1920 United States presidential election in North Carolina explained

See main article: 1920 United States presidential election.

Election Name:1920 United States presidential election in North Carolina
Popular Vote1:305,447
After Election:Warren G. Harding
Before Party:Democratic Party (United States)
Before Election:Woodrow Wilson
President
Percentage2:43.22%
Popular Vote2:232,848
Electoral Vote2:0
Running Mate2:Calvin Coolidge
Home State2:Ohio
Party2:Republican Party (United States)
Nominee2:Warren G. Harding
Percentage1:56.69%
Electoral Vote1:12
Country:North Carolina
Running Mate1:Franklin D. Roosevelt
Home State1:Ohio
Party1:Democratic Party (United States)
Nominee1:James M. Cox
Image1:James M. Cox 1920.jpg
Election Date:November 2, 1920
Next Year:1924
Next Election:1924 United States presidential election in North Carolina
Previous Year:1916
Previous Election:1916 United States presidential election in North Carolina
Ongoing:no
Type:presidential
After Party:Republican Party (United States)
Map Size:400px

The 1920 United States presidential election in North Carolina took place on November 2, 1920, as part of the 1920 United States presidential election, which was held throughout all contemporary forty-eight states. Voters chose twelve representatives, or electors to the Electoral College, who voted for president and vice president.

Like all former Confederate states, North Carolina would during its “Redemption” develop a politics based upon Jim Crow laws, disfranchisement of its African-American population and dominance of the Democratic Party. Unlike the Deep South, the Republican Party possessed sufficient historic Unionist white support from the mountains and northwestern Piedmont to gain a stable one-third of the statewide vote total in general elections even after blacks lost the right to vote.[1] Although with disfranchisement of blacks the state introduced a poll tax, it was less severe than other former Confederate states with the result that a greater proportion of whites participated than anywhere else in the South.[2] A rapid move following disenfranchisement to a completely “lily-white” state GOP also helped maintain Republican support amongst the state's voters.[3] Like Virginia, Tennessee and Oklahoma, the relative strength of Republican opposition meant that North Carolina did not have statewide White primaries, although certain counties did use the White primary.[4]

Although North Carolina had never given women suffrage rights at any level of government before 1919, nor did its legislature consider the Nineteenth Amendment when it passed the Federal House and Senate, during 1920 the state passed by more a more than three-to-one margin a constitutional amendment that made it the first former Confederate state to abolish its poll tax.[5] This amendment was first proposed as early as 1908,[6] but was only given serious thought by the state legislature after the Sixteenth Amendment took effect in 1913 and it was recognized that North Carolina was burdened with an inefficient and regressive tax system.[7] The abolition of the poll tax and women's suffrage, as it turned out, would cause in North Carolina amongst the largest mobilizations of new voters in the Union.[8]

Although Republican nominee Warren G. Harding had urged the state's mountain Republican legislators to ratify the Nineteenth Amendment,[9] neither Harding nor Democratic nominee and Ohio Governor James M. Cox did any campaigning in a state which had voted Democratic at every election since 1876. However, at the end of October the GOP, sensing a landslide, believed based on an early Rexall straw poll that it had a chance of carrying North Carolina as well as Tennessee for its first victory in a former Confederate state since 1876.[10] Later returns, however, gave Cox a larger win than Woodrow Wilson had gained in 1916.[11] As it turned out, Cox would carry the state comfortably, and North Carolina would prove the state that most resisted the anti-Wilson trend, with Cox losing fewer than 3 percentage points on Wilson and Polk County even switching from voting for Republican Charles Evans Hughes in 1916 to voting for Cox.[12]

Results

Presidential CandidateRunning MatePartyElectoral Vote (EV)Popular Vote (PV)
James M. Cox of OhioFranklin D. RooseveltDemocratic12[13] 305,44756.69%
Warren G. HardingCalvin CoolidgeRepublican0232,84843.22%
Eugene V. DebsSeymour StedmanSocialist04460.08%
Aaron S. WatkinsD. Leigh ColvinProhibition0170.00%

