Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Could Pawlenty Win the Presidency Without Minnesota?

Bookmark and Share

(This report is the second installment in Smart Politics' 'Pathway to the White House' Series. The first report analyzed from what state presidents come).

A new Minnesota Poll released this week finds a majority of Gopher State residents opposed to a presidential bid by Governor Tim Pawlenty and a plurality of 43 percent saying there is 'no chance' they would cast their vote for him.

The Star Tribune finding that there is barely lukewarm support in Pawlenty's home state for him to seek the highest office in the land, comes as Pawlenty has been running a distant fifth or sixth in (very) early national GOP horserace polls behind more well-known potential candidates such as Mitt Romney, Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, and Newt Gingrich.

While Pawlenty's support would likely grow nationwide once he launched an official candidacy (he launches his Freedom First PAC on Thursday), the new Minnesota Poll raises the question - could Pawlenty win the presidency without carrying his home state of Minnesota?

While it is still 2.5 years out from even the presidential primaries, the question is not a far-fetched one to consider from one perspective - a mid-September Rasmussen poll found half of Minnesotans to believe Pawlenty will win the GOP nomination should he run for President.

As analyzed by Smart Politics last week, no president has come from Minnesota to date, and only one has come from the Upper Midwest region (Herbert Hoover, from Iowa, in 1928).

Still, history has demonstrated that it is (nearly) a necessary though not a sufficient condition that presidential nominees must carry their home state if they wish to win the presidency.

A Smart Politics analysis of the 56 presidential elections since 1789 found that all but two presidents carried their home state en route to victory.

The first president to win the White House without his home state was Democrat James Polk in 1844. Polk lost Tennessee by just 123 votes to Kentucky's Henry Clay out of nearly 120,000 cast, but still defeated Clay 170-105 in the Electoral College vote.

Then, in 1916, Democratic incumbent Woodrow Wilson lost his home state of New Jersey by 11.7 points to New York GOPer Charles Hughes. Wilson had carried New Jersey by 7.6 points in 1912 over New Yorker Teddy Roosevelt.

That's the entire list.

As such, it does not appear that Pawlenty could have much success in 2012 if he fails to at least enlist Minnesotans among his supporters for such a bid.

Home State Presidential Vote for U.S. Presidents

Year
President
State
Won
Percent
MoV
2008
Obama
Illinois
Yes
61.9
25.1
2004
Bush
Texas
Yes
61.1
22.9
2000
Bush
Texas
Yes
59.3
21.3
1996
Clinton
Arkansas
Yes
53.7
16.9
1992
Clinton
Arkansas
Yes
53.2
17.7
1988
Bush
Texas
Yes
56.0
12.6
1984
Reagan
California
Yes
57.5
16.2
1980
Reagan
California
Yes
52.7
16.8
1976
Carter
Georgia
Yes
66.7
33.8
1972
Nixon
California
Yes
55.0
13.5
1968
Nixon
California
Yes
47.8
3.1
1964
L. Johnson
Texas
Yes
63.3
26.8
1960
Kennedy
Massachusetts
Yes
60.2
20.7
1956
Eisenhower
Pennsylvania
Yes
56.5
13.2
1952
Eisenhower
Pennsylvania
Yes
52.7
5.9
1948
Truman
Missouri
Yes
58.1
16.6
1944
F. Roosevelt
New York
Yes
52.3
5.0
1940
F. Roosevelt
New York
Yes
51.6
3.6
1936
F. Roosevelt
New York
Yes
58.9
19.9
1932
F. Roosevelt
New York
Yes
54.1
12.7
1928
Hoover
Iowa
Yes
61.8
24.2
1924
Coolidge
Massachusetts
Yes
62.3
37.4
1920
Harding
Ohio
Yes
58.5
19.9
1916
Wilson
New Jersey
No
42.7
-11.7
1912
Wilson
New Jersey
Yes
41.2
7.6
1908
Taft
Ohio
Yes
51.0
6.2
1904
T. Roosevelt
New York
Yes
53.1
10.9
1900
McKinley
Ohio
Yes
52.3
6.6
1896
McKinley
Ohio
Yes
51.9
4.8
1892
Cleveland
New York
Yes
49.0
3.4
1888
B. Harrison
Indiana
Yes
49.1
0.4
1884
Cleveland
New York
Yes
48.3
0.1
1880
Garfield
Ohio
Yes
51.7
4.7
1876
Hayes
Ohio
Yes
50.2
1.1
1872
Grant
Ohio
Yes
53.2
7.1
1868
Grant
Ohio
Yes
54.0
8.0
1864
Lincoln
Illinois
Yes
54.4
8.8
1860
Lincoln
Illinois
Yes
50.7
3.5
1856
Buchanan
Pennsylvania
Yes
50.1
18.1
1852
Pierce
New Hampshire
Yes
56.4
25.8
1848
Taylor
Louisiana
Yes
54.6
9.2
1844
Polk
Tennessee
No
50.0
-0.1
1840
W.H. Harrison
Ohio
Yes
54.1
8.5
1836
Van Buren
New York
Yes
54.6
9.3
1832
Jackson
Tennessee
Yes
95.4
90.8
1828
Jackson
Tennessee
Yes
95.2
90.4
1824
J.Q. Adams
Massachusetts
Yes
73.0
57.2
1820
Monroe
Virginia
Yes
---
---
1816
Monroe
Virginia
Yes
---
---
1812
Madison
Virginia
Yes
---
---
1808
Madison
Virginia
Yes
N/A
N/A
1804
Jefferson
Virginia
Yes
N/A
N/A
1800
Jefferson
Virginia
Yes
N/A
N/A
1796
J. Adams
Massachusetts
Yes
N/A
N/A
1792
Washington
Virginia
Yes
N/A
N/A
1789
Washington
Virginia
Yes
N/A
N/A
 
 
 
56.4
16.5

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Previous post: Will Democrats Lose 20+ U.S. House Seats in 2010? A Counterpoint.
Next post: Are Klobuchar and Franken Exceeding Expectations? MN Senators Receive All-Time High Job Approval Marks

2 Comments


  • Oh for crying out loud! The president is nine months into his first four-year term and you are already publishing stories like this. Can we please be without a presidential campaign -- and stories like these -- for about two years??????????

  • Yes, it sad how the mouth of the media needs to be fed. More web hits, more viewers, more eyes, more listeners, etc... It's all about the numbers and how they translate to advertising dollars. [with the exception of smart politics] No wonder the attention span of the media is about a nanosecond....

    Its kind of fun being in an indeterminate stage regarding what’s next. The real fun begins when they realize that they have nothing.

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

    Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

    Political Crumbs

    Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

    Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


    Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

    Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting