,000
income (B.Col.) Penn.
Allegheny
Pittsburgh
Ward 19,Prec.22
421
57.0
300
40.6
17
2.4
$10-15,000
income (B.Col.) Penn.
Allegheny
Pittsburgh
Ward 19,Prec.23
543
60.6
337
37.6
16
1.8
$10-15,000
income (B.Col.) Penn.
Allegheny
Pittsburgh
Ward 20,Prec.17
523
65.9
266
33.6
4
.5
$10-15,000
income (B.Col.) Penn.
Allegheny
Pittsburgh
Ward 20,Prec.18
308
63.7
166
34.4
9
1.9
Republican
National
Committee.
November 21, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
GORDON STRACHAN
FROM:
ED DeBOLT EQ
The enclosed State House report
reviews Republican fortunes in gubernatorial elections, other statewide
constitutional offices and the state legislatures. Whereas President
Nixon won by landslide margins in virtually every state, the results
for GOP gubernatorial and state legislative candidates were mixed
at best. Among Governors, the GOP dropped a net of one additional
seat and now are a 31 to 19 minority. The GOP captured formerly
Democrat-controlled State Houses in Missouri and North Carolina
while losing GOP State Houses in Delaware, Illinois and Vermont. Three
Republican incumbents (Evans, Moore and Ray) and four incumbent Democrat
Governors were re-elected. Two GOP incumbents (Ogilvie and Peterson)
were defeated. No Democrat incumbents lost re-election bids.
Among the State Legislatures, in the
lower houses the GOP made significant gains in Alaska, Connecticut,
Indiana, Missouri, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Utah and West Virginia
while suffering setbacks in Minnesota, Oregon and South Dakota. In State
Senate races, Republicans made good showings in Connecticut, Maine, New York
and North Carolina while experiencing losses in Iowa, Ohio and South Dakota.
/jg
enc.
cc: Senator Bob Dole
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast, Washington, D.C. 20003. (202) 484-6500.
ELECTION
72
Election
Report
The Statehouses
POLITICAL/RESEARCH DIVISION Republican National Committee, Bob Dole, Chairman
RNC RESEARCH DIVISION
November 21, 1972
1972 GUBERNATORIAL ELECTIONS
Results
State
Name*
Total Vote
Percentage
Arkansas
Len E. Blaylock (R)
145,744
24.2
DALE BUMPERS (D)
455,538
75.8
Delaware
Russell W. Peterson (R)
109,583
48.0
Virginia M. Lyndall (A)
1,604
.7
SHERMAN W. TRIBBITT (D)
117,274
51.3
Illinois
Richard B. Ogilvie (R)
2,226,207
49.3
DANIEL WALKER (D)
2,291,540
50.7
Indiana
OTIS R. BOWEN (R)
1,193,631
57.2
Matthew E. Welsh (D)
893,348
42.8
Iowa
ROBERT RAY (R)
705,778
58.5
Robert D. Dilley (AI)
13,578
1.2
Paul Frazenburg (D)
486,076
40.3
Kansas
Morris Kay (R)
332,357
37.3
ROBERT DOCKING (D)
558,788
62.7
Missouri
CHRISTOPHER (KIT) BOND (R)
1,008,343
55.2
Edward L. Dowd (D)
817,792
44.8
Montana
Ed Smith (R)
145,194
45.9
THOMAS L. JUDGE (D)
171,209
54.1
New Hampshire
MELDRIM THOMSON JR. (R)
133,702
41.5
Malcolm McLane (Ind.)
62,469
19.4
Roger J. Crowley Jr. (D)
126,107
39.1
North Carolina
JAMES E. HOLSHOUSER (R)
762,681
51.1
Arlis P., Pettyjohn (AI)
8,212
0.5
Hargrove (Skipper) Bowles Jr. (D)
721,881
48.4
North Dakota
Richard F. Larsen (R)
131,658
49.1
ARTHUR A. LINK (D)
136,583
50.9
Rhode Island
Herbert F. DeSimone (R)
185,841
47.0
PHILIP W. NOEL (D)
209,982
53.0
South Dakota
Carveth Thompson (R)
121,838
40.0
RICHARD F. KNEIP (D)
182,985
60.0
Texas
Henry C. Grover (R)
1,434,383
45.0
DOLPH BRISCOE (D)
1,535,752
48.1
Ramsey Muniz (LRU)
196,774
6.2
Deborah Leonard (SW)
21,782
0.7
Results
State
Name
Total Vote
Percentage
Utah
Nicholas Strike (R)
144,885
30.4
CALVIN L. RAMPTON (D)
331,198
69.6
Vermont
Luther F. Hackett (R)
81,062
43.5
Bernard Sanders (LU)
2,003
1.1
THOMAS P. SALMON (D)
103,129
55.4
Washington
DANIEL J. EVANS (R)
620,405
53.3
Albert Rosellini (D)
542,654
46.7
West Virginia
ARCH A. MOQRE (R)
413,865
54.7
J.D. Rockefellar (D)
342,699
45.3
* NAMES INCAPS INDICATE VICTORS
Minority Parties Key
A
American
AI
American Independent
Ind. Independent
LRU La Raza Unida
SW
Socialist Workers
RNC RESEARCH DIVISION
November 21, 1972
Constitutional Officers
State
Name
Party
Next Election
Alabama
Governor George Wallace
D
1974
Lt. Governor Jere Beasley
D
1974
Attorney Gen. William Baxley
D
1974
Sec. State (Mrs. ) Mabel Amos
D
1974
Treasurer Agnes Baggett
D
1974
Alaska
Governor William A. Egan
D
1974
Lt. Governor H.A. Boucher
D
1974
Attorney Gen. John Havelock
D
appointed by governor
Commissioner of Revenue
Eric Wohlforth
D
Appointed by governor
Arizona
Governor Jack Williams
R
1974
Lt. Governor
-
Attorney Gen. Gary K. Nelson
R
1974
Sec. State Wesley Bolin
D
1974
*
Treasurer Ernest Garfield
R
1974
* Note: Cannot seek re-election
Arkansas
Governor Dale Bumpers
D
1974
Lt. Governor Robert Riley
D
1974
Attorney Gen. Jim Guy Tucker
D
1974
Sec. State Kelly Bryant
D
1974
Treasurer Nancy Hall
D
1974
California
Governor Ronald Reagan
R
1974
Lt. Governor Ed Reinecke
R
1974
Attorney Gen. Evelle Younger
R
1974
Sec. State Edmund G. Brown, Jr.
D
1974
Colorado
Governor John A. Love
R
1974
Lt. Governor John Vanderhoof
R
1974
Attorney Gen. Duke W. Dunbar
R
1974
Sec. State Byron Anderson
R
1974
Treasurer Palmer Burch
R
1974
Connecticut
Governor Thomas J. Meskill
R
1974
Lt. Governor T. Clark Hull
R
1974
Attorney Gen. Roger Killian
D
Appointed
Sec. State Gloria Schaffer
D
1974
Delaware
Governor Sherman W. Tribbitt
D
1974
Lt. Governor Eugene D. Bookhammer
R
1974
Attorney Gen. W. Laird Stabler
R
1974
Sec. State Walton Simpson
R
To be appointed in
January
Treasurer Mary D. Jornlin
R
1974
Auditor F. Earl McGinnes
D
1974
State
Name
Party
Next Election
Florida
Governor Reubin Askew
D
1974
Lt. Governor Tom Adams
D
1974
Attorney Gen. Robert L. Shevin
D
1974
Sec. State Richard Stone
D
1974
Georgia
Governor Jimmy Carter
D
1974
Lt. Governor Lester Maddox
D
1974
Attorney Gen Arthur Bolton
D
1974
Sec. State Ben W. Fortson
D
1974
Treasurer Bill Burson
D
1974
Hawaii
Governor John A. Burns
D
1974
Lt. Governor George Ariyoshi
D
1974
Attorney Gen. Bertram Kanbara
D
Appointed
Idaho
Governor Ceqil Andrus
D
1974
Lt. Governor Jack Murphy
R
1974
Attorney Gen. W. Anthony Park
D
1974
Sec. State Pete T. Cenarrusa
R
1974
Treasurer Marjorie Moon
D
1974
Illinois
Governor Daniel Walker
D
1976
Lt. Governor Neil Hartigan
D
1976
Attorney Gen. William Scott
R
1976
Sec. State Michael Howlett.
D
1976
Treasurer Alan Dickson
R
1974
Indiana
Governor Otis Bowen
R
1976
Lt. Governor Robert Orre
R
1976
Attorney Gen. Theodore Sendall
R
1976
Sec. State Larry Conrad
D
1974
Iowa
Governor Robert Ray
R
1974
Lt. Governor Arthur Neu
R
1974
Attorney Gen. Richard Turner
R
1974
Sec. State Melvin Synhorst
R
1974
Treasurer Maurice Barringer
R
1974
Kansas
Governor Morris Docking
D
1974
Lt. Governor Dave Owen
R
1974
Attorney Gen. Bern Miller
D
1974
Sec. of State Elwill M. Shanahan
R
1974
Treasurer Tom Van Sickle
R
1974
Kentucky
Governor Wendell Ford
D
1975
Lt. Governor Julian Carroll
D
1975
Attorney Gen. Edward W. Hancock
D
1975
Sec. of State Thelma Stovall
D
1975
Treasurer Drexel R. Davis
D
1975
State
Name
Party
Next Election
Louisiana
Governor Edwin Edwards
D
1976
Lt. Governor Jas Fitzmorris
D
1976
Attorney Gen. William Ouste
D
1976
Sec. of State Wade 0. Martin
D
1976
Treasurer Mrs. Evelyn Parker
D
1976
Maine
Governor Kenneth Curtis
D
1974
Lt. Governor--none
Attorney Gen. Jas. Erwin*
R
1974
Sec. State Joseph Edgar
R
1974
Treasurer Norman Ferguson
R
1974
* Attorney Gen. will be elected
on January 3, 1973, by State
legislature John Lund (R)
is prominently mentioned as
successor
Maryland
Governor Marvin Mandel
D
1974
Lt. Governor Blair Lee
D
1974
Attorney Gen. Francis Burch
D
1974
Sec. State Blair Lee*
-
-
Treasurer John Luetkemeyer
D
1974
*appointed by Governor
Massachusetts
Governor Francis Sargent
R
1974
Lt. Governor Donald Dwight
R
1974
Attorney Gen. Robert H. Quinn
D
1974
Sec. State John F.X. Davoren
D
1974
Treasurer Robert Crane
D
1974
Michigan
Governor William Milliken
R
1974
Lt. Governor James H. Brickley
R
1974
Attorney Gen. Frank Kelley
D
1974
Sec. State Richard H. Austin
D
1974
Treasurer Allison Green
R
appointment
Minnesota
Governor Wendell Anderson
D
1974
Lt. Governor Rudy Perpich
D
1974
Attorney Gen. Warner Spannaus
D
1974
Sec. State Arlen I. Endahl
R
1974
Treasurer Val Bjornson
R
1974
Mississippi
Governor W.L. Waller
D
1975
Lt. Governor W. Winter
D
1975
Attorney Gen. A.F. Summer
D
1975
Sec. State Heber Ladner
D
1975
Treasurer Brad Dye
D
1975
State
Name
Party
Next Election
Missouri
Governor Christopher Bond*
R
1976
Lt. Gov. William Phelps
R
1976
Attorney Gen. John Danforth
R
1976
Sec. State James Kirkpatrick
R
1976
Treasurer James Spainhower
R
1976
*Note 1st Republican Governor
since 1940
Montana
Governor Thomas Judge
D
1976
Lt. Gov. William Christiansen
D
1976
Attorney Gen. Robert Woodall
R
1976
Sec. State Frank Murray
D
1976
Treasurer Hallis Conner
R
No new election--
abolishing office
Nebraska
Governor James Exon
D
1974
Lt. Governor Frank Marsh
R
1974
Attorney Gen. Clarence Meyer
R
1974
Sec. State Alan Beerman
R
1974
Treasurer Wayne Swanson
R
1974
Nevada
Governor Michael 'Callaghan
D
1974
Lt. Governor Harry M. Reid
D
1974
Attorney Gen. Robert List
R
1974
Sec. State John Koontz
D
1974
Treasurer Michael Mirabelli
D
1974
New Hampshire
Governor Meldrim Thomson
R
1974
Lt. Governor--none
Attorney Gen. Warren Rudman
None
Appointed
Sec. of State Robert L. Stark
R
Elected by legislature
Treasurer Robert W. Flanders
R
Elected by legislature
New Jersey
Governor William Cahill*
R
1973
Lt. Governor--none
Attorney Gen. George Kugler
R
Sec. State Paul Sherwin
R
Treasurer Joseph. McCrane
R
*Attorney General, Sec. State
and Treasurer. are appointed by
the Governor
New Mexico
Governor Bruce King
D
1974
Lt. Governor Robert Mondragon
D
1974
Attorney Gen. David Norvell
D
1974
Sec. State Betty Riorina
D
1974
Treasurer Jesse Kornegay
D
1974
New York
Governor Nelson Rockefeller
R
1974
Lt. Governor Malcolm Wilson
R
1974
Attorney Gen. Louis Lefkowitz
R
1974
Sec. State John Lomenzo
R
Appointed
Treasurer Arthur Levitt
D
1974
State
Name
Party
Next Election
North Carolina Governor Robert Holshouser
R
1976
Lt. Governor James B. Hunt
D
1976
Attorney Gen. Robert Morgan
D
1976
Sec. State Thad Euer
D
1976
Treasurer Edwin Gill
D
1976
North Dakota
Governor Arthur Link
D
1976
Lt. Governor Wayne Sanstead
D
1976
Attorney Gen. Alan I. Olson
R
1976
Sec. State Ben Meier
R
1976
Treasurer Walter Christiansen
D
1976
Ohio
Governor John J. Gilligan
D
1974
Lt. Governor John W. Brown
R
1974
Attorney Gen. William Brown
D
1974
Sec. State Ted W. Brown
R
1974
Treasurer Mrs. Gertrude Donahey
D
1974
Oklahoma
Governor David Hall
D
1974
Lt. Governor George Nigh
D
1974
Attorney Gen. Larry Derryberry
D
1974
Sec. State John Rogers
D
1974
Treasurer Leo Winters
D
1974
Oregon
Governor Tom McCall
R
1974*
Lt. Governor--none
Attorney Gen. Lee Johnson
D
1976
Sec. State Clay Myers
R
1976
Treasurer James Redden
D
1976
* Governor cannot succeed himself
Pennsylvania
Governor Milton Shapp
D
1974
Lt. Governor Ernest Kline
D
1974
Attorney Gen. J. Shane Cramer
D
1974
Sec. State C. Delores Tucker
D
1974
Treasurer
Rhode Island
Governor Philip Noel
D
1974
Lt. Governor J. Joseph Garrahy
D
1974
Attorney Gen. Richard Israel
R
1974
Sec. State Robert Burns
D
1974
Treasurer Raymond Hawksley
D
1974
South Carolina Governor John C. West
D
1974
Lt. Governor Earle E. Morris
D
1974
Attorney Gen. Daniel R. Mcleod
D
1974
Sec. State 0. Frank Thornton
D
1974
Treasurer Grady L. Patterson
D
1974
State
Name
Party
Next Election
South Dakota
Governor Richard Kneip
D
1974
Lt. Governor William Dougherty
D
1974
Attorney General Kermit A. Sande
D
1974
Sec. State Lorna Herseth
D
1974
Treasurer David Volk
R
1974
Tennessee
Governor Winfield Dunn
R
1974
Lt. Governor John F. Wilder
D
elected by. State
Assembly
Attorney Gen. David M. Pack
D
appointed by Governor
Sec. State Joe C. Carr
D
elected by State
Treasurer
Assembly
Texas
Governor Dolph Briscoe
D
1974
Lt. Governor William Hobby
D
1974
No
Attorney Gen. John Hill
D
1974
Opposition
Sec. State to be appointed
Treasurer Jesse James
D
Utah
Governor Calvin Rampton
D
1976
Lt. Governor--none
Attorney Gen. Vernon Romney
R
1976
Sec. State Clyde Miller
D
1976
Treasurer David Duncan
D
1976
Vermont
Governor Thomas Salmon
D
1974
Lt. Governor John S. Burgess
R
1974
Attorney Gen. Kimberly Bcheney
R
1974
Sec. State Richard Thomas
R
1974
Treasurer Frank Davis
R
1974
* Democrats picked up a
governorship
Virginia
Governor Linwood Holton
R
1973
Lt. Governor Henry Howell
I-D
1973
Attorney Gen. Andrew Miller
D
1973
Sec. State Cynthia Newman
R
1973
Treasurer--none
* 1st GOP Governor in the
20th century
Washington
Governor Daniel J. Evans
R
1976
Lt. Governor John Cherberg
D
1976
Attorney Gen. Slade Gorton
R
1976
Sec. State A. Ludlow Kramer
R
1976
Treasurer Robert O'Brien
D
1976
West Virginia
Governor Arch Moore Jr.
R
1976
Lt. Governor
Attorney Gen. Chauncey Browning*
D
1976
Sec. State Edgar Heiskell *
R
1976
Treasurer John Kelly
D
1976
Auditor John Gates
R
1976
* Attorney Gen. and Sec. State
races are in process of re-
counting votés
State
Name
Party
Next Election
Wisconsin
Governor Patrick J. Lucey
D
1974
Lt. Governor Martin Schreiber
D
1974
Attorney Gen. Robert Warren
R
1974
Sec. State Robert Zimmerman
R.
1974
Treasurer
Wyoming
Governor Stanley Hathaway
R
1974
Lt. Governor--none
Attorney Gen. Clarence Brimmer
R
appointed
Sec. State Thyra Thomson
R
1974
Treasurer James Griffith
R
1974
POLITICAL COMPOSITION OF STATE LEGISLATURES
UPPER HOUSE
LOWER HOUSE
TOTALS
Rep.
Dem.
Rep.
Dem.
Changes
State
Rep.
Dem.
Other
Change
Change
Rep.
Dem.
Other
Change
Change
Rep.
Dem.
Rep.
Dem.
