To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
Languages
Recent
Show all languages
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

1932 United States Senate elections

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States Senate elections, 1932 and 1933

← 1930 November 8, 1932 1934 →

32 of the 96 seats in the United States Senate
49 seats needed for a majority
  Majority party Minority party
 
Joseph t robinson.jpg
James Eli Watson.jpg
Leader Joseph Robinson James Watson
(lost re-election)
Party Democratic Republican
Leader since December 3, 1923 March 4, 1929
Leader's seat Arkansas Indiana
Seats before 47 48
Seats after 59[1] 36[1]
Seat change Increase 12 Decrease 12
Seats up 16 16
Races won 27 5

  Third party
 
Party Farmer–Labor
Seats before 1
Seats after 1
Seat change Steady
Seats up 0
Races won 0

US 1932 senate election map.svg
Results including special elections
     Democratic gain      Republican gain
     Democratic hold      Republican hold

Majority Leader before election

James Watson
Republican

Elected Majority Leader

Joseph Robinson
Democratic

The United States Senate elections of 1932 coincided with Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt's crushing defeat of incumbent Herbert Hoover in the presidential election. With the Hoover administration widely blamed for the Great Depression, Republicans lost twelve seats and control of the chamber.

This was the first time since the 1920 elections that the victorious party defended all of their own seats and achieved a pickup in the double-digits. Senator Reed Smoot (R-UT) lost re-election: although economists disagree by how much, the consensus view among economists and economic historians is that "The passage of [his] Smoot-Hawley tariff exacerbated the Great Depression."[2]

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    739 274
    5 113
    1 944
    1 487
    27 520
  • ✪ Congressional Elections: Crash Course Government and Politics #6
  • ✪ Us Elections 1944 (1944)
  • ✪ U.S. Presidential Election (1928)
  • ✪ Elections In America (1958)
  • ✪ The American Presidential Election of 1856