Results by county

1920 United States presidential election in North Carolina by county! rowspan="2" style="width:10%;"
CountyJames Middleton Cox
Democratic
Warren Gamaliel Harding
Republican
Margin
%%%
align="center" Edgecombe align="center" 99.29% align="center" 3,343 align="center" 0.71% align="center" 24 align="center" 98.57% align="center" 3,319
align="center" Northampton align="center" 93.32% align="center" 2,305 align="center" 6.68% align="center" 165 align="center" 86.64% align="center" 2,140
align="center" Currituck align="center" 92.08% align="center" 1,000 align="center" 7.92% align="center" 86 align="center" 84.16% align="center" 914
align="center" Bertie align="center" 89.67% align="center" 1,840 align="center" 10.33% align="center" 212 align="center" 79.34% align="center" 1,628
align="center" Hoke align="center" 88.41% align="center" 1,266 align="center" 11.59% align="center" 166 align="center" 76.82% align="center" 1,100
align="center" Anson align="center" 88.00% align="center" 3,175 align="center" 12.00% align="center" 433 align="center" 76.00% align="center" 2,742
align="center" Halifax align="center" 86.74% align="center" 3,429 align="center" 13.26% align="center" 524 align="center" 73.49% align="center" 2,905
align="center" Warren align="center" 86.34% align="center" 1,865 align="center" 13.66% align="center" 295 align="center" 72.69% align="center" 1,570
align="center" New Hanover align="center" 85.21% align="center" 4,102 align="center" 14.79% align="center" 712 align="center" 70.42% align="center" 3,390
align="center" Scotland align="center" 84.78% align="center" 1,705 align="center" 15.22% align="center" 306 align="center" 69.57% align="center" 1,399
align="center" Chowan align="center" 83.92% align="center" 1,091 align="center" 16.08% align="center" 209 align="center" 67.85% align="center" 882
align="center" Hertford align="center" 83.32% align="center" 1,104 align="center" 16.68% align="center" 221 align="center" 66.64% align="center" 883
align="center" Pitt align="center" 82.92% align="center" 4,196 align="center" 17.08% align="center" 864 align="center" 65.85% align="center" 3,332
align="center" Martin align="center" 82.85% align="center" 2,561 align="center" 17.15% align="center" 530 align="center" 65.71% align="center" 2,031
align="center" Craven align="center" 82.36% align="center" 3,413 align="center" 17.64% align="center" 731 align="center" 64.72% align="center" 2,682
align="center" Franklin align="center" 82.32% align="center" 2,742 align="center" 17.68% align="center" 589 align="center" 64.64% align="center" 2,153
align="center" Camden align="center" 79.18% align="center" 540 align="center" 20.82% align="center" 142 align="center" 58.36% align="center" 398
align="center" Greene align="center" 78.98% align="center" 1,649 align="center" 21.02% align="center" 439 align="center" 57.95% align="center" 1,210
align="center" Pasquotank align="center" 77.40% align="center" 1,736 align="center" 22.60% align="center" 507 align="center" 54.79% align="center" 1,229
align="center" Mecklenburg align="center" 76.78% align="center" 11,313 align="center" 23.22% align="center" 3,421 align="center" 53.56% align="center" 7,892
align="center" Granville align="center" 75.89% align="center" 2,622 align="center" 24.11% align="center" 833 align="center" 51.78% align="center" 1,789
align="center" Vance align="center" 75.10% align="center" 2,461 align="center" 24.90% align="center" 816 align="center" 50.20% align="center" 1,645
align="center" Richmond align="center" 74.83% align="center" 3,341 align="center" 25.17% align="center" 1,124 align="center" 49.65% align="center" 2,217
align="center" Union align="center" 74.80% align="center" 4,168 align="center" 25.20% align="center" 1,404 align="center" 49.61% align="center" 2,764
align="center" Robeson align="center" 73.58% align="center" 6,183 align="center" 26.42% align="center" 2,220 align="center" 47.16% align="center" 3,963
align="center" Nash align="center" 72.15% align="center" 4,031 align="center" 27.85% align="center" 1,556 align="center" 44.30% align="center" 2,475
align="center" Wilson align="center" 71.79% align="center" 3,496 align="center" 28.21% align="center" 1,374 align="center" 43.57% align="center" 2,122
align="center" Jones align="center" 71.46% align="center" 964 align="center" 28.54% align="center" 385 align="center" 42.92% align="center" 579
align="center" Caswell align="center" 71.04% align="center" 1,239 align="center" 28.96% align="center" 505 align="center" 42.09% align="center" 734
align="center" Gates align="center" 70.88% align="center" 796 align="center" 29.12% align="center" 327 align="center" 41.76% align="center" 469
align="center" Pender align="center" 69.33% align="center" 1,580 align="center" 30.67% align="center" 699 align="center" 38.66% align="center" 881
align="center" Lenoir align="center" 68.95% align="center" 2,560 align="center" 31.05% align="center" 1,153 align="center" 37.89% align="center" 1,407
align="center" Wake align="center" 68.71% align="center" 8,020 align="center" 31.29% align="center" 3,653 align="center" 37.41% align="center" 4,367