1
ALABAMA
0
35
0
-
-
2
104
0
-
-
2
139
-
-
ALASKA
11
9
0
+1
-1
19
20
1
+10
-11
30
29
+11
-12
ARIZONA
18
12
0
0
0
38
22
0
+4
-4
56
34
+4
-4
ARKANSAS
1
34
0
0
0
1
99
0
-1
+1
2
133
-1
+1
CALIFORNIA
2
19
19
0
0
-2
29
51
0
-8
+8
48
70
-8
+6
COLORADO
3
22
13
0
+1
-1
38
27
0
0
0
60
40
+1
-1
CONNECTICUT
4
23
13
0
+6
-5
95
56
0
+18
-44
118
69
+24
-49
DELAWARE
5
11
10
0
-2
+4
21
20
0
-2
+4
32
30
-4
+8
DIST. COLUMBIA
NOT APPLICABLE
FLORIDA
5
14
25
1
-1
-8
43
77
0
+5
-4
57
102
+4
-12
GEORGIA
5
8
48
0
+2
-2
28
152
0
+6
-21
36
200
+8
-23
HAWAII
6
8
16
0
-
-
1
16
35
0
-1
+1
24
51
-1
+1
IDAHO
23
12
0
+4
-4
51
19
0
+10
-10
74
31
+14
-14
ILLINOIS
30
29
0
+1
-1
89
88
0
-1
+1
119
117
0
0
INDIANA
27
23
C
-2
+2
73
27
0
+19
-19
100
50
+17
-17
IOWA
28
22
o
-10
+10
56
44
0
-7
+7
84
66
-17
+17
KANSAS 7
27
13
0
-5
+5
80
45
0
-4
the
107
58
-9
+9
KENTUCKY
1
15
23
o
-
-
23
72
0
I
-
43
95
(UM
I
LOUSIANA
8
I
38
0
0
0
4
101
0
+3
-3
5
139
+3
-3
MAINE
23
10
0
+5
-4
79
72
0
-1
+1
102
82
+4
-3
1
MARYLAND
10
33
0
-
-
21
121
0
-
)
31
154
CARD
-
7
MASSACHUSETTS
7
33
o
is
+3
52.
188
2
-10
+10
59
221
-13
+13
MICHIGAN
9
19
19
0
I
-
50
60
0
-2
+2
69
79
-2
+2
MINNESOTA 10
31
37
0
-3
+4
57
77
1
-13
+12
88
114
-16
+16
MISSISSIPPI 1
2
50
0
(4)
-
2
119
0
)
-
4
169
3
I
MISSOURI
13
21
0
+4
-4
66
97
0
+15
-15
79
118
+19
-19
MONTANA 11
23
27
0
-2
-3
45
54
0
-10
+5
68
81
-12
+2
NEBRASKA
12
NEVADA
6
14
0
-1
+1
15
25
0
-7
+7
21
39
-8
+8
NEW HAMPSHIRE
14
10
0
-1
+1
266
134
0
+15
-12
280
144
+14
-11
NEW JERSEY 1
28
9
0
-
-
59
21
0
-
-
87
30
-
-
NEW MEXICO
12
30
0
-2
+2
19
51
0
-3
+3
31
81
-5
+5
NEW YORK
37
23
0
+5
-2
83
67
0
+4
-4
120
90
+9
-6
POLITICAL COMPOSITION OF STATE LEGISLATURES
UPPERHOUSE
LOWER HOUSE
TOTALS
Rep.
Dem.
Rep.
Dem.
Changes
State
Rep.
Dem.
Other
Change
Change
Rep.
Dem.
Other
Change
Change
Rep.
Dem.
Rep.
Dem.
NORTH CAROLINA
15
35
0
+8
-8
35
85
0
+11
-11
50
120
+19
-19
NORTH DAKOTA
5
41
10
0
+3
-1
79
23
0
+21
-17
120
33
+24
-18
OHIO
17
16
0
-3
+3
41
58
0
-13
+13
58
74
-16
+16
OKLAHOMA
10
38
0
+1
-1
26
75
0
+5
-3
36
113
+6
-4
OREGON
12
18
0
-2
+2
27
33
0
-7
+7
39
51
-9
+9
PENNSYLVANIA
13
24
26
0
0
0
107
96
0
+17
-16
131
122
14
+17
-16
RHODE ISLAND
13
37
0
+4
-4
25
75
0
+1
0
38
112
+5
-4
SOUTH CAROLINA
4
42
0
+2
-2
21
103
0
+10
-10
25
145
+12
13
-12
SOUTH DAKOTA
17
18
O.
-7
+7
35
35
0
-10
+5
52
53
-17
+12
TENNESSEE
13
19
1
0
0
48
51
0
+5
-5
61
70
+5
-5
TEXAS
3
28
0
+1
-1
17
133
0
+7
-7
20
161
+8
-8
UTAH
16
13
0
0
+1
44
33
0
+13
-5
60
46
+13
16
-4
VERMONT
22
8
0
o
0
91
59
0
-3
+6
113
67
-3
1
+6
VIRGINIA
7
32
0
-
1
34
76
0
-
$
17
31
108
-
-
WASHINGTON
19
30
0
-1
+1
41
57
0
-7
+6
60
87
-8
+7
WEST VIRGINIA
10
24
0
-1
+1
43
57
0
+11
-11
53
81
+10
-10
WISCONSIN
18
15
0
-2
+2
62°
0
AD
-4
55
77
+2
-2
WYOMING
17
13
10
-2
+2
17
1
+4
-3
61
30
+2
-1
TOTALS
789
1,132
2
-2
-3
2,310
3,273
5
+109
-136
3,099
4,405
+107
-139
FOOTNOTES
1
5
No 1972 State Legislature elections
State Legislature reapportioned
2
6
Two vacancies will exist in new California
One vacancy in the upper house
Senate - special elections will be held
7
3
One recount pending in senate
One recount pending in the house
8
4
State Legislature elections -
Lower house reapportioned; one senate
Feb., 1972
seat vacant
FOOTNOTES
9
14
No senate races in 1972
Four recounts pending in the senate; seven
10
recounts pending in the house
State Legislature divides conservative VS.
15
liberal; Republicans are usually conservative
Lower house reapportioned
11
16
State Legislature reapportioned; one house
One recount pending in the senate; two
seat being recounted
recounts pending in the house
12
17
Uni-cameral, non-partisan legislature
State Legislature reapportioned; four
13
recounts pending in the house
One vacancy had existed in the house
GS
Dat you
Republican
Handy
These
National
TO
C,D ?
Committee.
November 20, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
GORDON STRACHAN
BRUCE KEHRLI
FROM:
ED DeBOLT
RE:
GOP TURNOUT ANALYSIS
Attached is a preliminary analysis
of the approximate number of GOP voters turning out and part-
icipating in the 1972 presidential electionin the requested
states.of Texas, ILlinois, Georgia, Michigan, Mississippi and
Delaware.
As a follow-up to this report we
have dispatched a staff member into Delaware and Michigan
to do a more detailed analysis of Republican voter turnout
for this election on a selected county basis and in some cases
even to the precinct level. In Delaware where partisan voter
registration information is available and where voter lists may
be available it is possible that we may have exact registered
Republican voter turnout figures by early next week. I will
advise you at that time of the status of that particular pro-
ject.
In preparing the attached approx-
imations of Republican turnout for approximations were cal-
culated for each state. The number of Republicans register-
ed was approximated by multiplying the most recent total
of registered voters by the average Republican vote for Pres-
ident since 1960. The number of Republicans voting was cal-
culated by multiplying the 1972 total presidential vote by the
average Republican vote for President since 1960. The approx-
imate number of Republicans voting was then divided by the
approximate number of Republicans in a state resulting in
an mate of 1972 Republican voter turnout percentage.
As I mentioned in my previous
memo any Republican voter turnout approximations such as
these are questionable at best due to the fact that partisan
registration information is not available in any of these
states except Delaware.
/st
cc: Senator Bob Dole
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast, Washington, D.C. 20003. (202) 484-6500.
RNC Political/Research Division
Preliminary Republican
Turnout Analysis
GOP Average
1972 Approximations
Vote %
1972 Nixon
GOP
GOP
GOP
1960 - 1972
Total Vote
Regis.
Turnout
Turnout %
DELAWARE
President
48.1
139,796
140,970
113,283
80.4
Senate
53.9
157,969
123,877
78.4
Governor
48.8
143,022
111,616
78.0
Average
50.3
147,418
116,372
78.9
ILLINOIS
President
49.2
2,745,352
3,057,943
2,241,106
73.3
Senate
51.8
3,219,541
2,301,884
71.5
Governor
48.3
3,002,005
2,182,072
72.7
Average
49.8
3,095,235
2,243,761
72.5
MICHIGAN
President
44.9
1,895,239
2,135,185
1,560,373
73.1
Senate
45.0
2,139,940
1,422,491
66.5
Governor
53.5
Average
47.8
2,137,563
1,274,410
69.8
TEXAS
President
47.9
2,272,656
2,442,900
1,637,761
67.0
Senate
48.6
2,478,600
1,554,684
62.7
Governor
37.0
1,887,000
1,179,816
62.5
Average
44.5
2,269,500
1,457,420
64.2
GEORGIA
President
49.2
794,766
1,048,544
521,338
49.7
MISSISSIPPI
President
50.9
498,680
445,375
323,770
72.7
Republican
National
Committee.
November 20, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
GORDON STRACHAN
BRUCE KEHRLI
FROM:
ED DeBOLT
RE:
GOP TURNOUT ANALYSIS
Attached is a preliminary analysis
of the approximate number of GOP voters turning out and part-
icipating in the 1972 presidential electionin the requested
states.of Texas, ILlinois, Georgia, Michigan, Mississippi and
Delaware.
As a follow-up to this report we
have dispatched a staff member into Delaware and Michigan
to do a more detailed analysis of Republican voter turnout
for this election on a selected county basis and in some cases
even to the precinct level. In Delaware where partisan voter
registration information is available and where voter lists may
be available it is possible that we may have exact registered
Republican voter turnout figures by early next week. I will
advise you at that time of the status of that particular pro-
ject.
In preparing the attached approx-
imations of Republican turnout for approximations were cal-
culated for each state. The number of Republicans register-
ed was approximated by multiplying the most recent total
of registered voters by the average Republican vote for Pres-
ident since 1960. The number of Republicans voting was cal-
culated by multiplying the 1972 total presidential vote by the
average Republican vote for President since 1960. The approx-
imate number of Republicans voting was then divided by the
approximate number of Republicans in a state resulting in
an estimate of 1972 Republican voter turnout percentage.
As I mentioned in my previous
memo any Republican voter turnout approximations such as
these are questionable at best due to the fact that partisan
registration information is not available in any of these
states except Delaware.
/st
cc: Senator Bob Dole
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast, Washington, D.C. 20003. (202) 484-6500.
RNC Political/Research Division
Preliminary Republican
Turnout Analysis
GOP Average
1972 Approximations
Vote %
1972 Nixon
GOP
GOP
GOP
1960 - 1972
Total Vote
Regis.
Turnout
Turnout %
DELAWARE
President
48.1
139,796
140,970
113,283
80.4
Senate
53.9
157,969
123,877
78.4
Governor
48.8
143,022
111,616
78.0
Average
50.3
147,418
116,372
78.9
ILLINOIS
President
49.2
2,745,352
3,057,943
2,241,106
73.3
Senate
51.8
3,219,541
2,301,884
71.5
Governor
48.3
3,002,005
2,182,072
72.7
Average
49.8
3,095,235
2,243,761
72.5
MICHIGAN
President
44.9
1,895,239
2,135,185
1,560,373
73.1
Senate
45.0
2,139,940
1,422,491
66.5
Governor
53.5
Average
47.8
2,137,563
1,274,410
69.8
TEXAS
President
47.9
2,272,656
2,442,900
1,637,761
67.0
Senate
48.6
2,478,600
1,554,684
62.7
Governor
37.0
1,887,000
1,179,816
62.5
Average
44.5
2,269,500
1,457,420
64.2
GEORGIA
President
49.2
794,766
1,048,544
521,338
49.7
MISSISSIPPI
President
50.9
498,680
445,375
323,770
72.7
Teater
MOR in field - we to 10 days
much town Ohio, Pa,
- all intere
one, see
done 11/18
lullampater
- RI of Iowa
Esame, nogain
-DMI frama
1wkg compater
host Legis badley-licy
weo + 80
lose seat
Cal AMEX
ny - MOR campan -inseased
percentage
MOR-NY-1/1/73 long pers
intere study
Teeter to send letter -le major
Rep depeat - a big party Case
-Lib's inered arguis
-Ohw - abstracts -oll precent
16 swing presents
voter data
c/w/z yrsago tedater
- -Twn disproportionate
beby Rep the lower -1st
-Toledo Rep words-user93-959
2 induste Reptur lower
now turn 79-83.
- Jan wong M/Ohio- wolling on detail esp
Teeter
-16 days / 2 was
Cnty bycnty
- cant get anything below tnly
and byten.
level for 2wls
Rn trough
-muia 12/ l - avail; impass before
analyses of after -Elee Studies)
Ind, Ohio, mich tall
+ cover
turnerit, etc
De Bolt - shopl Reg's + timing to
collect detailed info on
entire cerentry
By Caw avail 12/15
- most abstract of actual
results pl courties ween
certified due over course
- most sts will have collected
of Dee
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Date: 11/14/72
TO:
LARRY HIGBY
FROM:
GORDON STRACHAN
Attached is the original of the
re-typed version of the most
recent figures, as well as addi-
tional information on the key
counties.
Total
%Turnout of
%Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
Precincts
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
95%
Alabama
691,253
215,098
918,621
2,274,000
1,763,845
52.0
40.0
76%
Alaska
44,577
25,580
75,891
200,000
150,000
50.0
37.0
100%
Arizona
394,948
194,039
609,996
1,239,000
861,812
70.0
49.0
96%
Arkansas
427,014
190,598
617,612
1,310,000
959,871
64.0
47.1
100%
California
4,546,396
3,433,568
8,210,512
13,945,000
10,466,215
78.0
58.0
98%
Colorado
585,324
325,448
929,309
1,558,000
1,219,591
76.2
59.6
96%
Connecticut
801,143
535,405
1,359,875
2,106,000
1,507,603
90.2
64.5
100%
Delaware
139,796
91,904
234,789
371,000
293,078
80.1
63.2
100%
Dist. Columbia
31,257
115,914
149,089
518,000
305,072
48.9
28.7
100%
Florida
1,752,230
690,546
2,442,776
5,105,000
3,487,458
70.0
47.8
93%
Georgia
794,766
264,864
1,059,630
3,104,000
2,131,188
49.7
34.1
100%
Hawaii
167,414
100,617
268,031
531,000
326,906
82.0
50.4
99%
Idaho
197,589
80,558
307,462
479,000
400,000
76.9
64.1
97%
Illinois
2,745,352
1,861,950
4,607,302
7,542,000
6,215,331
74.1
61.0
100%
Indiana
1,401,547
705,808
2,107,355
3,509,000
2,842,195
74.1
60.0
100%
Iowa
706,578
494,863
1,225,492
1,909,000
739,906+
64.1
100%
Kansas
605,632
265,158
891,810
1,541,000
1,065,730
84.0
57.8
100%
Kentucky
671,198
369,051
1,057,418
2,206,000
1,454,575
72.6
47.9
96%
Louisiana
758,962
377,489
1,194,938
2,339,000
1,784,890
66.9
51.0
100%
Maine
252,851
161,659
414,510
666,000
576,915
71.8
62.2
100%
Maryland
797,295
486,570
1,302,315
2,688,000
1,815,784
72.0
48.4
Total
%Turnout of
%Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
Precincts
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
100%
Massachusetts
1,105,072
1,324,526
2,429,598
3,955,000
2,775,538
78.4
61.4
95%
Michigan
1,895,239
1,411,175
3,366,338
5,874,000
4,755,423
70.8
57.3
98%
Minnesota
881,326
789,473
1,701,478
2,560,000
66.5
99%
Mississippi
498,680
125,756
636,090
1,403,000
875,000
72.0
45.3
99%
Missouri
1,132,111
682,030
1,814,141
3,266,000
55.5
100%
Montana
183,784
118,661
314,691
460,000
386,867
81.0
68.4
100%
Nebraska
384,571
162,598
547,169
1,022,000
807,267
67.0
53.5
98%
Nevada
114,593
65,258
159,912
348,000
231,037
69.2
46.0
100%
New Hampshire
213,724
116,435
331,055
521,000
423,822
78.1
63.5
97%
New Jersey
1,769,487
1,058,557
2,852,405
5,025,000
3,667,329
77.8
56.8
99%
New Mexico
233,036
138,856
380,515
636,000
505,432
75.3
59.8
99%
New York
4,180,446
2,907,598
7,088,044
12,773,000
9,207,363
77.0
55.5
100%
North Carolina
1,052,165
437,652
1,514,178
3,463,000
2,357,645
64.2
43.7
94%
North Dakota
165,977
94,879
266,211
402,000
66.2
100%
Ohio
2,426,048
1,546,959
4,067,776
7,185,000
4,627,940+
56.6
100%
Oklahoma
745,810
242,957
1,011,634
1,812,000
1,247,157
80.2
55.8
100%
Oregon
483,229
390,867
920,200
1,500,000
1,198,996
76.7
61.3
100%
Pennsylvania
2,703,975
1,788,034
4,559,264
8,161,000
5,433,752
83.9
55.9
100%
Rhode Island
209,166
185,239
394,405
673,000
531,847
74.0
58.6
97%
South Carolina
468,572
189,560
668,188
1,706,000
1,033,688
64.6
39.2
Total
%Turnout of
%Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
Precincts
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
100%
South Dakota
163,814
137,569
301,383
434,000
391,727
76.9
69.4
100%
Tennessee
812,465
355,812
1,198,533
2,713,000
1,990,026
60.2
44.2
99%
Texas
8,272,656
1,146,470
3,419,126
7,681,000
5,100,000
67.0
44.5
100%
Utah
321,595
126,008
476,219
689,000
543,364
87.6
69.1
100%
Vermont
116,702
68,616
185,318
309,000
250,000
74.0
60.1
100%
Virginia
986,445
440,031
1,445,772
3,197,000
1,902,062
76.0
45.2
94%
Washington
679,156
475,553
1,175,597
2,371,000
1,973,895
59.6
49.6
98%
West Virginia
472,063
271,950
744,013
1,182,000
1,072,519
69.4
62.9
100%
Wisconsin
988,521
807,070
1,843,110
2,955,000
1,850,000
99.6
62.4
100%
Wyoming
100,630
44,348
144,986
225,000
138,936
104.3
64.4
KEY:
Total Turnout:
Based on the unofficial total Nixon-McGovern-Schmit vote and does not
include other minor parties
Voting Age Population:
U.S. Census Estimate for November, 1972
Total Registered Voters:
Most recent statistics available from Secretaries of State offices
+Partial Registration
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
Alabama
Jefferson
134,828
52,574
197,867
449,984
253,279
44.0
78.0
Madison
38,045
12,258
52,119
120,897
86,153
43.0
60.0
Mobile
64,133
17,819
86,927
209,039
151,346
42.0
57.0
Montgomery
34,909
11,590
48,605
113,242
85,432
43.0
57.0
Arkansas
Pulaski
57,576
33,611
89,609
198,611
145,780
45.0
61.0
Garland
15,602
5,207
21,112
40,245
32,623
52.0
65.0
Maryland
Baltimore
170,378
67,620
241,854
433,303
322,691
73.8
54.9
Baltimore City
116,941
138,716
259,482
634,894
424,377
61.1
40.8
Michigan
Genesie
85,747
73,896
162,449
285,176
225,923
71.9
56.9
Kent
103,450
67,427
174,684
274,814
227,196
76.8
63.5
Macomb
147,482
82,348
235,434
394,624
290,026
81.1
59.6
Monroe
23,263
17,726
42,448
75,754
55,663
75.4
62.7
Oakland
241,398
129,537
379,201
603,975
502,737
75.4
62.7
Wayne
535,523
514,007
1,065,659
1,840,584
1,484,384
71.7
57.8
Detroit City
873,761
*
New Jersey
Hudson
137,202
88,440
225,642
451,022
289,142
78.0
50.0
Berges
284,518
146,509
431,027
646,497
519,776
82.9
66.7
Issex
163,989
151,804
315,793
667,453
429,762
73.5
47.3
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters.