Transcription

Hi, I'm Craig and this is Crash Course Government and Politics, and today we're going to talk about what is, if you ask the general public, the most important part of politics: elections. If you ask me, it's hair styles. Look at Martin Van Buren's sideburns, how could he not be elected? Americans are kind of obsessed with elections, I mean when this was being recorded in early 2015, television, news and the internet were already talking about who would be Democrat and Republican candidates for president in 2016. And many of the candidates have unofficially been campaigning for years. I've been campaigning; your grandma's been campaigning. Presidential elections are exciting and you can gamble on them. Is that legal, can you gamble on them, Stan? Anyway, why we're so obsessed with them is a topic for another day. Right now I'm gonna tell you that the fixation on the presidential elections is wrong, but not because the president doesn't matter. No, today we're gonna look at the elections of the people that are supposed to matter the most, Congress. Constitutionally at least, Congress is the most important branch of government because it is the one that is supposed to be the most responsive to the people. One of the main reasons it's so responsive, at least in theory, is the frequency of elections. If a politician has to run for office often, he or she, because unlike the president we have women serving in Congress, kind of has to pay attention to what the constituents want, a little bit, maybe. By now, I'm sure that most of you have memorized the Constitution, so you recognize that despite their importance in the way we discuss politics, elections aren't really a big feature of the Constitution. Except of course for the ridiculously complex electoral college system for choosing the president, which we don't even want to think about for a few episodes. In fact, here's what the Constitution says about Congressional Elections in Article 1 Section 2: "The House of Representatives shall be composed of members chosen every second year by the people of the several states, and the electors in each state shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the state legislature." So the Constitution does establish that the whole of the house is up for election every 2 years, and 1/3 of the senate is too, but mainly it leaves the scheduling and rules of elections up to the states. The actual rules of elections, like when the polls are open and where they actually are, as well as the registration requirements, are pretty much up to the states, subject to some federal election law. If you really want to know the rules in your state, I'm sure that someone at the Board of Elections, will be happy to explain them to you. Really, you should give them a call; they're very, very lonely. In general though, here's what we can say about American elections. First stating the super obvious, in order to serve in congress, you need to win an election. In the House of Representatives, each election district chooses a single representative, which is why we call them single-member districts. The number of districts is determined by the Census, which happens every 10 years, and which means that elections ending in zeros are super important, for reasons that I'll explain in greater detail in a future episode. It's because of gerrymandering. The Senate is much easier to figure out because both of the state Senators are elected by the entire state. It's as if the state itself were a single district, which is true for states like Wyoming, which are so unpopulated as to have only 1 representative. Sometimes these elections are called at large elections. Before the election ever happens, you need candidates. How candidates are chosen differs from state to state, but usually it has something to do with political parties, although it doesn't have to. Why are things so complicated?! What we can say is that candidates, or at least good candidates, usually have certain characteristics. Sorry America. First off, if you are gonna run for office, you should have an unblemished record, free of, oh I don't know, felony convictions or sex scandals, except maybe in Louisiana or New York. This might lead to some pretty bland candidates or people who are so calculating that they have no skeletons in their closet, but we Americans are a moral people and like our candidates to reflect our ideals rather than our reality. The second characteristic that a candidate must possess is the ability to raise money. Now some candidates are billionaires and can finance their own campaigns. But most billionaires have better things to do: buying yachts, making even more money, building money forts, buying more yachts, so they don't have time to run for office. But most candidates get their money for their campaigns by asking for it. The ability to raise money is key, especially now, because running for office is expensive. Can I get a how expensive is it? "How expensive is it?!" Well, so expensive that the prices of elections continually rises and in 2012 winners of House races spent nearly 2 million each. Senate winners spent more than 10 million. By the time this episode airs, I'm sure the numbers will be much higher like a gajillion billion million. Money is important in winning an election, but even more important, statistically, is already being in Congress. Let's go to the Thought Bubble. The person holding an office who runs for that office again is called the incumbent and has a big advantage over any challenger. This is according to political scientists who, being almost as bad at naming things as historians, refer to this as incumbency advantage. There are a number of reasons why incumbents tend to hold onto their seats in congress, if they want to. The first is that a sitting congressman has a record to run on, which we hope includes some legislative accomplishments, although for the past few Congresses, these don't seem to matter. The record might include case work, which is providing direct services to constituents. This is usually done by congressional staffers and includes things like answering questions about how to get certain government benefits or writing recommendation letters to West Point. Congressmen can also provide jobs to constituents, which is usually a good way to get them to vote for you. These are either government jobs, kind of rare these days, called patronage or indirect employment through government contracts for programs within a Congressman's district. These programs are called earmarks or pork barrel programs, and they are much less common now because Congress has decided not to use them any more, sort of. The second advantage that incumbents have is that they have a record of winning elections, which if you think about it, is pretty obvious. Being a proven winner makes it easier for a congressmen to raise money, which helps them win, and long term incumbents tend to be more powerful in Congress which makes it even easier for them to raise money and win. The Constitution give incumbents one structural advantage too. Each elected congressman is allowed $100,000 and free postage to send out election materials. This is called the franking privilege. It's not so clear how great an advantage this is in the age of the internet, but at least according to the book The Victory Lab, direct mail from candidates can be surprisingly effective. How real is this incumbency advantage? Well if you look at the numbers, it seems pretty darn real. Over the past 60 years, almost 90% of members of The House of Representatives got re-elected. The Senate has been even more volatile, but even at the low point in 1980 more than 50% of sitting senators got to keep their jobs. Thanks, Thought Bubble. You're so great. So those are some of the features of congressional elections. Now, if you'll permit me to get a little politically sciencey, I'd like to try to explain why elections are so important to the way that Congressmen and Senators do their jobs. In 1974, political scientist David Mayhew published a book in which he described something he called "The Electoral Connection." This was the idea that Congressmen were primarily motivated by the desire to get re-elected, which intuitively makes a lot of sense, even though I'm not sure what evidence he had for this conclusion. Used to be able to get away with that kind of thing I guess, clearly David may-not-hew to the rules of evidence, pun [rim shot], high five, no. Anyway Mayhew's research methodology isn't as important as his idea itself because The Electoral Connection provides a frame work for understanding congressman's activities. Mayhew divided representatives' behaviors and activities into three categories. The first is advertising; congressmen work to develop their personal brand so that they are recognizable to voters. Al D'Amato used to be know in New York as Senator Pothole, because he was able to bring home so much pork that he could actually fix New York's streets. Not by filling them with pork, money, its money, remember pork barrel spending? The second activity is credit claiming; Congressmen get things done so that they can say they got them done. A lot of case work and especially pork barrel spending are done in the name of credit claiming. Related to credit claiming, but slightly different, is position taking. This means making a public judgmental statement on something likely to be of interest to voters. Senators can do this through filibusters. Representatives can't filibuster, but they can hold hearings, publicly supporting a hearing is a way of associating yourself with an idea without having to actually try to pass legislation. And of course they can go on the TV, especially on Sunday talk shows. What's a TV, who even watches TV? Now the idea of The Electoral Connection doesn't explain every action a member of Congress takes; sometimes they actually make laws to benefit the public good or maybe solve problems, huh, what an idea! But Mayhew's idea gives us a way of thinking about Congressional activity, an analytical lens that connects what Congressmen actually do with how most of us understand Congressmen, through elections. So the next time you see a Congressmen call for a hearing on a supposed horrible scandal or read about a Senator threatening to filibuster a policy that may have significant popular support, ask yourself, "Is this Representative claiming credit or taking a position, and how will this build their brand?" In other words: what's the electoral connection and how will whatever they're doing help them get elected? This might feel a little cynical, but the reality is Mayhew's thesis often seems to fit with today's politics. Thanks for watching, see you next week. Vote for me; I'm on the TV. I'm not -- I'm on the YouTube. Crash Course: Government and Politics is produced in association with PBS Digital Studios. Support for Crash Course US Government comes from Voqal. Voqal supports nonprofits that use technology and media to advance social equity. Learn more about their mission and initiatives at Voqal.org. Crash Course is made by all of these nice people. Thanks for watching. That guy isn't nice.