align="center" Perquimans align="center" 68.15% align="center" 1,042 align="center" 31.85% align="center" 487 align="center" 36.30% align="center" 555
align="center" Hyde align="center" 68.15% align="center" 1,134 align="center" 31.85% align="center" 530 align="center" 36.30% align="center" 604
align="center" Lee align="center" 67.06% align="center" 2,327 align="center" 32.94% align="center" 1,143 align="center" 34.12% align="center" 1,184
align="center" Onslow align="center" 64.61% align="center" 1,557 align="center" 35.39% align="center" 853 align="center" 29.21% align="center" 704
align="center" Bladen align="center" 64.57% align="center" 1,939 align="center" 35.43% align="center" 1,064 align="center" 29.14% align="center" 875
align="center" Cleveland align="center" 63.70% align="center" 5,181 align="center" 36.30% align="center" 2,953 align="center" 27.39% align="center" 2,228
align="center" Columbus align="center" 63.57% align="center" 3,111 align="center" 36.43% align="center" 1,783 align="center" 27.14% align="center" 1,328
align="center" Wayne align="center" 62.95% align="center" 4,794 align="center" 37.05% align="center" 2,822 align="center" 25.89% align="center" 1,972
align="center" Cumberland align="center" 62.11% align="center" 3,233 align="center" 37.89% align="center" 1,972 align="center" 24.23% align="center" 1,261
align="center" Beaufort align="center" 60.85% align="center" 3,522 align="center" 39.15% align="center" 2,266 align="center" 21.70% align="center" 1,256
align="center" Iredell align="center" 59.51% align="center" 6,470 align="center" 40.49% align="center" 4,402 align="center" 19.02% align="center" 2,068
align="center" Haywood align="center" 58.50% align="center" 4,229 align="center" 41.50% align="center" 3,000 align="center" 17.00% align="center" 1,229
align="center" Tyrrell align="center" 57.44% align="center" 718 align="center" 42.56% align="center" 532 align="center" 14.88% align="center" 186
align="center" Rowan align="center" 56.78% align="center" 6,421 align="center" 43.22% align="center" 4,888 align="center" 13.56% align="center" 1,533
align="center" Durham align="center" 56.69% align="center" 4,646 align="center" 43.31% align="center" 3,550 align="center" 13.37% align="center" 1,096
align="center" Dare align="center" 56.62% align="center" 825 align="center" 43.38% align="center" 632 align="center" 13.25% align="center" 193
align="center" Pamlico align="center" 56.06% align="center" 1,286 align="center" 43.94% align="center" 1,008 align="center" 12.12% align="center" 278
align="center" Rutherford align="center" 55.96% align="center" 5,101 align="center" 44.04% align="center" 4,015 align="center" 11.91% align="center" 1,086
align="center" Buncombe align="center" 55.91% align="center" 10,167 align="center" 44.09% align="center" 8,017 align="center" 11.82% align="center" 2,150
align="center" Duplin align="center" 55.75% align="center" 3,398 align="center" 44.25% align="center" 2,697 align="center" 11.50% align="center" 701
align="center" Rockingham align="center" 55.56% align="center" 4,507 align="center" 44.44% align="center" 3,605 align="center" 11.12% align="center" 902
align="center" Gaston align="center" 55.19% align="center" 7,148 align="center" 44.81% align="center" 5,803 align="center" 10.39% align="center" 1,345
align="center" Guilford align="center" 54.83% align="center" 9,615 align="center" 45.17% align="center" 7,920 align="center" 9.67% align="center" 1,695
align="center" Forsyth align="center" 54.46% align="center" 8,123 align="center" 45.54% align="center" 6,792 align="center" 8.92% align="center" 1,331
align="center" Harnett align="center" 54.20% align="center" 3,919 align="center" 45.80% align="center" 3,311 align="center" 8.41% align="center" 608
align="center" Moore align="center" 54.03% align="center" 2,679 align="center" 45.97% align="center" 2,279 align="center" 8.07% align="center" 400
align="center" Alleghany align="center" 53.98% align="center" 1,409 align="center" 46.02% align="center" 1,201 align="center" 7.97% align="center" 208
align="center" Washington align="center" 53.47% align="center" 1,116 align="center" 46.53% align="center" 971 align="center" 6.95% align="center" 145
align="center" Orange align="center" 53.43% align="center" 1,993 align="center" 46.57% align="center" 1,737 align="center" 6.86% align="center" 256
align="center" Alamance align="center" 53.22% align="center" 5,255 align="center" 46.78% align="center" 4,619 align="center" 6.44% align="center" 636
align="center" McDowell align="center" 52.31% align="center" 2,809 align="center" 47.69% align="center" 2,561 align="center" 4.62% align="center" 248
align="center" Chatham align="center" 52.30% align="center" 3,186 align="center" 47.70% align="center" 2,906 align="center" 4.60% align="center" 280
align="center" Johnston align="center" 51.90% align="center" 6,030 align="center" 48.10% align="center" 5,588 align="center" 3.80% align="center" 442