Voters
Population
Wyoming
Laramie
15,010
7,791
22,851
29,683
37,975
76.9
60.1
Delaware
New Castle
100,681
70,190
172,956
261,914
215,092
80.4
82.1
-
Hawaii
Honolulu
131,677
76,330
218,741
428,394
262,597
83.3
51.1
*
Idaho
Ada
33,679
11,753
52,013
76,987
71,895
72.3
67.6
Canyon
18,383
5,630
26,857
42,696
34,700
77.4
62.9
Nevada
Clark
53,046
36,790
89,836
184,340
116,611
77.0
48.7
Washoe
33,529
17,138
50,667
86,780
63,526
79.8
58.4
* Nebraska
Douglas
97,960
46,726
144,686
202,750
263,665
71.0
55.0
Lancaster
40,950
23,203
66,153
92,186
122,730
72.0
54.0
1972 ELECTION RESULTS KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
*
Vermont
Chittenden
23,078
16,076
39,154
66,388
45,604
85.9
59.0
Rutland
13,662
7,912
21,574
36,592
28,242
76.3
59.0
Windsor
12,420
6,594
19,374
30,765
24,225
80.0
63.0
Indiana
Marion
203,076
101,974
305,398
538,700
452,195
77.9
56.6
Vanderbourgh
49,059
22,139
71,221
119,947
109,972
64.8
59.3
Monroe
19,953
15,241
35,342
64,358
52,559
67.2
54.7
New Hampshire
Hillsborough
65,274
34,739
101,359
152,153
131,858
76.9
66.6
Rockingham
38,825
21,998
61,496
92,217
81,359
75.6
66.7
Merrimac
25,354
11,737
37,440
57,203
49,126
76.2
65.5
*
Massachusetts
Middlesex
269,216
344,825
614,041
977,426
677,298
91.0
63.0
Essex
139,585
156,690
296,275
447,719
332,719
89.0
66.0
Norfolk
132,114
148,636
280,750
418,833
305,081
92.0
67.0
Worcester
123,934
140,845
264,779
449,638
311,629
85.0
59.0
*
Iowa
Black Hawk
31,096
21,721
53,635
91,072
65,588
81.8
58.9
Cerro Gordo
11,856
9,270
21,449
34,949
16,454+
61.4
Crawford
4,493
3,018
7,656
12,757
60.0
Lucas
2,851
1,759
4,688
7,417
1,001+
63.2
Marion
6,583
4,634
11,516
19,146
4,265+
60.1
Polk
70,329
59,327
132,645
199,072
154,455
85.9
66.6
Poweshiek
4,785
3,718
8,633
13,457
64.6
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
North Dakota
Cass
21,770
14,073
36,306
51,693
70.2
Burleigh
13,909
5,841
20,644
26,835
76.9
Grand Forks
13,361
9,416
23,475
42,217
55.6
* Tennessee
Davidson
82,636
48,869
134,797
317,512
224,632
60.0
42.0
Knox
64,747
24,076
90,484
199,828
120,135
75.0
45.0
Shelby
161,810
81,063
247,717
489,344
374,591
66.0
50.0
South Carolina
Greenville
46,360
10,080
58,355
166,496
87,691
66.5
34.4
Richland
39,667
18,699
59,212
168,375
88,205
67.1
35.1
Utah
Utah
42,179
10,828
59,460
77,794
92,005
76.4
64.6
Weber
37,753
14,503
55,580
76,166
82,735
73.3
67.5
Salt Lake
296,772
*
West Virginia
Cabell
29,299
14,103
43,402
58,894
79,330
73.0
54.0
Kanawha
64,072
38,393
102,465
136,304
163,480
75.0
62.6
Wood
25,114
10,230
35,344
53,872
59,847
65.6
59.0
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
Kansas
Sedgewick
83,949
34,220
122,701
239,103
156,975
78.2
51.3
Shawnee
43,727
20,383
69,249
239,103
83,388
83.0
29.0
Johnson
76,161
24,324
104,136
144,015
120,407
86.5
72.3
Wyandatte
34,112
28,405
64,968
127,480
82,265
79.0
51.0
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
* Footnotes
IDAHO
Registration figures are prior to election day. People
were allowed to register on election day.
MASSACHUSETTS Registration figures are only up to February, . 1972. Turn-
out figure is only major party. Worcester County results
do not include town of Grafton.
VERMONT
All figures are based on 94% of the returns. Registration
is as of 1970.
TENNESSEE
Registration figures for Knox County are as of September,
1971.
NEBRASKA
All voter turnout figures are based on major party vote
only.
WEST VIRGINIA All voter turnout figures are based on major party vote
only.
IOWA
Registration figures for Cerro Gordo, Lucas and Marion
County are partial.
NEW JERSEY
All voter turnout figures are based on major party vote
only.
Republican
National
Committee.
November 17, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
GORDON STRACHAN
BRUCE KEHRL
FROM:
ED EQ
In response to your request this
morning, I have attached a listing of percentages of eligible voters
actually registered for each of the 50 states and the selected counties
as a follow-up to the initial voter turnout report submitted to you earlier
this week.
All previous reports should be discarded
as this report supercedes them and includes some up-dated election
returns and minor corrections.
We are now in the process of preparing a
report for each of the 15 major SMSAs (Cleveland, Minneapolis-St. Paul,
Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Detroit, Washington,
D.C., New York City, Baltimore, Dallas, Houston, St. Louis, Chicago,
and Newark) which will include 1972 Presidential vote totals, voting age
population, registered voters, turnout as a percent of registered voters,
turnout as a percent of voting age population and percent voting age
population registered for each county within the SMSA as well as the
aggregate totals for each SMSA. The only major SMSA which cannot be
reported on at this time is Boston, where vote totals are not available by
counties and the release of the numerous township totals is in the distant
future. This SMSA report will be sent to you by Noon tomorrow.
We are now in the process of conducting the
initial research into obtaining the percentage of Republican voters who
voted in the 1972 election, as you requested, from the states of Texas,
Illinois, Georgia, Michigan, Mississippi and Delaware. There will be
numerous problems in compiling this report. The major one being that
Delaware is the only state of those 6 where there is partisan registration
required. The other 5 states do not require registration by Party. Additionally,
any analysis of 1972 voting trends are complicated by the additional 18 to 24
year old vote which was not a factor in previous races. The fact that the
1968 Presidential race included a significant third party effort also poses
problems in making a significant partisan turnout report. We are now
considering several approaches to this problem which include taking 10
year GOP Presidential averages and comparing them to voter turnout
and registration figures. The same would be done with GOP Senate race
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast, Washington, D.C. 20003. (202) 484-6500.
November 17, 1972
Page 2.
averages, GOP Governor races averages and the combination of all three.
We are also looking at the possibility of identifying certain bellweather
counties and utilizing past bedrock and creating 1972 bedrock information
for those counties. Nevertheless, the problem will be difficult as it is
mathematically impossible to come up with absolute figures for Republican
turnout when there is no partisan registration list available and there are
no voter lists available indicating Party preference. The one exception is
Delaware where Party registration lists are available where it may be
possible to send someone in to selected precincts to sit down and manually
compare partisan registration lists with actual 1972 voter lists. By mid-
afternoon Monday we will have an idea how expensive that operation would
be and how long such a manual operation would take to complete.
Several other reports and projects
are also being currently conducted as listed below:
-Report on the polls - by Wednesday of next week a
preliminary polling report on any available post-election analyses will
be issued as well as comparisons of the pre-election straw votes and
polling trends with actual results. The week after Thanksgiving there
will be an additional report on any available post-election surveys.
-On Tuesday of next week we will issue a short report
on the election results of the statewide constitutional offices below the
congressional level as well as a status report of the partisan lineup of
the state legislatures following the 1972 legislative elections.
-There will be a precinct analysis of Presidential election
results for 50 or more selected precincts consisting of youth, ethnic, blue
collar and income characteristics which will be available by Wednesday
of next week.
-Answer Desk - On Monday, November 27, we will send
out the first post-election issue of Answer Desk which will focus on the
activities of the dissident Democrats with special attention given to the
DNC-Westwood battle and McGovern's recent statements as well as the
ramifications of their current battles for congressional leadership
positions.
November 17, 1972
Page 3.
-We will be working over the Thanksgiving holiday
to prepare a series of big city election results with the first of those
results due to you on Monday, November 27. Utilizing some of the
information gathered for previous reports, we will prepare in-depth
analyses of the Presidential election as it occurred in the major big
cities and surrounding suburbs throughout the country.
If you have any additional questions or comments about
these various reports and projects, please let me know.
/jg
cc: Chairman Bob Dole
Total
& Turnout of
:
Turnet of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
Precincts
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
%
95%
Alabama
691,253
215,098
918,621
2,274,000
1,768,845
77.5
52.0
40.0
76%
Alaska
44,577
25,580
75,891
200,000
150,000
75.0
50.0
37.0
100%
Arizona
394,948
194,039
609,996
1,239,000
861,812
69.6
70.0
49.0
96%
Arkansas
427,014
190,598
617,612
1,310,000
959,871
73.3
64.0
47.1
100%
California
4,546,396
3,433,568
8,210,512
13,945,000
10,466,215
75.1
78.0
58.0
98%
Colorado
585,324
325,448
929,309
1,558,000
1,219,591
78.3
76.2
59.6
96%
Connecticut
801,143
535,405
1,359,875
2,106,000
1,507,603
71.6
90.2
64.5
100%
Delaware
139,796
91,904
234,789
371,000
293,078
79.0
80.1
63.2
100%
Dist. Columbia
31,257
115,914
149,089
518,000
305,072
58.9
48.9
28.7
100%
Florida
1,752,230
690,546
2,442,776
5,105,000
3,487,458
68.3
70.0
47.8
93%
Georgia
794,766
264,864
1,059,630
3,104,000
2,131,188
68.6
49.7
34.1
100%
Hawaii
167,414
100,617
268,031
531,000
326,906
61.6
82.0
50.4
99%
Idaho
197,589
80,558
307,462
479,000
400,000
83.5
76.9
64.1
97%
Illinois
2,745,352
1,861,950
4,607,302
7,542,000
6,215,331
22.4
74.1
61.0
100%
Indiana
1,401,547
705,808
2,107,355
3,509,000
2,842,195
81.0
74.1
60.0
100%
Iowa
706,578
494,863
1,225,492
1,909,000
739,906+
38.8+
64.1
100%
Kansas
605,632
265,158
891,810
1,541,000
1,065,730
69.2
84.0
57.8
100%
Kentucky
671,198
369,051
1,057,418
2,206,000
1,454,575
65.9
72.6
47.9
96%
Louisiana
758,962
377,489
1,194,938
2,339,000
1,784,890
76.3
66.9
51.0
100%
Maine
252,851
161,659
414,510
666,000
576,915
86.6
71.8
62.2
100%
Maryland
797,295
486,570
1,302,315
2,688,000
1,815,784
67.6
72.0
48.4
Total
: Turnout of
:
Turnout
of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
Precincts
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
%
100%
Massachusetts
1,105,072
1,324,526
2,429,598
3,955,000
2,775,538
70.2
87.5
61.4
95%
Michigan
1,895,239
1,411,175
3,366,338
5,874,000
4,755,423
81.0
70.8
57.3
98%
Minnesota
881,326
789,473
1,701,478
2,560,000
66.5
99%
Mississippi
498,680
125,756
636,090
1,403,000
875,000
62.4
72.0
45.3
99%
Missouri
1,132,111
682,030
1,814,141
3,266,000
55.5
100%
Montana
183,784
118,661
314,691
460,000
386,867
34.1
81.0
68.4
100%
Nebraska
384,571
162,598
547,169
1.022,000
807,267
79.0
67.0
53.5
98%
Nevada
100,960
58,982
159,912
348,000
231,037
66.4
69.2
46.0
100%
New Hampshire
213,724
116,435
331,055
521,000
423,822
81.3
78.1
63.5
.97%
New Jersey
1,769,487
1,058,557
2,852,405
5,025,000
3,667,329
73.0
77.8
55.8
99%
New Mexico
233,036
138,856
380,515
636,000
505,432
79.5
75.3
59.8
99%
New York
4,180,446
2,907,598
7,088,044
12,773,000
9,207,363
72.1
77.0
55.5
100%
North Carolina
1,052,165
437,652
1,514,178
3,463,000
2,357,645
68.1
64.2
43.7
94%
North Dakota
165,977
94,879
266,211
402,000
66.2
100%
Ohio
2,426,048
1,546,959
4,067,776
7,185,000
4,627,940+
64.4+
56.6
100%
Oklahoma
745,810
242,957
1,011,634
1,812,000
1,247,157
68.8
80.2
55.8
100%
Oregon
483,229
390,867
920,200
1,500,000
1,198,996
79.7
76.7
61.3
100%
Pennsylvania
2,703,975
1,788,034
4,559,264
8,161,000
5,433,752
46.6
83.9
55.9
100%
Rhode Island
209,166
185,239
394,405
673,000
531,847
79.0
74.0
58.6
97%
South Carolina
468,572
189,560
668,188
1,706,000
1,033,688
60.6
64.6
39.2
Total
Turnout of
%
of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voring Age
Precincts
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
%
100%
South Dakota
163,814
137,569
301,383
434,000
391,727
90.3
76.9
69.4
100%
Tennessee
812,465
355,812
1,198,533
2,713,000
1,990,026
73.4
60.2
44.2
99%
Texas
2,272,656
1,146,470
3,419,126
7,681,000
5,100,000
66.4
67.0
44.5
100%
Utah
321,595
126,008
476,219
689,000
543,364
78.9
87.6
69.1
100%
Vermont
116,702
68,616
185,318
309,000
250,000
80.9
74.0
60.0
100%
Virginia
986,445
440,031
1,445,772
3,197,000
1,902,062
59.5
76.0
45.2
94%
Washington
679,156
475,553
1,175,597
2,371,000
1,973,895
83.3
59.6
49.6
98%
West Virginia
472,063
271,950
744,013
1,182,000
1,072,519
90.7
69.4
62.9
100%
Wisconsin
988,521
807,070
1,843,110
2,955,000
1,850,000
62.6
99.6
62.4
100%
Wyoming
100,630
44,348
144,986*
225,000
138,936 61.7
104.3*
64.4
KEY:
Total Turnout - In some cases figure is unofficial total for all parties; in other instances
minor party figures were unavailable and total is sum of the Nixon-McGovern vote.
Minnesota -
registration required only in communities of 10,000 or more.
'lissouri -
registration optional except in cities with populations of 400,000 or more and
counties with 200,000 or more. Registration is not statewide.
North Dakota - Do not register voters.
Voting Age Population: U.S. Census Estimate for November, 1972
Total Registered Voters: Most recent statistics available from Secretaries of State
offices
+
Partial Registration
*
Turnout was higher than registration because registration was open until Election Day.
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
%
Myoming
Laramie
15,010
7,791
22,851
37,975
29,683 78.2 76.9
60.1
Delaware
New Castle
100,681
70,190
172,956
261,914
215,092
82.
I
80.4
66.0
Hawaii
Honolulu
131,677
76,330
218,741
428,394
262,597 61.3 83.3
51.1
Idaho
93.
+
Ada
33,679
11,753
52,013
76,987
71,895
72.3
67.6
Canyon
18,383
5,630
26,857
42,696
34,700
81.3
77.4
62.9
Nevada
Clark
53,046
36,790
89,836
184,340
116,611 63.2 77.0
48.7
Washoe
33,529
17,138
50,667
86,780
63,526 73.2 79.8
58.4
Nebraska
Douglas
97,960
46,726
144,686
263,665
202,750 76.9 71.0
55.0
Lancaster
40,950
23,203
66,153
122,730
92,186 75. 1 72.0
54.0
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
Vermont
%
Chittenden
23,078
16,076
39,154
66,388
45,604
68.7
85.9
59.0
Rutland
13,662
7,912
21,574
36,592
28,242 11.2
76.3
59.0
Windsor
12,420
6,594
19,374
30,765
24,225
78.7
80.0
63.0
Indiana
Marion
203,076
101,974
305,398
538,700
452,195
83.9
67.5
56.6
Vanderbourgh
49,059
22,139
71,221
119,947
109,972
91.7
64.8
59.3
Monroe
19,953
15,241
35,342
64,358
52,559
81.7
67.2
54.7
New Hampshire
Hillsborough
65,274
34,739
101,359
152,153
131,858
86.7
76.9
66.6
Rockingham
38,825
21,998
61,496
92,217
81,359
88.2
75.6
66.7
Merrimac
25,354
11,737
37,440
57,203
49,126
85.9
76.2
65.5
Massachusetts
Middlesex
269,216
344,825
614,041
977,426
677,298
69.3
91.0
63.0
Essex
139,585
156,690
296,275
447,719
332,719
74.3
89.0
66.0
Norfolk
132,114
148,636
280,750
418,833
305,081
72.8
92.0
67.0
Worcester
123,934
140,845
264,779
449,638
311,629
69.3
85.0
59.0
Iowa
Black Hawk
31,096
21,721
53,635
91,072
65,588
12.0
81.8
58.9
Cerro Gordo
11,856
9,270
21,449
34,949
16,454+ 41.
61.4
Crawford
4,493
3,018
7,656
12,757
60.0
Lucas
2,851
1,759
4,688
7,417
1,001+
13.5
63.2
Marion
6,583
4,634
11,516
19,146
4,265+ 22.3
60.1
Polk
70,329
59,327
132,645
199,072
154,455
77.6
85.9
66.6
Poweshiek
4,785
3,718
8,633
13,457
64.6
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
State
Voting Age
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
Alabama
c/o
Jefferson
134,828
52,574
197,867
449,984
253,279
56.3
44.0
78.0
Madison
38,045
12,258
52,119
120,897
86,153
71.3
43.0
60.0
Mobile
64,133
17,819
86,927
209,039
151,346
72.4
42.0
57.0
Montgomery
34,909
11,590
48,605
113,242
85,432
75.4
43.0
57.0
Arkansas
Pulaski
57,576
33,611
91,187
198,611
145,780
73.4
45.0
61.0
Garland
15,602
5,207
21,112
40,245
32,623
81.1
52.0
65.0
Maryland
Baltimore
170,378
67,620
241,854
433,303
322,691
74.5
73.8
55.8
Baltimore City
116,941
138,716
259,482
634,894
424,377
66.8
61.1
40.8
Michigan
Genesie
85,747
73,896
162,449
285,176
225,923
79.2
71.9
56.9
Kent
103,450
67,427
174,684
274,814
227,196
82.7
76.8
63.5
Macomb
147,482
82,348
235,434
394,624
290,026
73.5
81.1
59.6
Monrce
23,263
17,726
42,448
75,754
55,663
76.2
56.0
Cakland
241,398
129,537
379,201
603,975
502,737
83.2
75.4
62.7
Wayne
535,523
514,007
1,065,659
1,840,584
1,484,384
80.6
71.7
57.8
Detroit City
873,761
* New Jersey
Hudson
137,202
88,440
225,642
451,022
289,142
64.1
78.0
50.0
Berges
284,518
146,509
431,027
646,497
519,776
80.4
82.9
66.7
Issex
163,989
151,804
315,793
667,453
429,762
64.4
4
73.5
47.3
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
North Dakota
%
Cass
21,770
14,073
36,306
51,693
70.2
Burleigh
13,909
5,841
20,644
26,835
76.9
Grand Forks
13,361
9,416
23,475
42,217
55.6
* Tennessee
Davidson
82,636
48,869
134,797
317,512
224,632 70. 7
60.0
42.0
Knox
64,747
24,076
90,484
199,828
120,135 60.