Contents

Gains and losses

Incumbents who lost renomination

Democrats took three seats from Republican incumbents:

  1. California: Two-term Republican Samuel M. Shortridge lost renomination to Tallant Tubbs, who in turn, lost the general election to Democrat William G. McAdoo.
  2. Iowa: One-term Republican Smith W. Brookhart lost renomination to Henry Field, who in turn, lost the general election to Democrat Richard L. Murphy.
  3. Wisconsin: One-term Republican John J. Blaine lost renomination to John B. Chapple, who in turn, lost the general election to Democrat F. Ryan Duffy.

Incumbents who lost re-election

Democrats defeated eight Republican incumbents:

  1. Connecticut: Two-term Republican Hiram Bingham lost to Democratic challenger, Augustine Lonergan.
  2. Idaho: One-term Republican John Thomas lost to Democratic challenger, James Pope.
  3. Illinois: One-term Republican Otis F. Glenn lost to Democratic challenger, William H. Dieterich.
  4. Indiana: Three-term Republican James E. Watson lost to Democratic challenger, Frederick Van Nuys.
  5. Nevada: Two-term Republican Tasker L. Oddie lost to Democratic challenger, Patrick A. McCarran.
  6. New Hampshire: Three-term Republican George H. Moses lost to Democratic challenger Fred H. Brown.
  7. Utah: Five-term Republican Reed Smoot lost to Democratic challenger Elbert D. Thomas.
  8. Washington: Four-term Republican Wesley L. Jones lost to Democratic challenger Homer T. Bone.

Milestones

  • First election in which a Senate leader lost re-election: Majority Leader James E. Watson (R-IN)
  • First woman to be elected to a full term in the Senate: Hattie Caraway (D-AR)
  • Last Democrat (as of 2017) to be elected from Kansas: George McGill (D-KS)

Change in Senate composition

Before the elections

Going into the November 1932 elections.

D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8
D18 D17 D16 D15 D14 D13 D12 D11 D10 D9
D19 D20 D21 D22 D23 D24 D25 D26 D27 D28
D38
Ran
D37
Ran
D36
Ran
D35
Ran
D34
Ran
D33
Ran
D32
Ran
D31 D30 D29
D39
Ran
D40
Ran
D41
Ran
D42
Ran
D43
Ran
D44
Ran
D45
Ran
D46
Retired
D47
Retired
FL1
Plurality → R48
Ran
R39
Ran
R40
Ran
R41
Ran
R42
Ran
R43
Ran
R44
Ran
R45
Ran
R46
Ran
R47
Ran
R38
Ran
R37
Ran
R36
Ran
R35
Ran
R34
Ran
R33
Ran
R32 R31 R30 R29
R19 R20 R21 R22 R23 R24 R25 R26 R27 R28
R18 R17 R16 R15 R14 R13 R12 R11 R10 R9
R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8

