Talk:List of major-party United States presidential candidates who lost their home state

Confusing

This article could become confusing, based on the idea of home state. Does it mean birthplace or where he was from. Hoover--Iowa or California, for example? He lost both, in this case. -- Decumanus 00:55, 2004 Nov 2 (UTC)

I believe we should have the state he is from, California in this case. --Lst27 (talk) 00:58, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Well, as you see, I've started doing both. As a native of Iowa, I can tell you that "everyone" knew that Hoover was an Iowan. Iowans sure thought of him as one, but still didn't vote for him that year. Likewise few people would have thought of Nixon as a New Yorker in 1968 He'd run for California governor only a few years before that and no had electoral base as a New York politician, despite his residence there. Still it is worth putting in both, I think, and letting people make up their minds. In other cases, it's not as solid, but I think it's worth putting both in. Interesting that tomorrow, both candidates will carry their current home states but are liable to lose their birth states, unless Kerrry pulls out Colorado, which he may. -- Decumanus 01:34, 2004 Nov 2 (UTC)

I think it's a mistake to list birth states here. Virtually nobody thinks of Bush or Kerry as being "from" Connecticut or Colorado, respectively. While it is certainly known in both those states, the vast majority of the country thinks of Bush as being a Texan. This is true of many former and potential major party presidential candidates. John McCain, for example, was born in the Panama Canal Zone, which is no longer part of the United States - therefore he could never carry his "birth state". Hillary Clinton was born in Illinois, but split her adult life between Arkansas and Washington, D.C., and has only lived in New York since 2000. While many people may not consider her a New Yorker, that is where she is currently serving in public office and is a registered voter. We should be concerned with official residences at the time of the election here, not birth states, states where they've spent a lot of time, or states where they died. --Xinoph 18:17, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

Well, I think it's useful and interesting information, especially for the modern candidates. But I think segregating into two lists would be useful, overall. -- Decumanus 20:06, 2004 Nov 22 (UTC)

A better idea

Surely there should be a comprehensive list of ALL candidates and ALL results so we can compare like with like and see whether there is a definite pattern rather than having to guess whether this is a usual result. It seems also that presidential candidates tend to win their state of residence more often than their state of origin. Owlqueen 02:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Comparison of home state vote with national vote

It’s notable that with major-party candidates who lost their home state in a landslide, that state will more often than not give the relevant candidate a higher proportion of the vote than the nation as a whole. This was notably true with:

1. Bryan in 1900 – Nebraska was 3.4 percent more Democratic than nation as a whole
2. Cox in 1920 – Ohio was about 7 percent more Democratic than nation as a whole
3. Davis in 1924 – West Virginia was 20 percent more Democratic than nation as a whole
4. Smith in 1928 – New York was 15 percent more Democratic than nation as a whole
5. Landon in 1936 – Kansas was 16.5 percent more Republican than nation as a whole.
6. Dewey in 1944 – New York was 2.7 percent more Republican than nation as a whole
7. McGovern in 1972 – South Dakota was 14.5 percent more Democratic than nation as a whole

This last figure is quite remarkable given that South Dakota has voted Democratic only four times since statehood, and has otherwise been more Democratic than the nation as a whole only in the free-silver election of 1896, the Depression election of 1932, and the farm-crisis election of 1988. In fact, amongst all states in the Great Basin and Great Plains, only South Dakota and Montana in 1972 and 1988 have ever voted more Democratic than the nation as a whole since 1960. Even if we focus only on these four elections, we see a “favourite son” effect very strongly:

• 1896 – South Dakota voted 4.53 percent more Democratic than United States overall
• 1932 – South Dakota voted 12.17 percent more Democratic than United States overall
• 1972 – South Dakota voted 14.52 percent more Democratic than United States overall
• 1988 – South Dakota voted 1.39 percent more Democratic than United States overall
  • In every other election South Dakota has voted more Republican than the United States overall – by 3.56 percent in 1976, 10.71 percent in 1968, 11.36 percent in 1964 and 19.09 percent in 1980.