/
75.0
45.0
Shelby
161,810
81,063
247,717
489,344
374,591 76
5
66.0
50.0
South Carolina
Greenville
46,360
10,080
58,355
166,496
87,691 52. 7
66.5
34.4
Richland
39,667
18,699
59,212
168,375
88,205 52. of 67.1
35.1
Utah
Utah
42,179
10,828
59,460
92,005.
77,794
84.6
76.4
64.6
Weber
37,753
14,503
55,580
82,735
76,166 92 /
73.3
67.5
Salt Lake
296,772
*
West Virginia
Cabell
29,299
14,103
43,402
79,330
58,894 94. 2 73.0
54.0
Kanawha
64,072
38,393
102,465
163,480
136,304
83.4
75.0
62.6
Wood
25,114
10,230
35,344
59,847
53,872 90.0
65.6
59.0
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
* Footnotes
IDAHO
Registration figures are prior to election day. People
were allowed to register on election day.
MASSACHUSETTS Registration figures are only up to February, 1972. Turn-
out figure is only major party. Worcester County results
do not include town of Grafton.
VERMONT
All figures are based on 94% of the returns. Registration
is as of 1970.
TENNESSEE
Registration figures for Knox County are as of September,
1971.
NEBRASKA
All voter turnout figures are based on major party vote
only.
WEST VIRGINIA All voter turnout figures are based on major party vote
only.
IOWA
Registration figures for Cerro Gordo, Lucas and Marion
County are partial.
NEW JERSEY
All voter turnout figures are based on major party vote
only.
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
%
New Mexico
Bernalillo
80,267
49,176
132,666
207,697
*
166,594 80.2 79.6
63.9
South Dakota
Brookings
5,182
4,701
9,913
16,618
13,491
$1.2- -
73.5
59.6
Brown
8,134
8,216
16,451
25,633
21,600
84.3
76.2
64.2
Minnehaha
22,447
22,386
44,988
63,956
57,500
89.9
78.2
70.3
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
%
Ohio
Ashtabula
22,769
15,222
39,692
66,541
47,235
11.0
84.0
59.7
Athens
9,735
9,977
19,915
42,575
25,500
59.9
78.0
46.8
Butler
49,981
21,042
73,081
155,758
98,691
63.4
74.0
47.0
Cleveland City
319,825
Cuyahoga
329,567
316,263
680,077
1,214,412
883,984
72.8
76.9
56.0
Franklin
218,472
116,752
343,264
576,075
430,644
74.8
79.7
59.6
Greene
25,349
12,736
38,904
83,993
52,099
62.0
74.7
46.0
Hamilton
248,013
119,204
373,598
636,801
457,379
71.8
81.7
58.7
Cincinnati
208,086
Montgomery
120,312
81,447
207,138
417,320.
268,124
64.3
77.3
49.6
Mahoning
63,956
61,395
127,843
214,144
158,487
74.0
80.7
59.7
Shelby
9,089
4,721
14,703
24,646
17,768
72.1
82.7
59.7
Colorado
Denver
122,025
97,972
223,373
375,480
301,692
80.3
74.0
59.0
New York
Bronx
197,441
245,757
443,198
1,053,437
703,902
66.8
63.0
42.0
Erie
251,869
203,939
455,808
774,650
596,692
17.
D.
75.0
58.0
Monroe
192,888
118,643
311,531
492,962
356,840
12.4
87.0
63.0
Nassau
440,219
253,095
693,314
992,377
828,799
83.5
83.0
70.0
New York
179,867
353,847
533,714
1,229,878
43.0
Onondage
133,521
56,081
189,602
324,134
237,328
73.2
80.0
58.0
Queens
423,429
328,462
751,891
1,517,183
1,039,869
68.5
72.0
50.0
Suffolk
316,623
131,991
448,614
714,964
526,506
73.6
85.0
63.0
Westchester
263,067
148,655
411,722
643,194
471,630
73.3
87.0
64.0
1972 ELECTION RESULTS KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
c/o
*
Missouri
Jackson
129,922
92,836
222,758
459,932
48.3
St. Louis
253,102
154,731
407,833
645,564
485,345
15.2
83.3
63.0
St. Louis City
69,744
113,782
183,526
446,358
263,917
59. /
69.5
41.1
* Wisconsin
Waukesha
59,399
34,573
97,620
146,823
65.8
Dane
56,020
79,567
137,177
203,415
67.4
Milwaukee
190,755
209,754
413,813
739,576
491,801
66
5
84.1
55.9
Washington
King
251,055
181,467
447,211
816,713
701,243 85.9 63.8
54.8
*
Texas
Dallas
304,850
129,809
434,659
896,934
631,457
70.4
68.8
48.5
Harris
365,670
215,916
581,586
1,164,513
847,779
72.9
68.6
49.9
Colorado
3,495
1,502
4,997
12,515
8,068
64.5
61.9
39.9
Georgia
Dekalb
102,676
29,727
145,317
280,155
181,000 64.6 80.3
51.9
Fulton
92,256
74,329
192,650
432,287
44.6
* Florida
Dade
256,529
177,693
434,222
920,094
592,6,59 64.4
73.3
47.2
Pinellas
179,541
77,197
256,968
416,764
324,802 77.9
79.1
61.7
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
: Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
Kansas
Sedgewick
83,949
34,220
122,701
239,103
-156,975
65.7
78.2
51.3
Shawnee
43,727
20,383
69,249
239,103
83,388
34.9
83.0
29.0
Johnson
76,161
24,324
104,136
144,015
120,407
5
3.6
86.5
72.3
Wyandatte
34,112
28,405
64,968
127,480
82,265 64.5 79.0
51.0
innesota
Hennepin
227,630
205,062
440,852
671,121
522,650
77.9
84.3
65.6
Ramsey
97,138
109,427
212,410
326,993
64.6
Illinois
Cook
1,197,818
1,006,793
2,204,611
3,840,387
3,140,500
81.8
70.2
57.4
Metro
529,517
708,206
1,237,723
1,990,500
62.1
Suburban
668,301
298,587
966,888
DuPage
166,346
64,000
230,346
318,031
290,432
91.3
79.3
72.4
Lake
78,332
41,371
119,703
258,885
165,357
63.9
72.4
46.2
Marion
10,755
6,968
17,723
27,962
27,740
99.2 63.9
63.4
Rock Island
36,684
32,159
68,843
115,441
100,000 86 6 68.8
59.6
Mississippi
Harrison
28,889
4,744
36,640
91,212
58,000
63.6
63.0
40.0
Hinds
49,700
12,888
63,964
143,561
98,706
68.
8
65.0
45.0
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
ADDENDUM
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
%
Illinois
Winnebago
34,892
22,662
57,677
165,461
73,177 44.2 78.8
34.9
Pennsylvania
Clarion
10,000
4,500
14,501
27;227
18,840
69.2
77.0
53.3
Cumberland
42,000
14,000
57,000
111,791
71,943
64.4
79.2
51.0
Lawrence
23,000
17,000
40,736
76,640
51,484
67.2
79.1
53.1
Mercer
27,804
18,162
46,992
89,318
58,976
66.0
79.7
52.6
Montgomery
173,213
91,581
267,394
438,095
329,648
75.2
81.1
61.0
Philadelphia-
344,000
429,000
778,900
1,405,617
1,010,229
71.9
77.1
55.4
Philadelphia City
344,000
429,000
778,900
1,405,617
1,010,229
71.9
77.1
55.4
Washington
42,925
34,949
78,274
151,694
98,859
65.2
79.2
51.6
Westmoreland
85,000
58,000
145,700
265,408
178,479
67.2
81.6
54.9
Chio
Lake
40,492
26,558
69,125
128,239
89,900 70.1 76.9
53.9
Wyoming
Natrona
15,649
6,514
22,163
37,975
28,109 74.0 78.8
58.4
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
State
Registered
Registered
Nixon
Voting Age
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
Kentucky
%
Jefferson.
140,216
86,692
232,123
474,891
301,769 63.5 77.0
49.0
*
California
,
Yuba
6,433
4,433
12,164
29,134
15,320
52.6
79.4
41.8
Fresno
79,049
72,677
163,328
281,543
201,396
71.6
81.1
58.1
Mendocino
11,104
9,402
22,492
36,142
26,876
74.4
83.7
62.2
San Francisco
127,826
170,702
317,098
573,998
426,338
74.3
74.4
55.2
Marin
53,687
46,959
105,494
147,059
126,928
86.3
83.1
71.7
San Diego
365,644
203,722
605,470
973,656
725,501
74.5
83.5
62.2
Los Angeles
1,516,832
1,163,205
2,835,769
5,017,447
3,597,963
71.7
78.8
56.5
Crange
442,587
174,695
648,263
952,515
794,174
83.4
81.6
68.1
San Mateo
134,870
109,301
260,920
398,567
310,204
77.8
84.1
65.5
Tuolumne
5,894
4,596
11,107
16,500
13,205
80.0
84.1
67.3
Pennsylvania
Pittsburgh City
89,769
104,468
197,759
372,191
266,298
71.5
74.0
53.0
Bucks
99,161
56,442
159,065
271,695
198,546
73.1
80.0
59.0
Delaware
175,480
93,759
273,446
422,164
335,711
79.5
81.0
65.0
Allegheny
317,281
281,283
611,808
1,156,055
920,875
79.7
66.0
53.0
Rhode Island
Kent
38,826
27,890
66,821
97,712
88,824
90.9
75.2
68.4
Providence
124,557
124,037
249,152
421,705
343,901
81.6
72.4
59.1
Arizona
Pima
71,798
55,349
129,738
245,367
179,950
73.3
72.1
52.9
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
* FOOTNOTES
RHODE ISLAND
For both counties, Total Turnout includes Nixon
McGovern, and Jenness votes only
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
* Footnotes
CALIFORNIA
The Orange County figures for turnout include only votes
cast for Nixon, McGovern, Schmitz and Spock; no other
minor candidates are included.
ILLINOIS
Major party vote only - Schmitz not on ballot
WISCONSIN
Registration is mandatory only for communities of
5,000 or more.
MISSOURI
Major party vote only, Schmitz not on ballot
TEXAS
Major party vote only, Schmitz not on ballot
FLORIDA
Major party vote only, Schmitz not on ballot
NEW YORK
Major party vote only, Schmitz not on ballot
SOURCE: Secretary of State
WEEK ENDING SEPTEMBER 18, 1972
REGISTRATION PROFILE
OF THE 50 STATES AND
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
September 28, 1972
STATE
REGISTRATION REQUIRED
PARTISAN ENROLLMENT
0
Alabama
Yes
No
Arizona
Yes
Yes
Arkansas
Yes
No
California
Yes
Yes
Colorado
Yes
Yes
Connecticut
Yes
Yes
Delaware
Yes
Yes
Florida
Yes
Yes
Georgia
Yes
No
Hawaii
Yes
No
Idaho
Yes
No
Illinois
Yes
No
Indiana
Yes
No
Iowa
Yes
Yes
Kansas
Yes
Yes
Kentucky
Yes
Yes
Louisiana
Yes
Yes
Maine
Yes
Yes
Maryland
Yes
Yes
Massachusetts
Yes
Yes
Michigan
Yes
No
Minnesota*
Yes
No
Mississippi
Yes
No
Missouri
*
Yes
No
Montana
Yes
No
Nebraska
Yes
Yes
Nevada
Yes
Yes
New Hampshire
Yes
Yes
New Jersey
Yes
No
New Mexico
Yes
Yes
New York
Yes
Yes
Nevada
Yes
Yes
North Dakota
No
No
Ohio*
Yes
No
Oklahoma
Yes
Yes
Oregon
Yes
Yes
Pennsylvania
Yes
Yes
Rhode Island
Yes
No
South Carolina
Yes
No
South Dakota
Yes
Yes
Tennessee
Yes
No
Texas
Yes
No
Utah
Yes
No
Page 2
STATE
REGISTRATION REQUIRED
PARTISAN ENROLLMENT
Vermont
Yes
No
Virginia
Yes
No
Washington
Yes
No
West Virginia
Yes
Yes
Wisconsin*
Yes
No
Wyoming
Yes
Yes
District of Columbia
Yes
Yes
* Indicates where registration is not required state-wide. The following is a brief
description of the pecularities of the state laws regarding partial registration.
Iowa. All independent cities with a population of 10,000 or more and all counties
with a population of 50,000 or more are required to register.
Kansas. All 1st and 2nd class cities require voter registration. Most cities with
a population of 5,000 or more qualify as a 1st or 2nd class city, although is not
the major factor. The four largest counties require county-wide registration.
Minnesota. All cities with population of 10,000 or more require registration. Cities
with less than 10,000 population have local option. All towns within 15 miles of
St. Paul, Minneapolis and Duluth must have voter registration.
Missouri. St. Louis City and 33 counties require county-wide registration, while 10
counties require only partial registration.
Ohio. All cities with a population of 16,000 or more require registration. Six
counties have parital registration.
Wisconsin. All cities with a population of 5,000 or more require voter registration.
Towns with a population of less than 5,000 have an option on registration, however,
most localities do not require it. No counties, as a jurisdiction, require registra-
tion.
REGISTRATION CLOSING DATES
The following are the registration closing dates by state for the
Presidential Election and state elections.
STATE
NATIONAL ELECTION
STATE ELECTIONS
Alabama
October 27
October 27
Alaska
October 7
October 7
Arizona
October 7
September 18
Arkansas
October 17
October 17
California
October 8
October 8
Colorado
October 6
October 6
Connecticut
October 14
October 14
Delaware
October 21
October 21
District of Columbia
October 6
October 6
Florida
October 7
October 7
Georgia
October 20
September 18
Hawaii
October 12
October 12
Idaho
November 7
November 4
Illinois
October 9
October 9
Indiana
October 9
October 9
Iowa
October 28
October 28
(in areas that
require registration)
Kansas
October 17
October 17
(in areas that
require registration)
Kentucky
October 10
October 10
Louisiana
October 7
October 7
Maine
Rural-November 7
Rural-November 7
Town-November 13
Town-November 13
City-October 23
City-October 23
Maryland
October 10
October 10
Massachusetts
October 7 (noon)
October 7 (noon)
Michigan
October 6 (8:00 p.m.)
October 6 (8:00 p.m.)
Minnesota
October 17
October 17
Mississippi
October 7
October 7
Missouri
October 10
Court case pending
St. Louis-October 10
St. Louis-October 10
Kansas City-October 11
Kansas City-Octoberll
Montana
October 8
October 8
Nebraska
October 27
October 27
Nevada
October 7
October 7
New Hampshire
Rural-November 6
Rural-November 6
Town-Hovember ]
Town-November 1
City-October 28
City-October 28
New Jersey
October 10
September 28
New Mexico
October 9
September 26
New York
October 10
October 10
North Carolina
October 9
October 9
North Dakota
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Ohio
October 10
October 10.
Oklahoma
October 27
October 27
Oregon
October 7
October 7
Pennsylvania
October 10
October 10
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
October 7
October 7
South Carolina
October 7
October 7
South Dakota
October 20
October 20
Tennessee
October 7
October 7
Texas
October 7
October 7
Utah
October 28
October 28
Vermont
November 4
November 4
Virginia
October 7
October 7
Washington
October 7
October 7
West Virignia
October 7
October 7
Wisconsin
October 25
October 25
Milwaukee-October 17
Milwaukee-October 17
Wyoming
October 24
October 24
Source: Secretaries of State, week of September 18, 1972
Republican
National
Committee.
ANYTHES GS ELSÉ Her?
B.
November 16, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
Bruce Kehrli
FROM:
Ed DeBolt
RE:
Presidential Election Returns --
for all states and key counties
The enclosed reports constitute
the complete set of presidential election returns, re-
gistration statistics and voting population information
for all fifty states and 150 major counties.
Let me know if you need
additional information.
Dwight D. Eisenhower Republican Center: 310 First Street Southeast, Washington, D.C. 20003. (202) 484-6500.