Result of the general elections

D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8
D18 D17 D16 D15 D14 D13 D12 D11 D10 D9
D19 D20 D21 D22 D23 D24 D25 D26 D27 D28
D38
Re-elected
D37
Re-elected
D36
Re-elected
D35
Re-elected
D34
Re-elected
D33
Re-elected
D32
Re-elected
D31 D30 D29
D39
Re-elected
D40
Re-elected
D41
Re-elected
D42
Re-elected
D43
Re-elected
D44
Re-elected
D45
Hold
D46
Hold
D47
Hold
D48
Gain
Majority → D49
Gain
D58
Gain
D57
Gain
D56
Gain
D55
Gain
D54
Gain
D53
Gain
D52
Gain
D51
Gain
D50
Gain
D59
Gain
FL1 R36
Re-elected
R35
Re-elected
R34
Re-elected
R33
Re-elected
R32
Re-elected
R31 R30 R29
R19 R20 R21 R22 R23 R24 R25 R26 R27 R28
R18 R17 R16 R15 R14 R13 R12 R11 R10 R9
R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8
Key:
D# Democratic
FL# Farmer–Labor
R# Republican

Race summary

All races are general elections for class 3 seats, unless noted.

Elections during the 72nd Congress

In these elections, the winners were seated during 1932 or in 1933 before March 4; ordered by election date.

State Incumbent Results Candidates
Senator Party Electoral history
Arkansas
(Class 3)
Hattie W. Caraway Democratic 1931 (Appointed) Interim appointee elected January 12, 1932.
Democratic hold.
Winner was subsequently re-elected in November.
Hattie W. Caraway (D) 91.6%
Rex Floyd (I) 5.2%
Sam D. Carson (I) 3.2%[3]
Colorado
(Class 3)
Walter Walker Democratic 1929 (Appointed) Interim appointee lost election to finish the term.
New senator elected November 8, 1932.
Republican gain.
Winner was not elected to the next term, see below.
Karl C. Schuyler (Republican) 48.76%
Walter Walker (Democratic) 48.51%
Carle Whitehead (Socialist) 2.73%[4]
New Jersey
(Class 2)
W. Warren Barbour Republican 1931 (Appointed) Interim appointee elected November 8, 1932. W. Warren Barbour (Republican) 49.6%
Percy H. Stewart (Democratic) 48.5%
North Carolina
(Class 3)
Cameron A. Morrison Democratic 1930 (Appointed) Interim appointee lost nomination to finish the term.
New senator elected November 8, 1932.
Democratic hold.
Winner was also elected to next term, see below.
Robert R. Reynolds (Democratic) 68.7%
Jake F. Newell (Republican) 31.3%[5]
Georgia
(Class 2)
John S. Cohen Democratic 1932 (Appointed) Interim appointee retired.
New senator elected January 12, 1933.
Democratic hold.
Richard Russell, Jr. (Democratic)
Unopposed

Elections leading to the 73rd Congress

All elections are for Class 3 seats.