align="center" Macon align="center" 51.50% align="center" 2,177 align="center" 48.50% align="center" 2,050 align="center" 3.00% align="center" 127
align="center" Lincoln align="center" 51.50% align="center" 3,331 align="center" 48.50% align="center" 3,137 align="center" 3.00% align="center" 194
align="center" Person align="center" 51.25% align="center" 1,646 align="center" 48.75% align="center" 1,566 align="center" 2.49% align="center" 80
align="center" Polk align="center" 50.65% align="center" 1,361 align="center" 49.35% align="center" 1,326 align="center" 1.30% align="center" 35
align="center" Jackson align="center" 50.32% align="center" 2,385 align="center" 49.68% align="center" 2,355 align="center" 0.63% align="center" 30
align="center" Montgomery align="center" 50.18% align="center" 2,321 align="center" 49.82% align="center" 2,304 align="center" 0.37% align="center" 17
align="center" Brunswick align="center" 47.92% align="center" 1,253 align="center" 52.08% align="center" 1,362 align="center" -4.17% align="center" -109
align="center" Transylvania align="center" 47.86% align="center" 1,542 align="center" 52.14% align="center" 1,680 align="center" -4.28% align="center" -138
align="center" Catawba align="center" 47.66% align="center" 5,404 align="center" 52.34% align="center" 5,935 align="center" -4.68% align="center" -531
align="center" Burke align="center" 47.59% align="center" 3,262 align="center" 52.41% align="center" 3,592 align="center" -4.81% align="center" -330
align="center" Ashe align="center" 47.40% align="center" 3,431 align="center" 52.60% align="center" 3,808 align="center" -5.21% align="center" -377
align="center" Carteret align="center" 47.21% align="center" 2,070 align="center" 52.79% align="center" 2,315 align="center" -5.59% align="center" -245
align="center" Stanly align="center" 47.12% align="center" 3,843 align="center" 52.88% align="center" 4,312 align="center" -5.75% align="center" -469
align="center" Caldwell align="center" 47.05% align="center" 2,931 align="center" 52.95% align="center" 3,298 align="center" -5.89% align="center" -367
align="center" Yancey align="center" 46.76% align="center" 2,280 align="center" 53.24% align="center" 2,596 align="center" -6.48% align="center" -316
align="center" Cabarrus align="center" 46.18% align="center" 4,418 align="center" 53.82% align="center" 5,148 align="center" -7.63% align="center" -730
align="center" Clay align="center" 45.32% align="center" 755 align="center" 54.68% align="center" 911 align="center" -9.36% align="center" -156
align="center" Randolph align="center" 44.80% align="center" 5,110 align="center" 55.20% align="center" 6,297 align="center" -10.41% align="center" -1,187
align="center" Davidson align="center" 44.59% align="center" 4,797 align="center" 55.41% align="center" 5,960 align="center" -10.81% align="center" -1,163
align="center" Alexander align="center" 43.62% align="center" 2,045 align="center" 56.38% align="center" 2,643 align="center" -12.76% align="center" -598
align="center" Henderson align="center" 42.79% align="center" 2,496 align="center" 57.21% align="center" 3,337 align="center" -14.42% align="center" -841
align="center" Graham align="center" 41.31% align="center" 644 align="center" 58.69% align="center" 915 align="center" -17.38% align="center" -271
align="center" Cherokee align="center" 41.27% align="center" 1,761 align="center" 58.73% align="center" 2,506 align="center" -17.46% align="center" -745
align="center" Surry align="center" 40.69% align="center" 3,547 align="center" 59.31% align="center" 5,170 align="center" -18.62% align="center" -1,623
align="center" Stokes align="center" 40.59% align="center" 1,999 align="center" 59.41% align="center" 2,926 align="center" -18.82% align="center" -927
align="center" Watauga align="center" 39.55% align="center" 1,721 align="center" 60.45% align="center" 2,631 align="center" -20.91% align="center" -910
align="center" Swain align="center" 39.04% align="center" 1,434 align="center" 60.96% align="center" 2,239 align="center" -21.92% align="center" -805
align="center" Davie align="center" 38.53% align="center" 1,624 align="center" 61.47% align="center" 2,591 align="center" -22.94% align="center" -967
align="center" Sampson align="center" 31.19% align="center" 2,426 align="center" 68.81% align="center" 5,353 align="center" -37.63% align="center" -2,927
align="center" Wilkes align="center" 30.59% align="center" 2,843 align="center" 69.41% align="center" 6,451 align="center" -38.82% align="center" -3,608
align="center" Yadkin align="center" 29.03% align="center" 1,350 align="center" 70.97% align="center" 3,301 align="center" -41.95% align="center" -1,951
align="center" Madison align="center" 27.04% align="center" 1,340 align="center" 72.96% align="center" 3,616 align="center" -45.92% align="center" -2,276
align="center" Mitchell align="center" 24.46% align="center" 697 align="center" 75.54% align="center" 2,153 align="center" -51.09% align="center" -1,456
align="center" Avery align="center" 13.69% align="center" 397 align="center" 86.31% align="center" 2,503 align="center" -72.62% align="center" -2,106