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
Alabama
Jefferson
134,828
52,574
197,867
449,984
253,279
44.0
78.0
Madison
38,045
12,258
52,119
120,897
86,153
43.0
60.0
Mobile
64,133
17,819
86,927
209,039
151,346
42.0
57.0
Montgomery
34,909
11,590
48,605
113,242
85,432
43.0
57.0
Arkansas
Pulaski
57,576
33,611
89,609
198,611
145,780
45.0
61.0
Garland
15,602
5,207
21,112
40,245
32,623
52.0
65.0
Maryland
Baltimore
170,378
67,620
241,854
433,303
322,691
73.8
54.9
Baltimore City
116,941
138,716
259,482
634,894
424,377
61.1
40.8
Michigan
Genesie
85,747
73,896
162,449
285,176
225,923
71.9
56.9
Kent
103,450
67,427
174,684
274,814
227,196
76.8
63.5
Macomb
147,482
82,348
235,434
394,624
290,026
81.1
59.6
Monroe
23,263
17,726
42,448
75,754
55,663
75.4
62.7
Oakland
241,398
129,537
379,201
603,975
502,737
75.4
62.7
Wayne
535,523
514,007
1,065,659
1,840,584
1,484,384
71.7
57.8
Detroit City
873,761
* New Jersey
Hudson
137,202
88,440
225,642
451,022
289,142
78.0
50.0
Berges
284,518
146,509
431,027
646,497
519,776
82.9
66.7
Issex
163,989
151,804
315,793
667,453
429,762
73.5
47.3
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
Wyoming
Laramie
15,010
7,791
22,851
29,683
37,975
76.9
60.1
Delaware
New Castle
100,681
70,190
172,956
261,914
215,092
80.4
82.1
Hawaii
Honolulu
131,677
76,330
218,741
428,394
262,597
83.3
51.1
*
Idaho
Ada
33,679
11,753
52,013
76,987
71,895
72.3
67.6
Canyon
18,383
5,630
26,857
42,696
34,700
77.4
62.9
Nevada
Clark
53,046
36,790
89,836
184,340
116,611
77.0
48.7
Washoe
33,529
17,138
50,667
86,780
63,526
79.8
58.4
* Nebraska
Douglas
97,960
46,726
144,686
202,750
263,665
71.0
55.0
Lancaster
40,950
23,203
66,153
92,186
122,730
72.0
54.0
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
State
Voting Age
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
*
Vermont
Chittenden
23,078
16,076
39,154
66,388
45,604
85.9
59.0
Rutland
13,662
7,912
21,574
36,592
28,242
76.3
59.0
Windsor
12,420
6,594
19,374
30,765
24,225
80.0
63.0
Indiana
Marion
203,076
101,974
305,398
538,700
452,195
77.9
56.6
Vanderbourgh
49,059
22,139
71,221
119,947
109,972
64.8
59.3
Monroe
19,953
15,241
35,342
64,358
52,559
67.2
54.7
New Hampshire
Hillsborough
65,274
34,739
101,359
152,153
131,858
76.9
66.6
Rockingham
38,825
21,998
61,496
92,217
81,359
75.6
66.7
Merrimac
25,354
11,737
37,440
57,203
49,126
76.2
65.5
*
Massachusetts
Middlesex
269,216
344,825
614,041
977,426
677,298
91.0
63.0
Essex
139,585
156,690
296,275
447,719
332,719
89.0
66.0
Norfolk
132,114
148,636
280,750
418,833
305,081
92.0
67.0
Worcester
123,934
140,845
264,779
449,638
311,629
85.0
59.0
* Iowa
Black Hawk
31,096
21,721
53,635
91,072
65,588
81.8
58.9
Cerro Gordo
11,856
9,270
21,449
34,949
16,454+
61.4
Crawford
4,493
3,018
7,656
12,757
60.0
Lucas
2,851
1,759
4,688
7,417
1,001+
63.2
Marion
6,583
4,634
11,516
19,146
4,265+
60.1
Polk
70,329
59,327
132,645
199,072
154,455
85.9
66.6
Poweshiek
4,785
3,718
8,633
13,457
64.6
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
North Dakota
Cass
21,770
14,073
36,306
51,693
70.2
Burleigh
13,909
5,841
20,644
26,835
76.9
Grand Forks
13,361
9,416
23,475
42,217
55.6
* Tennessee
Davidson
82,636
48,869
134,797
317,512
224,632
60.0
42.0
Knox
64,747
24,076
90,484
199,828
120,135
75.0
45.0
Shelby
161,810
81,063
247,717
489,344
374,591
66.0
50.0
South Carolina
Greenville
46,360
10,080
58,355
166,496
87,691
66.5
34.4
Richland
39,667
18,699
59,212
168,375
88,205
67.1
35.1
Utah
Utah
42,179
10,828
59,460
77,794
92,005
76.4
64.6
Weber
37,753
14,503
55,580
76,166
82,735
73.3
67.5
Salt Lake
296,772
* West Virginia
Cabell
29,299
14,103
43,402
58,894
79,330
73.0
54.0
Kanawha
64,072
38,393
102,465
136,304
163,480
75.0
62.6
Wood
25,114
10,230
35,344
53,872
59,847
65.6
59.0
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
* Footnotes
IDAHO
Registration figures are prior to election day. People
were allowed to register on election day.
MASSACHUSETTS Registration figures are only up to February, 1972. Turn-
out figure is only major party. Worcester County results
do not include town of Grafton.
VERMONT
All figures are based on 94% of the returns. Registration
is as of 1970.
TENNESSEE
Registration figures for Knox County are as of September,
1971.
NEBRASKA
All voter turnout figures are based on major party vote
only.
WEST VIRGINIA All voter turnout figures are based on major party vote
only.
IOWA
Registration figures for Cerro Gordo, Lucas and Marion
County are partial.
NEW JERSEY
All voter turnout figures are based on major party vote
only.
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
* Footnotes
IDAHO.
Registration figures are prior to election day. People
were allowed to register on election day.
MASSACHUSETTS Registration figures are only up to February, 1972. Turn-
out figure is only major party. Worcester County results
do not include town of Grafton.
VERMONT
All figures are based on 94% of the returns. Registration
is as of 1970.
TENNESSEE
Registration figures for Knox County are as of September,
1971.
NEBRASKA
All voter turnout figures are based on major party vote
only.
WEST VIRGINIA All voter turnout figures are based on major party vote
only.
IOWA
Registration figures for Cerro Gordo, Lucas and Marion
County are partial.
NEW JERSEY
All voter turnout figures are based on major party vote
only.
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
Kansas
Sedgewick
83,949
34,220
122,701
239,103
156,975
78.2
51.3
Shawnee
43,727
20,383
69,249
239,103
83,388
83.0
29.0
Johnson
76,161
24,324
104,136
144,015
120,407
86.5
72.3
Wyandatte
34,112
28,405
64,968
127,480
82,265
79.0
51.0
Minnesota
Hennepin
227,630
205,062
440,852
671,121
522,650
84.3
65.6
Ramsey
97,138
109,427
212,410
326,993
64.6
*
Illinois
Cook
1,197,818
1,006,793
2,204,611
3,840,387
3,140,500
70.2,
57.4
Metro
529,517
708,206
1,237,723
1,990,500
62.1
Suburban
668,301
298,587
966,888
DuPage
166,346
64,000
230,346
318,031
290,432
79.3
72.4
Lake
78,332
41,371
119,703
258,885
165,357
72.4
46.2
Marion
10,755
6,968
17,723
27,962
27,740
63.9
63.4
Rock Island
36,684
32,159
68,843
115,441
100,000
68.8
59.6
Mississippi
Harrison
28,889
4,744
36,640
58,000
91,212
63.0
40.0
Hinds
49,700
12,888-
63,964
98,706
143,561
65.0
45.0
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
* Missouri
Jackson
129,922
92,836
222,758
459,932
48.3
St. Louis
253,102
154,731
407,833
645,564
485,345
83.3
63.0
St. Louis City
69,744
113,782
183,526
446,358
263,917
65.3
41.1
* Wisconsin
Waukesha
59,399
34,573
97,620
146,823
65.8
Dane
56,020
79,567
137,177
203,415
67.4
Milwaukee
190,755
209,754
413,813
739,576
491,801
66.4
55.9
Washington
King
251,055
181,467
447,211
816,713
701,243
63.8
54.8
* Texas
Dallas
304,850
129,809
434,659
896,934
631,457
68.8
48.5
Harris
365,670
215,916
581,586
1,164,513
847,779
68.6
49.9
Colorado
3,495
1,502
4,997
12,515
8,068
61.9
39.9
Georgia
Dekalb
102,676
29,727
145,317
280,155
181,000
80.3
51.9
Fulton
92,256
74,329
192,650
432,287
44.6
* Florida
Dade
256,529
177,693
434,222
920,094
592,6,59
73.3
47.2
Pinellas
179,541
77,197
256,968
416,764
324,802
79.1
61.7
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
Ohio
Ashtabula
22,769
15,222
39,692
66,541
47,235
84.0
59.7
Athens
9,735
9,977
19,915
42,575
25,500
78.0
46.8
Butler
49,981
21,042
73,081
155,758
98,691
74.0
47.0
Cleveland City
319,825
Cuyahoga
329,567
316,263
680,077
1,214,412
883,984
-76.9
56.0
Franklin
218,472
116,752
343,264
576,075
430,644
79.7
59.6
Greene
25,349
12,736
38,904
83,993
52,099
74.7
46.0
Hamilton
248,013
119,204
373,598
636,801
457,379
81.7
58.7
Cincinnati
208,086
Montgomery
120,312
81,447
207,138
417,320
268,124
77.3
49.6
Mahoning
63,956
61,395
127,843
214,144
158,487
80.7
59.7
Shelby
9,089
4,721
14,703
24,646
17,768
82.7
59.7
Colorado
Denver
122,025
97,972
223,373
375,480
301,692
74.0
59.0
*
New York
Bronx
197,441
245,757
443,198
1,053,437
703,902
63.0
42.0
Erie
251,869
203,939
455,808
774,650
596,692
75.0
58.0
Monroe
192,888
118,643
311,531
492,962
356,840
87.0
63.0
Nassau
440,219
253,095
693,314
992,377
828,799
83.0
70.0
New York
179,867
353,847
533,714
1,229,878
43.0
Onondaga
133,521
56,081
189,602
324,134
237,328
80.0
58.0
Queens
423,429
328,462
751,891
1,517,183
1,039,869
72.0
50.0
Suffolk
316,623
131,991
448,614
714,964
526,506
85.0
63.0
Westchester
263,067
148,655
411,722
643,194
471,630
87.0
64.0
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
State
Voting Age
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
Kentucky
Jefferson.
140,216
86,692
232,123
474,891
301,769
77.0
49.0
*
California
Yuba
6,433
4,433
12,164
29,134
15,320
79.4
41.8
Fresno
79,049
72,677
163,328
281,343
201,396
81.1
58.1
Mendocino
11,104
9,402
22,492
36,142
26,876
83.7
62.2
San Francisco
127,826
170,702
317,098
573,998
426,338
74.4
55.2
Marin
53,687
46,959
105,494
147,059
126,928
83.1
71.7
San Diego
365,644
203,722
605,470
973,656
725,501
83.5
62.2
Los Angeles
1,516,832
1,163,205
2,835,769
5,017,447
3,597,963
78.8
56.5
Orange
442,587
174,695
648,263'
952,515
794,174
81.6
68.1
San Mateo
134,870
109,301
260,920
398,567
310,204
84.1
65.5
Tuolumne
5,894
4,596
11,107
16,500
13,205
84.1
67.3
Pennsylvania
Pittsburgh City
89,769
104,468
197,759
372,191
266,298
74.0
53.0
Bucks
99,161
56,442
159,065
271,695
198,546
80.0
59.0
Delaware
175,480
93,759
273,446
422,164
335,711
81.0
65.0
Allegheny
317,281
281,283
611,808
1,156,055
920,875
66.0
53.0
Rhode Island
Kent
38,826
27,890
66,821
97,712
88,824
75.2
68.4
Providence
124,557
124,037
249,152
421,705
343,901
72.4
59.1
Arizona
Pima
71,798
55,349
129,738
245,367
179,950
72.1
52.9
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
* Footnotes
CALIFORNIA
The Orange County figures for turnout include only votes
cast for Nixon, McGovern, Schmitz and Spock; no other
minor candidates are included.
ILLINOIS
Major party vote only - Schmitz not on ballot
WISCONSIN
Registration is mandatory only for communities of
5,000 or more.
MISSOURI
Major party vote only, Schmitz not on ballot
TEXAS
Major party vote only, Schmitz not on ballot
FLORIDA
Major party vote only, Schmitz not on ballot
NEW YORK
Major party vote only, Schmitz not on ballot
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
New Mexico
Bernalillo
80,267
49,176
132,666
207,697
166,594
79.6
63.9
South Dakota
Brookings
5,182
4,701
9,913
16,618
13,491
73.5
59.6
Brown
8,134
8,216
16,451
25,633
21,600
76.2
64.2
Minnehaha
22,447
22,386
.44,988
63,956
57,500
78.2
70.3
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
ADDENDUM
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
Illinois
Winnebago
34,892
22,662
57,677
165,461
73,177
78.8
34.9
Pennsylvania
Clarion
10,000
4,500
14,501
27,227
18,840
77.0
53.3
Cumberland
42,000
14,000
57,000
111,791
71,943
79.2
51.0
Lawrence
23,000
17,000
40,736
76,640
51,484
79.1
53.1
Mercer
27,804
18,162
46,992
89,318
58,976
79.7
52.6
Montgomery
173,213
91,581
267,394
438,095
329,648
81.1
61.0
Philadelphia-
344,000
429,000
778,900
1,405,617
1,010,229
77.1
55.4
Philadelphia City
344,000
429,000
778,900
1,405,617
1,010,229
77.1
55.4
Washington
42,925
34,949
78,274
151,694
98,859
79.2
51.6
Westmoreland
85,000
58,000
145,700
265,408
178,479
81.6
54.9
Chio
Lake
40,492
26,558
69,123
128,239
89,900
76.9
53.9
Wyoming
Natrona
15,649
6,514
22,163
37,975
28,109
78.8
58.4
1972 ELECTION RESULTS - KEY COUNTIES
* FOOTNOTES
RHODE ISLAND
For both counties, Total Turnout includes Nixon
McGovern, and Jenness votes only
GS -FyI
Committee
for the Re-election
of the President
1701 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE, N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 (202) 333-0920
December 11, 1972
Dear Bob:
With respect to the attached bill, I understand
that filming Presidential spots such as these are
to be paid by the Senate candidates and not
charged against the White House's account at the
Committee.
Congratulations on your great victory in Michigan.
With best wishes.
Sincerely,
Robert C. Odle, Jr.
Director of Administration
Mr. Robert M. Smalley
Administrative Assistant to
Robert P. Griffin
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
bcc: Mr. Bruce Kehrli
Total
Total
Voting Age
Registered
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
%
95%
Alabama
691,253
215,098
918,621
2,274,000
1,768,845
77.5
52.0
40.0
76%
Alaska
44,577
25,580
75,891
200,000
150,000
75.0
50.0
37.0
100%
Arizona
394,948
194,039
609,996
1,239,000
861,812
69.6
70.0
49.0
95%
Arkansas
427,014
190,598
617,612
1,310,000
959,871
73.3
64.0
47.1
100%
California
4,546,396
3,433,568
8,210,512
13,945,000
10,466,215
75.1
78.0
58.0
98%
Colorado
585,324
325,448
929,309
1,558,000
1,219,591
78.3
76.2
59.6
96%
Connecticut
801,143
535,405
1,359,875
2,106,000
1,507,603
71.6
90.2
64.5
100%
Delaware
139,796
91,904
234,789
371,000
293,078
79.0
80.1
63.2
100%
Dist. Columbia
31,257
115,914
149,089
518,000
305,072
58.9
48.9
28.7
100%
Florida
1,752,230
690,546
2,442,776
5,105,000
3,487,458
68.3
70.0
47.8
93%
Georgia
794,766
264,864
1,059,630
3,104,000
2,131,188
68.6
49.7
34.1
100%
Hawaii
167,414
100,617
268,031
531,000
326,906
61.6
82.0
50.4
99%
Idaho
197,589
80,558
307,462
479,000
400,000
83.5
76.9
64.1
97%
Illinois
{
2,745,352
1,861,950
4,607,302
7,542,000
6,215,331
22.4
74.1
61.0
100%
Indiana
1,401,547
705,808
2,107,355
3,509,000
2,842,195
81.0
74.1
60.0
100%
Iowa
706,578
494,863
1,225,492
1,909,000
739,906+
38.8+
64.1
100%
Kansas
605,632
265,158
891,810
1,541,000
1,065,730
69.2
84.0
57.8
100%
Kentucky
671,198
369,051
1,057,418
2,206,000
1,454,575
65.9
72.6
47.9
96%
Louisiana
758,962
377,489
1,194,938
2,339,000
1,784,890
76.3
66.9
51.0
100%
Maine
252,851
161,659
414,510
666,000
576,915
86.6
71.8
62.2
100%
Maryland
797,295
486,570
1,302,315
2,688,000
1,815,784
67.6
72.0
48.4
Total
:
Turnout
of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting
Age
Precincts
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
%
100%
Massachusetts
1,105,072
1,324,526
2,429,598
3,955,000
2,775,538
70.2
87.5
61.4
95%
Michigan
1,895,239
1,411,175
3,366,338
5,874,000
4,755,423
81.0
70.8
57.3
98%
Minnesota
881,326
789,473
1,701,478
2,560,000
66.5
99%
Mississippi
498,680
125,756
636,090
1,403,000
875,000
62.4
72.0
45.3
99%
Missouri
1,132,111
682,030
1,814,141
3,266,000
55.5
100%
Montana
183,784
118,661
314,691
460,000
386,867
84.1
81.0
68.4
100%
Nebraska
384,571
162,598
547,169
1.022,000
807,267
79.0
67.0
53.5
98%
Nevada
100,960
58,982
159,912
348,000
231,037
66.4
69.2
46.0
100%
New Hampshire
213,724
116,435
331,055
521,000
423,822
81.3
78.1
63.5
97%
New Jersey
1,769,487
1,058,557
2,852,405
5,025,000
3,667,329
73.0
77.8
56.8
99%
New Mexico
233,036
138,856
380,515
636,000
505,432
79.5
75.3
59.8
99%
New York
4,180,446
2,907,598
7,088,044
12,773,000
9,207,363
72.1
77.0
55.5
100%
North Carolina
1,052,165
437,652
1,514,178
3,463,000
2,357,645
68.1
64.2
43.7
94%
North Dakota
165,977
94,879
266,211
402,000
66.2
100%
Ohio
2,426,048
1,546,959
4,067,776
7,185,000
4,627,940+
64.4+
56.6
100%
Oklahoma
745,810
242,957
1,011,634
1,812,000
1,247,157
68.8
80.2
55.8
100%
Oregon
483,229
390,867
920,200
1,500,000
1,198,996
79.7
76.7
61.3
100%
Pennsylvania
2,703,975
1,788,034
4,559,264
8,161,000
5,433,752
66.6
83.9
55.9
100%
Rhode Island
209,166
185,239
394,405
673,000
531,847
79.0
74.0
58.5
97%
South Carolina
468,572
189,560
668,188
1,706,000
1,033,688
60.6
64.6
39.2
Total
% Turnout of
Turnout
of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
Precincts
State
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
%
100%
South Dakota
163,814
137,569
301,383
434,000
391,727
90.3
76.9
69.4
100%
Tennessee
812,465
355,812
1,198,533
2,713,000
1,990,026
73.4
60.2
44.2
-
99%
Texas
2,272,656
1,146,470
3,419,126
7,681,000
5,100,000
66.4
67.0
44.5
100%
Utah
321,595
126,008
476,219
689,000
543,364
78.9
87.6
69.1
100%
Vermont
116,702
68,616
185,318
309,000
250,000
80.9
74.0
60.0
100%
Virginia
986,445
440,031
1,445,772
3,197,000
1,902,062
59.5
76.0
45.2
94%
Washington
679,156
475,553
1,175,597
2,371,000
1,973,895
83.3
59.6
49.6
98%
West Virginia
472,063
271,950
744,013
1,182,000
1,072,519
90.7
69.4
62.9
100%
Wisconsin
988,521
807,070
1,843,110
2,955,000
1,850,000
62.6
99.6
62.4
100%
Wyoming
100,630
44,348
144,986*
225,000
138,936 61.7
104.3*
64.4
KEY:
Total Turnout - In some cases figure is unofficial total for all parties; in other instances
minor party figures were unavailable and total is sum of the Nixon-McGovern vote.
Minnesota -
registration required only in communities of 10,000 or more.
Missouri -
registration optional except in cities with populations of 400,000 or more and
counties with 200,000 or more. Registration is not statewide.
North Dakota - Do not register voters.
Voting Age Population: U.S. Census Estimate for November, 1972
Total Registered Voters: Most recent statistics available from Secretaries of State
offices
+
Partial Registration
*
Turnout was higher than registration because registration was open until Election Day.
VOTING FOR PRESIDENT
OFFICIAL
November 22, 1972
% of
Nixon
% of
McGovern
% of
Schmitz
% of
Date of
ate
Pret.