With Al Smith, we can note that:

• 1916 – New York voted 10.22 recent more Republican than nation overall
• 1920 – New York voted 11.43 percent more Republican than nation overall
• 1924 – New York voted 1.43 percent more Republican than nation overall
• 1928 – New York voted 15.07 percent more Democratic than nation overall
• 1932 – New York voted 5.03 percent more Republican than nation overall
• 1936 – New York voted 4.37 percent more Republican than nation overall

So, even if they lost the election in a landslide and their home states, there was an extremely strong “favourite son” effect with Al Smith and George McGovern. Indeed, I would think this “favourite son” effect was stronger with Smith and McGovern than with Barry Goldwater or Walter Mondale who in 1964 and 1984 respectively lost in comparable landslides but narrowly carried their home states of Arizona and Minnesota. In Goldwater’s case, a “favourite son” effect was demonstrably confined to the Phoenix metropolitan area: elsewhere in Arizona Goldwater fared as badly as in the swathe of Great Basin and Plains States that have been rock-solid Republican since.

Cox is another case where a “favourite son” effect may have had effects: 1920 was the last election Ohio was more Democratic than the nation as a whole until 1964. However, the relationship between Ohio’s vote and the nation’s was no different from 1916, and 1920 remains the last election to date when neighbouring Indiana was more Democratic than the nation as a whole, suggesting Cox did not possess much status in Ohio.

When one considers that Kansas has in 155 years only twice been less Republican than the nation as a whole – in 1896 due to Bryan’s free silver campaign, and in 1916 – Landon’s 1936 result there does not suggest major “favourite son” influences. Indeed, in 1940 with Indiana’s Wendell Willkie as the party’s candidate, Kansas was 0.35 percent from being the most Republican state in the nation, and was the most Republican in 1944.

Another advantage I see is that this method can be extended more easily to third-party candidates winning no electoral votes – did they do better in their home state than over the whole of the United States?

• luokehao, 2 January 2017, 14:58 (UTC)

change the name of this article

since "home" state is not clearly defined, we should change the name of the article to "candidates who lost their birth or resident states. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tallicfan20 (talk • contribs) 00:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Still confusing

I'm afraid this article makes no sense to those not very familiar with the American electoral system. I have some knowledge of it but I still don't understand what this article is about. What does it mean to "lose" a home state? Does it mean the candidate failed to win the popular vote in his home state? Or that he failed to win the votes of those in the electoral college? Or something else, such as failing to win the primary? It would help immensely if the lead to this article were rewritten so as to explain the terminology. —Psychonaut (talk) 20:09, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

To lose a home state means to lose the popular vote within that state for the general election, which also loses that state's electoral votes in the general election. —Lowellian (reply) 02:28, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

How about a list of VP candidate who didn't win their RESIDENT (home) state

How about a list of VP candidate who didn't win their RESIDENT (home) state but still became Vice-President. I'm not sure there have been any? Think Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney are going to with Wisconsin and Massachusetts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.55.60.111 (talk) 11:13, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Here are four recent ones who lost their home state AND lost the election:

• 1984 Democratic ticket: Geraldine Ferraro lost New York.
• 1988 Democratic ticket: Lloyd Bentsen lost Texas. Bentsen won re-election to his seat in the US Senate but failed to carry the state for the Presidential ticket.
• 1996 Republican ticket: Jack Kemp lost New York.
• 2004 Democratic ticket: John Edwards lost North Carolina.
• 2012 Republican ticket: Paul Ryan lost Wisconsin.

Mtminchi08 (talk) 04:37, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Requested move 14 January 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 21:42, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

---

List of major-party United States presidential candidates who lost home state → List of major-party United States presidential candidates who lost their home state – The title is missing the word their. Also, the title is very long. If you can figure out a shorter title for this list, that would be great. Interstellarity (talk) 17:20, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

• Support. But as the proposal says, it's a very long title. I'd probably recommend using "U.S." instead of "United States" to try to shorten it a bit. Rreagan007 (talk) 20:09, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
• Support proposal; oppose using "U.S." over "United States" though. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:39, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Elections where someone had to lose

Should there be a separate section listing elections where both candidates were "from" the same state and, therefore, one of them HAD to lose their home state? If this article exists to show any kind of trend, then I think that losing your home state because you shared your home state with your opponent is worth noting. 147.226.157.14 (talk) 19:06, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Also, would it be worth listing elections where candidates ONLY won their home state, like Mondale in 1984? 147.226.157.14 (talk) 19:07, 14 December 2022 (UTC)