Notes and References

  1. [Kevin Phillips (political commentator)|Phillips, Kevin P.]
  2. Rusk. J.J, and Stucker J.J.; ‘The Effect of Southern Election Laws on Turnout Rates’ in Silbey, Joel H. and Bogue, Allan G., The History of American Electoral Behavior, p. 246
  3. Book: Heersink. Boris. Jenkins. Jeffery A.. Republican Party Politics and the American South, 1865–1968. 48–50, 239–243. 9781316663950.
  4. Klarman. Michael J.. The White Primary Rulings: A Case Study in the Consequences of Supreme Court Decision-Making. Florida State University Law Review. 29. 2001. 55–107.
  5. ‘Vote for Constitutional Amendments by Counties’, in North Carolina Manual (1920), pp. 324-328
  6. ‘Poll-Tax Abolition Urged.: North Carolina Board Favors Levy of 2-3 Per Cent on Assessments’; Special to the Washington Post, December 24, 1908, p. 3
  7. Steelman, Joseph F.; Origins of the Campaign for Constitutional Reform in North Carolina, 1912-1913; The North Carolina Historical Review, vol. 56, no. 4 (October, 1979) pp. 396-418
  8. Schuyler, Lorraine Gates; The Weight of Their Votes: Southern Women and Political Leverage in the 1920s, p. 190
  9. ‘Harding resents Suffrage Attack: Declares He Is Impatient Over Charges That Republicans Oppose Women’; New York Times, July 15, 1920, p. 1
  10. ‘Victory is Claimed by Rival Chairmen: Hays Sees 368 Electoral Votes for Harding’; The Washington Post, October 31, 1920, p. 1
  11. ‘Cox Gains in Straw Vote: Late Returns Give Him Missouri – Some Other States Close’; New York Times, October 31, 1920, p. 6
  12. Menendez, Albert J.; The Geography of Presidential Elections in the United States, 1868-2004, p. 52
  13. Web site: 1920 Presidential General Election Results – North Carolina. Dave Leip’s U.S. Election Atlas.