Vote
Vote
Vote
Certification
AP
labama
95
692,480
76
215,792
23
12,248
1
Nothing until 11/22
laska
41,809
58.5
24,362
34
5,354
7.5
rizona
100
381,532
65
188,892
32
20,542
3
AP
rkansas
96
427,014
70
190,598
30
-
-
Nothing until 11/22 -AP
alifornia
100
4,546,396
56
3,433,568
42
230,548
?,
AP
clorado
98
585,324
63
325,448
36
16,537
1
Nothing until 11/27 -AP
onnecticut
100
810,763
555.498
17,239
Unofficial until 11/29
claware
100
139,796
60
91,974
39
2615
l
AP
ist. of Columbia
100
29,697
21
109,974
79
-
-
AP
!orida
100
1. 752.230
72
690,546
28
None
AP
corgia
100
881,490
289,529
write in
None
lawaii
100
167,414
63
100,671
37
daho
all but 2 pct.
197,589
64.0
80,558
26.0
28,221
9.0
Approx. 11/28
linois
97
2,748,252
60
1,863,731
40
-
-
Approx. 11/30 - UPI
idiana
1,278,714
610,582
11/22
DIVE.
100
703,933
57.8
493,310
24,051
1
12/4
lansas
100
605,632
68
265,158
30
21,020
2
Nothing until 12/1 -UPI
Contucky
100
671.198
64
369,051
35
17,169
1
End of November -AP
Louisiana
96
758,903
63
377,489
32
58,547
5
Nothing until 11/27 -AP
Maine
100
252,851
61
161,652
39
-
-
Nothing until 11/27 -AP
Maryland
100
797,295
62
486,570
37
16,450
1
Official on 12/6-AP
Massachusetts
100
1,105,072
45
1,324,525
55
-
-
Nothing until mid Dec. -AP
Michigan
99
1,960,871
57
1,465,093
42
45,772
J.
Nothing until 12/1
-AP
Vinnesota
100
897,569
802,569
31,407
11/21
Mississippi
100
505,125
123,992
11,598
11/20
Vissouri
99
1,425,256
63
678,660
37
--
-
Nothing until 12/12 AP
Montana
100
183,976
120,197
13,430
11/22
Nobraska
100
384,571
71
162,600
29
-
I
Nothing until 12/4-AP
Nevada
100
115,750
66,016
11/22
New Hampshire
100
213,724
116,435
3,386
11/17
Note Tereby
97
1,769,487
62
1,058,557
38
24,361
-
Nothing until 12/5AP
Now Mexico
99
233,036
62
138,856
37
8,623
2
Nothing until 11/27-AP
New York
99
4,180,446
59
2,907,598
41
-
-
Nothing until 12/1 AP
VOTING FOR PRESIDENT
OFFICIAL
- 2 -
% of
Nixon
% of
McGovern % of
Schmitz
% of
Date of
to
Prot.
Vote
Vote
Vote
Certification
oth Carolina
100
1,054,889
438,705
9,039
Result of 2nd of 3 audits
with Dakota
174,109
100,384
5,646
Official results 11/24
tio
100
2
456,048
60
1.546,959
38
80,766
2
Nothing until 11/21 - AP
dahores
100
759,025
247,147
237,028
11/13
10702
100
483,229
53
390,867
42
46,104
5
Official after 12/7 - AP
enusylvania
100
2,703,975
60
1,788,034
39
67,255
1
Nothing until 11/27 -AP
todo Island
100
209,166
54
185,239
46
Nothing until 11/27 - AP
uth Caroline
97
468,572
71
189,560
28
10,056
1
Nothing until 11/21 - AP
with Dakota
100
163,814
55
137,568
45
Nothing until 12/1 - AP
annessed
100
813,147
357,293
30,343
11/22
exas
99
2,272,656
67
1,146,470
33
Nothing until end of Dec. AP
tah
99
321,595
68
126,008
26
28,616
6
Nothing until 12/11
AP
crument
117,149
68,174
11/21
irginia
100
986.440
69
440,030
30
19,296
1
Nothing until 12/11
AP
Techington
94
679,456
57
475,568
39
48,953
4
Nothing until 12/7
AP
lost Virginia
98
472,063
64
271,950
36
12/11 -AP
Viseonsin
100
988,021
54
807,070
44
47,019
2
Nothing until 11/23
AP
Avoming
100
100,630
70
44,348
30
Nothing until 12/6
AP
TOTAL
46,622,734
60.9
28,648,135
37.44
1,238,217
1.62
Total Votes Tabulated: 76,509,086
Period
Nates
1:02
McGovern
Schmitz
Shof
Date of
*Tote
Certification
AP
95
$92,480
75
215,792
23
12,248
1
Nothing MA 11/22
using
41,809
58.5
24,352
34
3.356
7,3
100
381,532
65
138,392
32
20,542
3
23
06
627,014
70
190,599
30
-
-
Nothing vaill 11/22 -AP
lifernia
200
4,545.396
55
3.433,568
42
230.548
2
AP
lorado
98
585,324
53
325,448
36
16,537
1
Nothing not!1 11/27 -SP
100
810.753
555,498
17,239
Unditioial until 11/29
102
139.796
50
91.974
39
2615
1
AP
of Columbia
100
29,697
21
109,974
79
-
-
AP
cride
1100
752.230
72
690.546
2S
No.co
AP
creis
100
SSL,490
289,529
write in
None
100
167,414
63
100,671
37
all but 2 pct.
197.589
64.0
80,358
26.0
26,221
9.0
Approx. 11.23
87
2,748,252
60
1,863,731
40
-
,
Approx. 11/30 - UPI
100
1,401,547
67
705,808
33
1
-
Mayba 11/22 - UPI
1200
703,933
57.8
473,310
24,051
1
12/4
1383
'100
505,632
68
265,155
30
21,020
2
Nothins notil 12.1 -UPI
BARACKY
100
672.198
64
359,051
35
17,169
1
End of November -AP
ovisiana
95
758.903
63
377,489
32
58,547
3
Nothing natil 11/27 AP
100
252,651
E1.
161,652
39
,
,
Nothing uctil 11 727 3P
haviand
100
797,295
62
485,570
37
16,450
1
Official O.O. 12/6-AP
atts
100
1,105,072
65
1,324,525
55
-
I
Nothing until mid-Doc. -AP
chipan
99
1,960,871
57
1,465.093
42
45,772
l
Nothing well 1271 AP
minescle
9S
881,326
52
789,473
47
30,679
1
Nothing and 11/22 AP
Resissioni
100
505,125
123,992
11,598
11/20
Misscuri
99
1,425,256
63
678,650
37
-
I
Nothing until 12/12-AP
Contana
100
183,784
58
118,681
38
13,371
so
Nothing until 11/21-AP
straska
100
384,571
71
162,600
29
-
I
Nothine until 12/4-AP
avade
93
114,593
64
65,258
36
1
I
Nothing until 11/22-4P
Hampshire
100
213,724
116,435
3,386
11/17
Jersey
97
1,759.487
52
058.557
38
24.361
!
Nothing cetil 12/5.1P
Mexter
29
233,035
62
138,856
37
8,623
2
Nothing until 11/27 -AP
York
99
4,150,445
59
907,598
41
-
-
Nothing until /1-AP
VOTING POR PR FIDEND
OFFICIAL
-2-
% of
Nixon
foof
McGovara % of Schmits
To os
Date of
Prot.
Vota
Toto
Total
Cardification
1
birth Carolina
100
1,054,889
438.705
9,039
Result 200 Blaudits
and Dokota
174,109
100,384
5,646
Cuficial results 24
to
200
2,456,048
3
0.546,959
38
30.756
2
Nothing will 21-AP
klahoras
100
759,025
247,147
237,028
11.13
regun
100
483,229
53
390,867
42
146,104
5
Official siter 2,7 - AP
acceptivania
100
2,703,975
60
4,783,034
39
67,255
1).
Nothing will -AP
here Island
100
209,166
5-4
185,239
46
Nothing 2013 U.S. -AP
>WM Carolina
97
468,572
71
189,550
28
10,356
1
Nothing caril 12 21 - AP
bath Dakota
100
163,814
55
137.568
45
Nothing will 220 - AP
conossos
100
$12,484
68
355,817
30
30,256
2
Nothing world 11:32 - UPI
so
2,272,658
67
1,146,470
33
Norhing undi and of Dec.:
Utah
83
321,595
68
126,008
26
38,615
6
Nothing until 12:11 AP
Vorrnoot
117,149
58,174
11/21
irginin
100
986,440
69
440,030
30
19,296
1
Nathing until 12 11 TO
Washington
9%
679,456
57
475,563
38
48,953
4
Norbing AP
VOED Virginia
98
472,063
164
271,950
35
12/01 AP
Wisconsin
100
933.021
54
807,070
44
47,019
2
Nothing until 11/23 AP
Wyoming
100
100.530
70
44,348
30
Nothing watil 12,6 AP
TOTAL
99
46;767,312
60.9
28,726,515
37.4
1.235.89)
1.6
Total Votes Tabulated: 76,732,718
1972 ELECTION REPORT
AGGREGATE REPORT ON THE TOP 15 SMSA's
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
SMSA/Counties
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
1. New York, New York
New York City
2,341,506
1,909,151
4,250,657
8,373,419
50.8
Bronx
197,441
245,757
443,198
1,053,437
703,902
(66.8)
63.0
42.1
Kings
373,831
383,972
757,803
1,871,211
1,132,754
(60.5)
66.9
40.5
New York
179,867
353,847
533,714
1,229,878
43.4
Queens
423,429
328,462
751,891
1,517,183
1,039,869
(68.5)
72.3
49.6
Richmond
84,676
29,126
113,802
203,358
145,375
(71.5)
78.3
56.0
Nassau
440,219
253,095
693,314
992,377
828,799
(83.5)
83.7
70.0
Rockland
62,353
34,246
96,599
147,817
118,517
(80.2)
81.5
65.4
Suffolk
316,623
131,991
448,614
714,964
526,506
(73.6)
85.2
62.7
Westchester
263,067
148,655
411,722
643,194
471,630
(73.3)
87.3
64.0
2. Los Angeles, Long Beach
California
Los Angeles
1,516,832
1,163,205
2,835,769
5,017,447
3,597,963 (71.7)
78.8
56.5
3. Chicago, Illinois
1,608,311
1,185,412
2,794,279
4,822,814
3,925,107
(81.4)
71.2
57.9
Cook
1,197,818
1,006,793
2,204,611
3,840,387
3,140,500
(81.8)
70.2
57.4
DuPage
166,346
64,000
230,346
318,031
290,432
(91.3)
79.3
72.4
Kane
64,546
27,525
92,286
168,262
124,008
(73.7)
74.4
54.8
Lake
78,332
41,371
119,703
258,885
165,357
(63.9)
72.4
46.2
McHenry
36,114
12,090
48,312
73,598
64,265
(87.3)
75.2
65.6
Will
65,155
33,633
99,021
163,651
140,545
(85.9)
70.5
60.5
1972 ELECTION REPORT
AGGREGATE REPORT ON THE TOP 15 SMSA's
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
SMSA/Counties
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
4. Philadelphia, PA
1,091,815
844,100
1,962,178
3,375,563
2,474,163 (73,3)
79.3
58.1
Bucks, PA
99,161
56,442
159,065
271,695
198,546
(73.1)
80.1
58.5
Chester, PA
72,415
31,087
105,912
191,574
130,864
(68.3)
80.9
55.3
Delaware, PA
175,480
93,759
273,446
422,164
335,711
(79.5)
81.5
64.8
Montgomery, PA
173,213
91,581
267,394
438,095
329,648
(75.2)
81.1
61.0
Philadelphia, PA
344,000
429,000
778,900
1,405,617
1,010,229
(71.9)
77.1
55.4
Burlington, NJ
70,805
41,520
110,846
218,090
136,583
(62.6)
81.2
50.8
Camden, NJ
111,935
75,202
193,324
313,328
246,344
(78.6)
78.5
61.7
Gloucester, NJ
44,806
25,509
73,291
115,000
86,238
(75.0)
85.0
63.7
5. Detroit, Michigan
924,403
725,892
1,680,294
2,839,183
2,277,147
(80.2)
73.8
59.2
Macomb
147,482
82,348
235,434
394,624
290,026
(73.5)
81.2
59.7
Oakland
241,398
129,537
379,201
603,975
502,737
(83.2)
75.4
62.8
Wayne
535,523
514,007
1,065,659
1,840,584
1,484,384
(80.6)
71.8
57.9
6. San Francisco, CA
648,449
697,624
1,430,419
2,273,893
1,771,204
(77.9)
80.8
62.9
Alameda
201,362
259,254
483,756
774,556
596,587
(77.0)
81.1
62.5
Contra Costa
130,704
111,408
263,151
379,713
311,147
(81.9)
84.6
69.3
Marin
53,687
46,959
105,494
147,059
126,928
(86.3)
83.1
71.7
San Francisco
127,826
170,702
317,098
573,998
426,338
(74.3)
74.4
55.2
San Mateo
134,870
109,301
260,920
398,567
310,204
(77.8)
84.1
65.5
1972 ELECTION REPORT
AGGREGATE REPORT ON -THE TOP 15 SMSA's
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
SMSA/Counties
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
7. Washington, D.C.-MD-VA
482,415
399,874
899,127
1,938,312
1,259,606
(65.0)
71.4
46.4
Dist. Columbia
31,257
115.914
149,089
518,000
305,072
(58.9)
48.9
28.8
Montgomery, MD
125,620
92,543
220,364
355,597
290,000
(81.6)
76.0
62.0
Prince Georges, MD
116,166
79,914
198,410
436,910
238,097
(54.5)
83.3
45.4
Alexandria City, VA
20,235
15,409
37,223
83,360
56,202
(67.4)
66.2
44.7
Fairfax City, VA
5,063
2,271
7,472
14,073
10,154
(72.2)
73.6
53.1
Falls Chrc. City, VA
2,967
1,895
4,943
7,795
6,523 (83.7)
75.8
63.4
Arlington, VA
39,406
25,877
67,774
137,487
90,870 (66.1)
74.6
49.3
Fairfax, VA
112,135
54,844
172,601
295,656
208,945
(70.7)
82.6
58.4
Loudoun, VA
9,417
3,941
13,367
23,882
18,402
(77.1)
72.6
56.0
Prince William, VA
20,149
7,266
27,884
65,552
35,341
(53.9)
78.9
42.5
8. Pittsburgh, PA.
488,902
405,801
914,312
1,718,920
1,293,516
(75.3)
70.7
53.2
Allegheny
317,281
281,283
611,808
1,156,055
920,875
(79.7)
66.0
53.0
Beaver
43,696
31,569
78,530
145,763
95,303
(65.4)
82.4
53.9
Washington
42,925
34,949
78,274
151,694
98,859
(65.2)
79.2
51.6
Westmoreland
85,000
58,000
145,700
265,408
178,479
(67.2)
81.6
54.9
9. St. Louis, MO-ILL
486,991
388,954
883,362
1,615,106
1,148,121 (71.1)
76.9
54.7
St. Louis City, MO
69,744
113,782
183,526
446,358
263,917
(59.0)
69.5
41.4
Franklin, MO
13,795
7,464
21,259
36,781
29,757
(80.9)
71.4
57.8
Jefferson, MO
18,764
12,019
30,783
67,123
50,717
(75.6)
60.7
45.9
St. Charles, MO
25,682
11,033
36,715
57,970
48,500
(83.7)
75.5
63.3
St. Louis, MO
253,102
154,731
407,833
645,564
485,345
(75.2)
83.3
63.0
Madison, ILL
55,385
43,289
101,398
171,864
127,000
(73.9)
79.8
59.0
St. Clair
50,519
46,636
101,848
189,446
142,885
(75.4)
71.3
53.8
1972 ELECTION REPORT
AGGREGATE REPORT ON THE TOP 15 SMSA's
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
SMSA/Counties
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
.
10. Baltimore, MD
420,200
255,758
685,010
1,433,385
985,991 (68.8)
69.5
47.8
Baltimore City
116,941
138,716
259,482
634,894
424,377
(67.0)
61.1
40.8
Anne Arundel
71,707
26,082
99,239
200,184
125,831
(62.9)
78.9
49.6
Baltimore
170,378
67,620
241,854
433,303
322,691
(74.5)
74.9
55.8
Carroll
16,382
4,262
21,192
48,559
27,623
(56.9)
76.7
43.6
Harford
25,141
8,737
33,878
76,098
47,187
(62.0)
71.8
44.5
Howard
18,651
10,341
29,365
40,347
38,282
(94.9)
76.7
72.8
11. Cleveland, Ohio
406,675
360,794
805,151
1,436,169
1,040,791
(72.5)
77.4
56.1
Cuyahoga
329,567
316,263
680,077
1,214,412
883,984
(72.8)
76.9
56.0
Geauga
15,606
7,325
23,552
40,253
28,225
(70.2)
83.4
58.5
Lake
40,492
26,558
69,123
128,239
89,900
(70.1)
76.9
53.9
Medina
21,010
10,648
32,399
53,265
38,652
(72.6)
83.8
60.8
12. Houston, Texas
417,442
239,464
656,906
1,325,463
964,722
(72.8)
68.1
49.6
Brazoria
21,045
11,350
32,395
71,920
48,628 (67.6)
66.6
45.0
Fort Bend
9,549
4,529
14,078
33,445
22,578 (67.5)
62.4
42.1
Harris
365,670
215,916
581,586
1,164,513
847,779
(72.8)
68.6
49.9
Liberty
6,111
3,311
9,422
22,661
15,450 (68.2)
61.0
41.6
Montgomery
15,067
4,358
19,425
32,924
30,287
(92.0)
64.1
59.0
13. Newark, New Jersey
425,805
292,571
720,337
1,318,357
918,716 (69.7)
78.4
54.6
Essex
163,989
151,804
315,793
667,453
429,762 (64.4)
73.5
47.3
Morris
114,469
50,937
159,016
257,069
195,434 (76.0)
81.4
61.9
Union
147,347
89,830
245,528
393,835
293,520
(74.5)
83.6
62.3
1972 ELECTION REPORT
AGGREGATE REPORT ON THE TOP 15 SMSA's
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
SMSA/Counties
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
14. Minneapolis, St. Paul
Minnesota
408,423
387,101
815,980
1,222,357
66.8
Anoka
29,546
28,031
60,475
90,042
67.2
Dakota
34,967
28,479
65,678
84,785
77.5
Hennepin
227,630
205,062
440,852
671,121
522,650 (77.9)
84.3
65.7
Ramsey
97,138
109,427
212,410
326,993
65.0
Washington
19,142
16,102
36,565
49,416
74.0
15. Dallas, Texas
357,424
151,556
509,224
1,057,849
744,993
(70.4)
68.4
48.1
Collin
17,667
4,783
22,595
44,917
33,112
(73.7)
68.2
50.3
Dallas
304,850
129,809
434,659
896,934
631,457
(70.4)
68.4
48.5
Denton
19,138
9,720
28,920
55,493
42,365
(76.3)
68.3
52.1
Ellis
8,779
3,839
12,626
32,249
19,159
(59.4)
65.9
39.2
Kaufman
5,100
2,795
7,907
23,402
15,000
(64.1)
52.7
33.8
Rockwall
1,890
610
2,517
4,854
3,900
(80.3)
64.5
51.9
Boston anavail lec/tun/unty pur
Minn -Herenties no Regis.