State Incumbent Results Candidates
Senator Party Electoral history
Alabama Hugo L. Black Democratic 1926 Incumbent re-elected. Hugo L. Black (Democratic) 86.3%
J. Theodore Johnson (Republican) 13.8%
Arizona Carl Hayden Democratic 1926 Incumbent re-elected. Carl Hayden (Democratic) 66.7%
Ralph H. Cameron (Republican) 32.1%
Arkansas Hattie W. Caraway Democratic 1931 (Appointed) Interim appointee elected. Hattie W. Caraway (Democratic) 89.5%
John W. White (Republican) 10.5%
California Samuel M. Shortridge Republican 1920
1926
Incumbent lost renomination.
New senator elected.
Democratic gain.
William G. McAdoo (Democratic) 43.4%
Tallant Tubbs (Republican) 30.8%
Robert P. Shuler (Prohibition) 25.8%
Colorado Walter Walker Democratic 1932 (Appointed) Interim appointee retired.
New senator elected to next term.
Democratic hold.
Winner was not elected to finish the term, see above.
Alva B. Adams (Democratic) 52.23%
Karl C. Schuyler (Republican) 45.78%
Carle Whitehead (Socialist) 1.99%[4]
Connecticut Hiram Bingham III Republican 1924 (Special)
1926
Incumbent lost re-election.
New senator elected.
Democratic gain.
Augustine Lonergan (Democratic) 48.5%
Hiram Bingham III (Republican) 47.7%
Florida Duncan U. Fletcher Democratic 1909 (Appointed)
1909 (Special)
1914
1920
1926
Incumbent re-elected. Duncan U. Fletcher (Democratic) 99.8%
Georgia Walter F. George Democratic 1922 (Special)
1926
Incumbent re-elected. Walter F. George (Democratic) 92.8%
James W. Arnold (Republican) 7.2%
Idaho John Thomas Republican 1928 (Appointed)
1928 (Special)
Incumbent lost re-election.
New senator elected.
Democratic gain.
James Pope (Democratic) 55.7%
John Thomas (Republican) 42.3%
Illinois Otis F. Glenn Republican 1928 (Special) Incumbent lost re-election.
New senator elected.
Democratic gain.
William H. Dieterich (Democratic) 52.2%
Otis F. Glenn (Republican) 46.0%
Indiana James E. Watson Republican 1916 (Special)
1920
1926
Incumbent lost re-election.
New senator elected.
Democratic gain.
Frederick Van Nuys (Democratic) 55.6%
James E. Watson (Republican) 42.3%
Iowa Smith W. Brookhart Republican 1926 Incumbent lost renomination.
Incumbent lost re-election as an Independent.
New senator elected.
Democratic gain.
Richard L. Murphy (Democratic) 54.9%
Henry Field (Republican) 40.8%
Kansas George McGill Democratic 1930 (Special) Incumbent re-elected. George McGill (Democratic) 45.7%
Ben S. Paulen (Republican) 42.0%
Kentucky Alben W. Barkley Democratic 1926 Incumbent re-elected. Alben W. Barkley (Democratic) 59.2%
Maurice Thatcher (Republican) 40.5%
Louisiana Edwin S. Broussard Democratic 1920
1926
Incumbent lost renomination.
New senator elected.
Democratic hold.
John H. Overton (Democratic)
Unopposed
Maryland Millard E. Tydings Democratic 1926 Incumbent re-elected. Millard E. Tydings (Democratic) 66.2%
Wallace Williams (Republican) 31.2%
Missouri Harry B. Hawes Democratic 1926 (Special)
1926
Incumbent retired.
New senator elected.
Democratic hold.
Incumbent then resigned and winner was appointed to finish the current term.
Bennett Champ Clark (Democratic) 63.2%
Henry Kiel (Republican) 35.9%
Nevada Tasker L. Oddie Republican 1920
1926
Incumbent lost re-election.
New senator elected.
Democratic gain.
Patrick A. McCarran (Democratic) 52.1%
Tasker L. Oddie (Republican) 47.9%
New Hampshire George H. Moses Republican 1918 (Special)
1920
1926
Incumbent lost re-election.
New senator elected.
Democratic gain.
Fred H. Brown (Democratic) 50.4%
George H. Moses (Republican) 49.3%
New York Robert F. Wagner Democratic 1926 Incumbent re-elected. Robert F. Wagner (Democratic) 55.8%
George Z. Medalie (Republican) 38.6%
North Carolina Cameron A. Morrison Democratic 1930 (Appointed) Interim appointee lost nomination.
New senator elected.
Democratic hold.
Winner was also elected to finish the current term, see above.
Robert R. Reynolds (Democratic) 68.6%
Jake F. Newell (Republican) 31.4%[5]
North Dakota Gerald P. Nye Republican 1925 (Appointed)
1926 (Special)
Incumbent re-elected. Gerald P. Nye (Republican) 72.3%
P. W. Lanier (Democratic) 27.5%
Ohio Robert J. Bulkley Democratic 1930 (Special) Incumbent re-elected. Robert J. Bulkley (Democratic) 52.5%
Gilbert Bettman (Republican) 45.8%
Oklahoma Elmer Thomas Democratic 1926 Incumbent re-elected. Elmer Thomas (Democratic) 65.6%
Wirt Franklin (Republican) 33.7%
Oregon Frederick Steiwer Republican 1926 Incumbent re-elected. Frederick Steiwer (Republican) 52.7%
Walter B. Gleason (Democratic) 38.9%
Pennsylvania James J. Davis Republican 1930 (Special) Incumbent re-elected. James J. Davis (Republican) 49.3%
Lawrence H. Rupp (Democratic) 43.2%
South Carolina Ellison D. Smith Democratic 1909
1914
1920
1926
Incumbent re-elected. Ellison D. Smith (Democratic)
Unopposed
South Dakota Peter Norbeck Republican 1920
1926
Incumbent re-elected. Peter Norbeck (Republican) 53.8%
U.S.G. Cherry (Democratic) 44.6%
Utah Reed Smoot Republican 1903
1909
1914
1920
1926
Incumbent lost re-election.
New senator elected.
Democratic gain.
Elbert D. Thomas (Democratic) 56.7%
Reed Smoot (Republican) 41.7%
Vermont Porter H. Dale Republican 1909 (Appointed)
1923 (Special)
1926
Incumbent re-elected. Porter H. Dale (Republican) 55.1%
Fred C. Martin (Democratic) 44.9%
Washington Wesley L. Jones Republican 1909
1914
1920
1926
Incumbent lost re-election.
New senator elected.
Democratic gain.
Incumbent then died November 19, 1932 and Elijah S. Grammer (R) was appointed to finish the current term.
Homer T. Bone (Democratic) 60.6%
Wesley L. Jones (Republican) 32.7%
Wisconsin John J. Blaine Republican 1926 Incumbent lost renomination.
New senator elected.
Democratic gain.
F. Ryan Duffy (Democratic) 57.0%
John B. Chapple (Republican) 36.2%
Emil Seidel (Socialist) 6.1%