ny Cnty - I where couldn't get
1972 ELECTION REPORT
AGGREGATE REPORT ON THE TOP 15 SMSA's
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
SMSA/Counties
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
1. New York, New York
New York City
2,341,506
1,909,151
4,250,657
8,373,419
50.8
Bronx
197,441
245,757
443,198
1,053,437
703,902
(66.8)
63.0
42.1
Kings
373,831
383,972
757,803
1,871,211
1,132,754
(60.5)
66.9
40.5
New York
179,867
353,847
533,714
1,229,878
43.4
Queens
423,429
328,462
751,891
1,517,183
1,039,869
(68.5)
72.3
49.6
Richmond
84,676
29,126
113,802
203,358
145,375
(71.5)
78.3
56.0
Nassau
440,219
253,095
693,314
992,377
828,799
(83.5)
83.7
70.0
Rockland
62,353
34,246
96,599
147,817
118,517
(80.2)
81.5
65.4
Suffolk
316,623
131,991
448,614
714,964
526,506
(73.6)
85.2
62.7
Westchester
263,067
148,655
411,722
643,194
471,630
(73.3)
87.3
64.0
2. Los Angeles, Long Beach
California
Los Angeles
1,516,832
1,163,205
2,835,769
5,017,447
3,597,963 (71.7)
78.8
56.5
3. Chicago, Illinois
1,608,311
1,185,412
2,794,279
4,822,814
3,925,107
(81.4)
71.2
57.9
Cook
1,197,818
1,006,793
2,204,611
3,840,387
3,140,500
(81.8)
70.2
57.4
DuPage
166,346
64,000
230,346
318,031
290,432
(91.3)
79.3
72.4
Kane
64,546
27,525
92,286
168,262
124,008
(73.7)
74.4
54.8
Lake
78,332
41,371
119,703
258,885
165,357
(63.9)
72.4
46.2
McHenry
36,114
12,090
48,312
73,598
64,265
(87.3)
75.2
65.6
Will
65,155
33,633
99,021
163,651
140,545
(85.9)
70.5
60.5
1972 ELECTION REPORT
AGGREGATE REPORT ON-THE TOP 15 SMSA's
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
SMSA/Counties
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
4. Philadelphia, PA
1,091,815
844,100
1,962,178
3,375,563
2,474,163 (73.3)
79.3
58.1
Bucks, PA
99,161
56,442
159,065
271,695
198,546
(73.1)
80.1
58.5
Chester, PA
72,415
31,087
105,912
191,574
130,864
(68.3)
80.9
55.3
Delaware, PA
175,480
93,759
273,446
422,164
335,711
(79.5)
81.5
64.8
Montgomery, PA
173,213
91,581
267,394
438,095
329,648
(75.2)
81.1
61.0
Philadelphia, PA
344,000
429,000
778,900
1,405,617
1,010,229
(71.9)
77.1
55.4
Burlington, NJ
70,805
41,520
110,846
218,090
136,583
(62.6)
81.2
50.8
Camden, NJ
111,935
75,202
193,324
313,328
246,344
(78.6)
78.5
61.7
Gloucester, NJ
44,806
25,509
73,291
115,000
86,238
(75.0)
85.0
63.7
5. Detroit, Michigan
924,403
725,892
1,680,294
2,839,183
2,277,147
(80.2)
73.8
59.2
Macomb
147,482
82,348
235,434
394,624
290,026
(73.5)
81.2
59.7
Oakland
241,398
129,537
379,201
603,975
502,737
(83.2)
75.4
62.8
Wayne
535,523
514,007
1,065,659
1,840,584
1,484,384
(80.6)
71.8
57.9
6. San Francisco, CA
648,449
697,624
1,430,419
2,273,893
1,771,204
(77.9)
80.8
62.9
Alameda
201,362
259,254
483,756
774,556
596,587
(77.0)
81.1
62.5
Contra Costa
130,704
111,408
263,151
379,713
311,147
(81.9)
84.6
69.3
Marin
53,687
46,959
105,494
147,059
126,928
(86.3)
83.1
71.7
San Francisco
127,826
170,702
317,098
573,998
426,338
(74.3)
74.4
55.2
San Mateo
134,870
109,301
260,920
398,567
310,204
(77.8)
84.1
65.5
1972 ELECTION REPORT
AGGREGATE REPORT ON THE TOP 15 SMSA's
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
SMSA/Counties
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
7. Washington, D.C.-MD-VA
482,415
399,874
899,127
1,938,312
1,259,606 (65.0)
71.4
46.4
Dist. Columbia
31,257
115,914
149,089
518,000
305,072 (58.9)
48.9
28.8
Montgomery, MD
125,620
92,543
220,364
355,597
290,000
(81.6)
76.0
62.0
Prince Georges, MD
116,166
79,914
198,410
436,910
238,097
(54.5)
83.3
45.4
Alexandria City, VA
20,235
15,409
37,223
83,360
56,202
(67.4)
66.2
44.7
Fairfax City, VA
5,063
2,271
7,472
14,073
10,154 (72.2)
73.6
53.1
Falls Chrc. City, VA
2,967
1,895
4,943
7,795
6,523 (83.7)
75.8
63.4
Arlington, VA
39,406
25,877
67,774
137,487
90,870 (66.1)
74.6
49.3
Fairfax, VA
112,135
54,844
172,601
295,656
208,945 (70.7)
82.6
58.4
Loudoun, VA
9,417
3,941
13,367
23,882
18,402
(77.1)
72.6
56.0
Prince William, VA
20,149
7,266
27,884
65,552
35,341 (53.9)
78.9
42.5
8. Pittsburgh, PA.
488,902
405,801
914,312
1,718,920
1,293,516 (75.3)
70.7
53.2
Allegheny
317,281
281,283
611,808
1,156,055
920,875 (79.7)
66.0
53.0
Beaver
43,696
31,569
78,530
145,763
95,303 (65.4)
82.4
53.9
Washington
42,925
34,949
78,274
151,694
98,859 (65.2)
79.2
51.6
Westmoreland
85,000
58,000
145,700
265,408
178,479 (67.2)
81.6
54.9
9. St. Louis, MO-ILL
486,991
388,954
883,362
1,615,106
1,148,121
(71.1)
76.9
54.7
St. Louis City, MO
69,744
113,782
183,526
446,358
263,917
(59.0)
69.5
41.4
Franklin, MO
13,795
7,464
21,259
36,781
29,757
(80.9)
71.4
57.8
Jefferson, MO
18,764
12,019
30,783
67,123
50,717
(75.6)
60.7
45.9
St. Charles, MO
25,682
11,033
36,715
57,970
48,500 (83.7)
75.5
63.3
St. Louis, MO
253,102
154,731
407,833
645,564
485,345
(75.2)
83.3
63.0
Madison, ILL
55,385
43,289
101,398
171,864
127,000
(73.9)
79.8
59.0
St. Clair
50,519
46,636
101,848
189,446
142,885
(75.4)
71.3
53.8
1972 ELECTION REPORT
AGGREGATE REPORT ON THE TOP 15 SMSA's
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
SMSA/Counties
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
10. Baltimore, MD
420,200
255,758
685,010
1,433,385
985,991
(68.8)
69.5
47.8
Baltimore City
116,941
138,716
259,482
634,894
424,377
(67.0)
61.1
40.8
Anne Arundel
71,707
26,082
99,239
200,184
125,831
(62.9)
78.9
49.6
Baltimore
170,378
67,620
241,854
433,303
322,691
(74.5)
74.9
55.8
Carroll
16,382
4,262
21,192
48,559
27,623
(56.9)
76.7
43.6
Harford
25,141
8,737
33,878
76,098
47,187
(62.0)
71.8
44.5
Howard
18,651
10,341
29,365
40,347
38,282
(94.9)
76.7
72.8
11. Cleveland, Ohio
406,675
360,794
805,151
1,436,169
1,040,791
(72.5)
77.4
56.1
Cuyahoga
329,567
316,263
680,077
1,214,412
883,984
(72.8)
76.9
56.0
Geauga
15,606
7,325
23,552
40,253
28,225
(70.2)
83.4
58.5
Lake
40,492
26,558
69,123
128,239
89,900
(70.1)
76.9
53.9
Medina
21,010
10,648
32,399
53,265
38,652
(72.6)
83.8
60.8
12. Houston, Texas
417,442
239,464
656,906
1,325,463
964,722
(72.8)
68.1
49.6
Brazoria
21,045
11,350
32,395
71,920
48,628
(67.6)
66.6
45.0
Fort Bend
9,549
4,529
14,078
33,445
22,578
(67.5)
62.4
42.1
Harris
365,670
215,916
581,586
1,164,513
847,779
(72.8)
68.6
49.9
Liberty
6,111
3,311
9,422
22,661
15,450
(68.2)
61.0
41.6
Montgomery
15,067
4,358
19,425
32,924
30,287
(92.0)
64.1
59.0
13. Newark, New Jersey
425,805
292,571
720,337
1,318,357
918,716 (69.7)
78.4
54.6
Essex
163,989
151,804
315,793
667,453
429,762
(64.4)
73.5
47.3
Morris
114,469
50,937
159,016
257,069
195,434
(76.0)
81.4
61.9
Union
147,347
89,830
245,528
393,835
293,520
(74.5)
83.6
62.3
1972 ELECTION REPORT
AGGREGATE REPORT ON -THE TOP 15 SMSA's
Total
% Turnout of
% Turnout of
Total
Voting Age
Registered
Registered
Voting Age
SMSA/Counties
Nixon
McGovern
Turnout
Population
Voters
Voters
Population
14. Minneapolis, St. Paul
Minnesota
408,423
387,101
815,980
1,222,357
66.8
Anoka
29,546
28,031
60,475
90,042
67.2
Dakota
34,967
28,479
65,678
84,785
77.5
Hennepin
227,630
205,062
440,852
671,121
522,650 (77.9)
84.3
65.7
Ramsey
97,138
109,427
212,410
326,993
65.0
Washington
19,142
16,102
36,565
49,416
74.0
15. Dallas, Texas
357,424
151,556
509,224
1,057,849
744,993
(70.4)
68.4
48.1
Collin
17,667
4,783
22,595
44,917
33,112
(73.7)
68.2
50.3
Dallas
304,850
129,809
434,659
896,934
631,457
(70.4)
68.4
48.5
Denton
19,138
9,720
28,920
55,493
42,365
(76.3)
68.3
52.1
Ellis
8,779
3,839
12,626
32,249
19,159
(59.4)
65.9
39.2
Kaufman
5,100
2,795
7,907
23,402
15,000
(64.1)
52.7
33.8
Rockwall
1,890
610
2,517
4,854
3,900 (80.3)
64.5
51.9
Cal - 1968 - 60%
72 - 58%
face Salona - Pol Sci atmit
ThePartees -
20th Cen Fund
Fred sonty
Fooling uf no per / mo.
4
can't tell; city aberrations by cnty
Teeter
1) Big Cities - low turnout,
2) Rural areas - low, but unles
spotty trends, 0
3) Ohio no difference let Onose
softa I org and those not highly
sts wal were highly
ody. Ohio V. Tenn.
4) nate Turnout 5% 54,56%
above 60 in B preerous dec
- drop off in so Sts not
near as great as in
no big sts
at- in 1960 ala - 31%
64 !! -36%
A
68
53%
72 11 44%
So operation Pul 3.4r
are not great
So teernout Kigher proper
than Rest of drinlry
- m72 the difference decreased
So's 68 turn held up
in/72
6) Turn did not fall off near
as much where there
were hertly contested
St wille rues
see +
mich- i '68 - 66%
72 58%
Ohio -no - st race 639mings
56 in 72
Pa
65(68) to 55(72)
no st wide roles
in Pa
7) Rep turnout
Somewhat lower go delain
8) Olio Precinets
Core Repul Preunets - Twn
of as 90 of Regis
are teem 91-938-68, 64
in 72 - -85%
9) The Rep TLS dropped off
mere than regular Reps
- Suburban upper end
T/S - Reason: apathy
beel RA going to arin ey
20% - also didn't
cl
like lither and +proba
Sindl
can't influenced show that watergate
10) anti- - Mc G so intense
ISI- thing to mind be MeG
- 60-65% whatever
they boo that of me G was
- Hated MeG enuf to cote for
but many hated only
enul to stoy home
1)
Dem Turn lower, but
tnds + Reps gnlly lower
not just Dems lower,
arguel for apating as
very very few contested
local races beef 84
have shifted Goving
to nonp years.
12) Post Dee survey - -dropped
beel of deay - con't
remember PU or mail
13) SuRes Centen-4-5 mois -
apr
14) Fred Currier cel Galleep - -
condusion re Twirrlow
-but little into- -
mostly beef RA
assumed a wenner
- Gollup will put
out monthly book
15) AMPAC - post-elec severys
avail after gan
-Cal + colo
- -Did ny- - but two short
to be really usefully
16) n.m. -a Dem st
No
1972 - 59.8
various
60 - 62
Flat
low
64 62
term
68 61
southern sto
Border aris, n m s'w Tean 8th
- Sts w 6 rept low teen
60-67 -
big drop was in the
stayed fow se the
64-65
68-60 72-57
states such as mich, Minn,
historically higher turnoret
Olvie, ny
wa h indiates
the turnoril lower 1 in big
indus sts
60- - 76
68 64 - - 76 74 64
17) all post - elee surveys
overst teen by 10 12%
18) But in O Cife Rep party
will pale off names
of these anown not
T will be surveyed by
to vote + then they
T eater
- expected each 1stwll
in Ian.
19) absence of Local Roces
4
apathy.
20) There was no Oi turnout
area -
Fore 21) Organis people down held turn up.
22) Tues-a - 50 st seemm
of 50 st precent avail
- Whenavail
Post Dee
Benham
1) - higher propor of youth +
they cote lover
- lowered the total
2) hower nt in Elec genly
- Gall ? low the are
you in lee
3) Sice '60, 90 dropping + by
Disenpronehises incressing mobility
4) Demog of gouth lowering age
Hall
to grp least libely
to
down
5) walcace - anothest adherent
couldnt vote for him
6) me G lost his most ardent
this dischanted
after deterlies the Conven this
7) Genlly low merate of Dem party. -
many bozses satan Chands
6) Rep's turned out dut tread tow/ Pems
- -Normal nen- P line treable
Steen anderson position re houyer's 12/12
D
- info re are lawyer
from Gemery.
Fri mtg for Kopp-
mile Harrigan
FU
11/20
when GS 17?L
B
Hfa
11/23
ACTION MEMO
We need a complete analysis of the Republican vote and the
Republican Party performance in the election.
We lost s net of one Governor and a net of four state legislatures.
This shows the total ineffectiveness of the Republican Party at
the lower level, since these races were not effected by the
Presidential status and it shows that the Party was a terrible
drag.
We need a check as to whether we really made the effort to get
all Republicans out, OF did we rely too much on Dole and the
National Committee for this.
With only a 55% turn out, we should have won a huge Republican
victory. There must have been a weak Republican effort that cut
into this. This should be examined ruthlessly with no excuses
because we need to know where the strengths and weaknesses are.
HRH :pm
11/13/72
ACTION MEMO
We need a complete analysis of the Republican vot e and the
Republican Party performance in the election.
We lost a net of one Governor and a net of four state legislatures.
This shows the total ineffectiveness of the Republican Party at
the lower level, since these races were not effected by the
Presidential status and it shows that the Party was a terrible
drag.
We need a check as to whether we really made the effort to get
all Republicans out, or did we rely too much on Dole and the
National Committee for this.
With only a 55% turn out, we should have won a huge Republican
victory. There must have been a weak Republican effort that cut
into this. This should be examined ruthlessly with no excuses
because we need to know where the strengths and weaknesses are.
HRH
11/13/72
Hpu
11/29
ACTION MEMO
HIGBY
Give me the report on the California voter turnout
percentage versus the national percentage. Also,
what was the Republican vote turnent throughout the country and
what was the voter turnout in the South versus the rest of the
country?
HRH
11/10/72
HRH:kb
November 20, 1972
Memorandum
To: Bob Haldeman
From: Charlie McWhorter
Re: Post Election Comments
I am sure you have noticed that some political pundits and
others have been trying to detract from the significance of the President's
victory by suggesting that it was a "lonely landslide" and suggesting he
should have done more to assist GOP local candidates. In my opinion, this
position cannot be justified. I think we should stress the following
points:
1. The President created a favorable political climate in which all
GOP candidates could run with maximum advantage from the President's
leadership. This is an unprecedented achievement in modern
American politics and demonstrates the commanding strength of the
President's centrist position. Our local and state candidates
have never had, even under Eisenhower, an incumbent President who
did more to create a favorable political climate in both domestic
and foreign affairs, and that is more important than dashing around
trying to prop up sagging candidates who are in trouble in spite
of the President's leadership.
2. The President did campaign personally for six Republican challengers
(Ga., Ky., N.C., N.M., Okla. and R.I.) and in support of Bob Griffin,
Chuck Percy and John Tower. In addition, the President had taken
the time to visit all 50 states at some point during his first
Administration. By concentrating emphasis on voter registration
and voter contact activities, all GOP candidates were helped by
the national campaign efforts.
3. It is increasingly difficult to develop strong national trends on
a partisan basis because of the tendency of voters to split their
ticket. The fact that the President could receive 61% of the total
vote at a time when the overall national Republican support was
considerably less than 50% demonstrates the strength which the
President gave to our campaign this fall and the great personal
political achievement it represents.
4. As a party the GOP has a great many problems as it faces the future,
but this is not an extraordinary or unusual situation. Rather,
it should be pointed out that whatever problems face our party,
the likelihood of getting them resolved on a satisfactory basis is
greatly enhanced as a result of the President's campaign this fall.
In other words, any impartial examination of the political situa-
tion would indicate that, in facing its future, the GOP's greatest
strength is the example and leadership of Richard Nixon.
- 2 -
5. I think it is important to keep in mind what future writers will
say about the 1972 elections. It can be described as "a land-
slide", one in which the President got over 60% of the vote, one
in which the electoral vote was 521-17, or one in which the
President won "49-1". While all of these are accurate descriptions,
I think we should consider which one should be stressed. Per-
sonally, I was impressed that the FDR victory in 1936 seems to be
one in which everybody recalls that he carried all but two states -
Maine and Vermont - but very few people remember the percentage
of his vote or the exact electoral count. For this reason, it
occurs to me that the most likely political interpretation of the
1972 campaign may well be the "49-1" description. If that is true,
perhaps that is the description which we should be emphasizing.
After all, 49 to 1 is a good score in any game.
cc: Herb Klein
DWIGHT L. CHAPIN
November 8, 1972
Dear Gordon:
I know how hard (and long) you worked on the political side of the
President's re-election effort.
Congratulations to you on a job very well done - and for helping with
one of the most magnificent outcomes in political history.
Your QA friend,
Dwight L. Chapin
Mr. Gordon Strachan
The White House
Washington, D.C.
F
November 8, 1972
STRAIGHTWIRE
Honorable Donald Dwight
Mrs. Charles Malone
Co-Chairmen
Massachusetts Committee for the
Re-Election of the President
77 Franklin Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02110
While Massachusetts did not come in the Presidential
winner column for us last night, I know the tremendous challenge
we faced in the Bay State, and we are all heartened by the
gains we made over the returns of four years ago. I am deeply
grateful for your remarkable spirit and dedication to our
cause. You and all who worked with you have my heartfelt
appreciation and warm wishes always.
RICHARD NIXON
RN:AVH:RLE:baw
November 8, 1972
STRAIGHTWIRE
Honorable Otto A. Wahlrab
Chairman
Republican State Committee
No. 524
73 Tremont Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02109
The Presidential election news heartens all who worked
60 hard for victory. Although Massachusetts did not
show up in the winner column, I know the tremendous
challenges you faced, I am well aware of the gains we
made over 1968 in the Presidential race. I am deeply
grateful for your wonderful spirit and dedication to our
cause which contributed so importantly to our successful
outcome across the nation. With my appreciation to you=
and to all who worked so hard for our success,
RICHARD NIXON
RN:AVH:RLE:baw
November 8, 1972
The President
The White House
Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. President:
Here is a preliminary report on the fund-raising efforts
in your campaign.
To which was originally fired at
$40,000,000, gradually crept up to $43,000,000, and I suspect
that by the time all of the bills are in it will amount to as
much as $45,000,000. In addition, we should have a reserve
fund of $1,000,000 or $2,000,000 to take care of continuing
legal expenses, final reports, necessary refunds, and other
items which ought to be provided for.
Our fund-raising vas inhibited by a series of events that
we did not face in 1968:
1. The many investigations and legal intters related to
the Watergate and its aftermath occupied more than half of my
personal time during the last fifteen weeks of the campaign,
which made it impossible for me to be wholly effective.
2. The continuing lead of 25 points in the various polls
during the campaign caused many people to assume that we would
not need much money to win.
3. The Democrate kept up a constant barrage of statements
from the beginning of the year until election day to the effect
that we had more money than we needed, and these statements were
frequently printed in the prese, and even sometimes repeated by
individuals working on our side of the campaign.
Despite all of these serious handicaps, I believe I can tell
you that we have raised enough money to pay the campaign costs in
full and have nome reserve, unless there are major surprises still
to come in the unpaid bills.
The President
page two
There will be one notable change, however, from 1968. As a
result of the circumstances I have described, a larger proportion
of our contributions will have come from individual contributions
of larger amounts. The small contributors who normally might have
given in greater numbers were apparently influenced by the Demo-
cratic propaganda to the effect that we didn't need money. Never-
theless, we will have had at least 500,000 contributors.
I congratulate you on a perfect campaign and a magnificent
winl
Sincerely,
Maurice H. Stans
MIS:AC:ft
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 7, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
FROM:
KEN KHACHIGIAN x
SUBJECT:
ANALYSIS OF WHY MCGOVERN LOST
Attached is a fairly detailed political analysis of why McGovern did not win
in 1972. The reason for this exercise is to offer up the response to the commen-
tary which will maintain that McGovern lost not because of his ideology but
because of himself. I. e., it will be argued that extreme liberalism is still
a valid political phenomonon but that McGovern was the wrong candidate to
carry the colors.
There are many ways to respond to this, and I have done so with an analysis
of the many different factors of the McGovern movement. However, each time
we return to the basic reason: that McGovern was trying to sell an unpopular,
unwanted ideology to the American people.
Eagleton will get a great deal of blame from some -- but McGovern was
tarred way before Eagleton. It began in California where HHH tied the
albatross around McGovern's neck, and we took it from there. Labor didn't
walk out because of Eagleton, but because of the McGovern platform.
Right on down the line, it is simple to disprove the argument that we
were in a personality contest. Make no mistake about it, the contest was
between drastically differing political philosophies - - and the left got a good
licking in a fair contest.
Whether you measure it by polls, the actual results, or by sentiment
in certain areas, McGovern was tied down to the thinking which America
didn't want. Vietnam dovishness, welfarism, isolationism, pacifism,
permissiveness, and a host of other gut issues found McGovern on the far
left -- objectively on the far left.
To say that he ran a bad campaign or that he bungled the Eagleton affair
or that he made too many mistakes misses the fundamental reason for the
rejection of McGovern. The attached tries to chronicle the McGovern defeat,
and in my judgment, should provide enough for some of our people to move out
to columnists and opinion-makers. I think the President == in his post-election
analysis -- should make an important effort to knock down in advance some of
the stories we will see. This memo might give him some ideas in that direction.
Ken Khachigian
November 7, 1972
POLITICAL MEMORANDUM
WHY MCGOVERN LOST
A massive effort must be taken after the election to head off the
liberal establishment effort to detract from RN's election victory. That
effort will take many tacks -- such as RN didn't bring in a Congress; people
voted against McGovern not for Nixon, etc. However, the liberal apologists
will push one line extra hard: the defeat was not for the ideas of left-liberal
movement but rather for the bearer of those ideas.
They will argue that liberalism is still viable -- that we still need
busing, and all the other liberal schemes, and that they need only wait until
they get a standard bearer who won't make the same mistakes McGovern did.
The following analysis serves to debunk that viewpoint, and, it seems to me,
should be put out as much as possible to counter all the opinion contra. This
memorandum focuses on why McGovern lost -- any analysis of the high points
of the RN victory should be taken up in a separate memorandum.
THE CENTRAL POINT TO MAKE
To those who argue that McGovern had bad strategy and bad tactics and
that he made too many mistakes to run a good campaign, we have one basic
response: the tactics of the liberal movement are the logical outgrowth of
the liberal ideology. That is, don't blame McGovern per se, blame the
philosophy. Elitism, close-mindedness, moral righteousness, viewing
things as good versus evil and the penchant for overstatement are all
-2-
fundamentals of the liberal-left political ideology. If McGovern ran a
bad campaign -- don't blame his strategy because the strategy is the
ideology. The personal flaws of McGovern were bred of the flaws of his
political philosophy.
Thus, McGovern could change his mind on central issues, and then with
a straight face defend his credibility. This hurt his standing with the voters,
but being trained in the narrow view as he has, he sees his position only in
moralistic terms, or, as PJB put it, as the true believers.
People rejected the McGovern philosophy pure and simple. If the questions
of his credibility and wishy-washyness arose, it was only because of his
approach to public policy -- one in which he could cut aircraft carriers back
from 16 to 6 and still maintain with a straight face that this would not affect
the strength of the sixth fleet. That is the underlying problem with the left
radicals, i. e. , that the wild things they propose really won't disjoint things
important to citizens or voter blocs.
But there are other things to look at in terms of what McGovern did
wrong, and I'll take them in sequence.
THE PARTY REFORM
It is not for nothing that the Democratic Party reform was promulgated
under the "McGovern Commission. " This is where we underestimated
McGovern Immediately, he saw the potential of these guidelines -- they
-3-
served his purposes perfectly. The reforms brought precisely those
people into the process who would directly further his candidacy. Moreover,
it was only McGovern at that point who saw that the complexity of the rules
would be baffling to those who did not know them, and he hired the fellow
who knew the rules best to be his delegate counter -- Rick Stearns.
His opponents did not see soon enough the potential of having a tight
solid base which could bring victory in a field of many candidates. Therefore,
McGovern moved quickly to pre-empt the party's left wing, and knowing
that and with tight organization and his left flank protected, he could con-
ceivably get the nomination. To that extent the liberal-left issues were
winners for McGovern in the early stages of the game.
PRIMARIES
McGovern made it through the primaries with skill, luck, and, later,
with a little help from his friends in the media. New Hampshire was a
Muskie disaster, and McGovern was clever in making his loss out to be a
victory. McGovern's first score. McGovern was wiped out in Florida in
what should have been the first test of the McGovern political philosophy --
but it was not reported that way. It was said that McGovern never expected
to win Florida. Nevertheless, his views on gutting the space program,
support for massive busing, and a few other positions surely were important
in the Florida defeat.
-4-
Next came Illinois where McGovern wisely worked more on getting a
foothold while avoiding a direct test with Muskie. This strategy - - a good
one - - brought him to Wisconsin which he targeted from the beginning as
his strongest state with the yough-lust and an excellent organization. There
the tight-knit support for his radicalism and an excellent youth turnout gave
him a victory. Moreover, the Republicans helped by crossing over for
McGovern and Wallace. If only Democrats had voted, HHH would have won.
Yet Wisconsin was the key for McGovern and most importantly it knocked
Lindsay out and gave McG an unexposed left flank.
From Wisconsin on, it was not very difficult for McG. He took Rhode
Island because there was only about a 10% Democrat turnout -- and the tight
organization, getting the liberals and doves out, did it again. Then came
Massachusetts and Pennsylvania with Muskie mercilessly caught in between
HHH and McG. By this time the press was necking in the back seat with
McGovern, and Massachusetts was a cinch while HHH kept Muskie at bay in
Pa. Again, the organization also went to work in Pa. to pick up some
delegates -- what proved to be a good strategy for McG; he nickel-dimed
his opposition. Throughout, McGovern was assisted by low voter turnouts
coupled with his zealots going to the polls in droves. April 25th served to
put Muskie over the side -- a hapless victim on a fast track.
-5-
Through Ohio, Indiana, Tennessee, and North Carolina, in my
judgment, the press effectively protected McGovern. He didn't do real well
in any of these states -- except Ohio -- yet they only said it was because
he didn't try. Yet, by then they should have known that the McGovern
ideology was like death in those states. Moreover, in Ohio he was basking
in the media glow which did not mention his radical positions at all, but
rather how he represented "the alienated and discontented. " That left
McG free to use his excellent TV spots to bilk the voters of their support.
They only saw a nice guy on the tube, not a radical.
Nebraska was the beginning of the end for McGovern. For the first
time, his opposition began to hammer effectively at the McGovern leftism.
Abortion, amnesty, pot, welfare and defense all became problems. It was
too late for HHH to have much of an impact, but the seeds were planted.
The threat that Offutt Air Base in Omaha would be closed by McGovern was
the first big hit.
By this time in Oregon and California, McG had the only effective
organization and a huge public relations advantage. The media was busy
explaining why they were wrong about the early primaries, and in deference to
McG were giving him every break possible. Michigan and Maryland were
in between, but McG avoided media setbacks because the Wallace shooting
knocked everything else off the front page. Yet those two states were another
hint that McGovern represented the wrong side of the political spectrum.
That story was lost in the Wallace tragedy.
-6-
By the time McGovern got out to the West Coast, the regular
Democrats found out that they were in the process of being had by McGovern.
But it was too late. The Dem party had been infiltrated by the McGovern
guerillas, and there was no time for pacification. (Maybe the fact that
McGovern seemed to think more of the Communists in Vietnam than
their opponents colored his political strategy: he was the Viet Cong of
the Democratic party).
Thus, McGovern won the California, South Dakota, New Mexico and
New Jersey primaries all on the same day -- a tribute to irreversible
momentum. (As McGovern said that night: "I can't believe I won the
whole thing" -- neither could his fellow Democrats who probably swore
that night that they would do anything to try to stop him. ) But California
was the true turning point in the 1972 presidential campaign and it turned
on issues, not on McGovern's personality or bad tactics.
McGovern saw a 20 point lead in the polls drop to 4%. In short, he was
devastated by the HHH one-man shredding machine. The issues caught
up with him, and HHH was able to articulate them in his hammering
staccato fashion as no other figure in American politics could do. Those
three national debates -- which could not be filtered by the writing press
or Frank Reynolds and his gang -- were the real Waterloo for McGovern.
Vast attention was given to the welfare plan, the defense plan, the Vietnam
bug-out, the fact that McGovern had voted against Jewish interests. HHH
-7- -
was vicious and relentless and he did for us what we could have never done
for ourselves. Moreover, he did to McG what Rockefeller did to Goldwater:
he labelled McGovern.
Luckily for McG the next primary was New York, and he couldn't lose
it because there was no preferential vote -- only delegate selection. Thus,
the small left-wing delegate machine moved on, aided and abetted by only
a little over a 10% voter turnout.
THE MEDIA IN THIS PERIOD
McGovern got more than his share of breaks from the press in the
early days. They covered for his radical positions by writing tons of
essays on populism and anti-politicians and alienated voters. Moreover,
McGovern's staff was being given the kid-glove treatment. Stories followed
on the McG "wunderkinder." Caddell (whose poll information has been so
spectacularly bad, yet universally praised) was made out to be Gallup and
Harris rolled into one. Stearns, Grandmaison and Pokorny (who Sidey
eulogized with the prairie sod in his ears) were "master strategists" --
and oh so young ! Mankiewicz was quoted from coast to coast - - the
man with the quick wit and fast repartee (in my opinion Mankiewicz is
an absolute political lightweight who covered up with a quick wit -- he gave
monumentally bad advice).
These "kids" began to believe their press clippings and probably thought
it was a good time to screw the old-liners. I would guess that the boys in
-8-
the clubhouse didn't appreciate either their treatment or the stories they
read about the "kids. " Their duty was to win elections and not worry about
ideology. The McG people believed that winning elections was a part of
the ideology -- that the two were intertwined, and that their radicalism was
the wave of the future. But give the devil his due -- the organization worked
well and played the delegates and the convention states like violins.
THE CONVENTION
The Convention also had to be quite harmful to McGovern. By this time
McGovern was tarred on the issues, but it was too late to stop him -- he really
had it wrapped up after Califor nia. Nevertheless, the leftism was fully
exposed on national television, and the shock for some probably has not
yet worn off. The spectacle of the abortion people, the libbers and the
homosexuals was too much. McGovern was seen, finally, to be the radical
that his positions made him out to be, and this hurt.
Then came the compromises -- putting the abortion, women's lib, and
other minority planks over the side -- along with George Wiley and Gloria
Steinem. It was time to kiss and make up with Daley, though Daley would
resist. But the sum total was a picture of just another politician, one who
would make deals to win and comprose his principles -- or at least certain
principles.
-9-
But McGovern walked out of that convention a radical. For all
intents and purposes he could not escape that label through November.
It was not because of mistakes in his strategy or flaws in his tactics and
it was not George McGovern the man or personality. It was his position
on the political spectrum -- he was on the left, and he believed in his ways.
EAGLETON
I think the death blow was already delivered before the Eagleton
affair. It only confirmed everything which had already been building
up against McGovern. Those who argue that Eagleton was the turning
point don't know what they're talking about. Eagleton was extremely impor-
tant in terms of harming McGovern's credibility and trust. But even before
Eagleton the seeds were planted -- Eagleton merely made it harder for
McGovern. Without the Eagleton affair, McGovern would have still been
weighted by his positions.
Blaming the Eagleton affair will be a liberal cop-out and a McGovern
staff cop-out. Eagleton did not make McGovern lose a 20 point lead in the
California balloting. We have got to stop the myth of the Eagleton thing before
history writes that it was this and only this which cost McG his crack at the
Presidency. It just ain't true. There was a Gallup after the Dem convention
and before Eagleton which saw RN gaining three points. McGovern was
already on the way down.
-10-
RADICALISM -- THE FATAL FLAW
Hubert Humphrey was always thought to be a radical. He had radical
ideas, like McGovern. But the people around HHH were not radical. He had
pols all around him -- cigar-chomping boys who prowled the back rooms.
McGovern was surrounded by radicals -- all those damn hippy kids and free
love adherents, etc. McGovern's politics were caught up in the culture of
the "movement" and only made his radicalism seem worse.
These were not flaws of the man or his tactics -- again, they were basic
defects of the radical liberal movement. McGovern though that the kooky
people around him were logical extensions of his new politics, of the coming
home of America, and of the revolutionary basis of his candidacy. I would
think that McGovern never did see what was wrong in saying that Henry
Wallace was still "right, 11 that the Soviets would treat him as a "friend"
and not test him; or question why the Rubin and Hoffman endorsements were
bad.
His friends -- Galbraith, Schlesinger, Steinem, et al. -- all came from
the closed club of liberal intelligentsia which saw the historical movement
through its own narrow vision. These were not casual campaign mistakes,
they were the most profound of judgmental errors. McGovern misread the
mood of the country and refused to admit it because liberal intellectuals
always think they have a monopoly on wisdom. (I'm quite serious about
this I never knew a liberal college professor who was otherwise, and
McG is a former college professor)
-11-
THE CAMPAIGN
The campaign itself was marred by the same fundamental flaws
of ideology. I don't believe at all that it was a tactical error for McGovern
to campaign in the early days on Vietnam and some of the most leftish
positions. I think he believed that his surrender policy in Vietnam (he
was actually to the left of the Viet Cong in his proposals) was the right
position and probably the politically expedient position. The income redis-
tribution plan and some of the other way-out ideas were still in his speeches
in early September, although not explicitly. And throughout, there was
Vietnam, where McGovern grew to higher reaches of sell-out. He dumped
his $1000-per-person plan for a $4000-per-four-persons plan and gave out
detailed explanations of how this would work.
Basically, I don't think that McGovern forsaked his radicalism. He
simply tried to make it sound not all that bad in the campaign. Sure, he made
some stupid mistakes, but the singular mistake was the belief that he could
sell to the steelworker in the fall what he spoonfed to the students in the
winter -- a disrespected political philosophy.
Finally, the McGovern campaign tactics and language were classics
in New Left politics. The pure smear, the overstatement, the disruption,
the Hitler analogy, the fostering of discord and the planting of fears --
all permeate the liberal ideology. When liberals disagree, the first charge
-12-
they make is "fascist" or "Hitler. 11 It is reflexive. It is the formbook
liberal tactic -- to many liberal politicians, the ideology imbues the
form -- the substance is the form. And in the end you cannot fault
McGovern for his tactics without really faulting his ideological base.
NOTES
It might be said that McGovern lost the election because of the way
he won the nomination. He sold his soul to the left and had little
inclination to seek salvation. That massive political error cannot be
laid alone to ineptitude -- it is no less than a major misreading of
American values and the cultural ethos of our country.
The polls showed over and over again that the public resented McGovern
"running down America. 11 And while Haynes Johnson traveled the country
talking about alienation, he missed the fact that Americans are basically at
peace with themselves, satisfied with their lives, and optimistic about the
future. What he saw was good old American skepticism -- the "show me"
attitude -- and he mistook it for a penetrating anomie and social listlessness,
Not only did the polls show McGovern misreading the country's mood,
they also showed that McGovern misread the public's perception of the
correct position on the issues. Harris found out in the summer that the
President had the preferable position on 15 out of 16 issues. This shows an
unusually high perception of McGovern's radical views - - moreover, this was
-13-
a huge jump over the period in the primaries where McGovern was viewed as
benign. This confirms that McGovern was hurt deeply by HHH's efforts in
California and that that was the most harmful point in the McGovern candidacy.
It was not that McGovern played the wro ng strings -- he was playing the
tuba in a string orchestra. He was out of syncopation; out of tune; and blaring
fortissimo while the public wanted pianissimo.
In a nutshell, McGovern was wrong from the start. His radical politics
took a good shellacking from the Ameri can public -- a deserved repudiation
of alien ideas. Let's not blame it on his political amateur standing - -
after all, he did some quite intelligent politicking at times -- let's put
the blame where it belongs: on the elitist, leftward movement in America
which was born of Kennedy, raised in the Great Society and cut down by
the grocer's son who saw the excesses and called 'em like he saw 'em.