Election during the 73rd Congress

In this special election, the winner was elected in 1933 after March 4.

State Incumbent Results Candidates
Senator Party Electoral history
 Virginia
(Class 1)
Harry F. Byrd Democratic 1933 (Appointed) Claude A. Swanson (D) had resigned March 4, 1933 to become U.S. Secretary of the Navy.
Interim successor was appointed March 4, 1933 to continue the term.
Appointee elected November 7, 1933.
Democratic hold.
Harry F. Byrd (Democratic) 71.31%
Henry A. Wise (Republican) 26.67%
John M. Daniel (Independent) 0.92%
Elizabeth L. Otey (Socialist) 0.68%
Newman H. Raymond (Prohibition) 0.42%[6]

Arizona

United States Senate election in Arizona, 1932[7]
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Democratic Carl T. Hayden 74,310 66.67%
Republican Ralph H. Cameron 35,737 32.06%
Socialist Lester B. Woolever 1,110 1.00%
Communist Edward Haustgen 306 0.28%
Majority 38,573 34.61%
Turnout 111,463
Democratic gain from Republican Swing

Georgia (Special)

New York

Democratic ticket Republican ticket Socialist ticket Law Preservation ticket Communist ticket Socialist Labor ticket
Robert F. Wagner 2,532,905 George Z. Medalie 1,751,186 Charles Solomon 143,282 D. Leigh Colvin 74,611 William Weinstone 27,956 Jeremiah D. Crowley[8]

Pennsylvania

General election results[9]
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Republican James J. Davis (incumbent) 1,375,489 49.46%
Democratic Lawrence H. Rupp 1,200,760 43.18%
Prohibition Edwin J. Fithian 106,602 3.83%
Socialist William J. Van Essen 91,456 3.29%
Communist Harry M. Wicks 6,426 0.23%
N/A Others 145 0.01%

South Carolina

South Carolina U.S. Senate Election, 1932
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Democratic Ellison D. Smith (incumbent) 104,472 98.1 -1.9
Republican Clara Harrigal 1,976 1.9 +1.9
Majority 102,496 96.2 -3.8
Turnout 106,448
Democratic hold
  65+% won by Smith

Vermont

United States Senate election in Vermont, 1932[10]
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Republican Porter H. Dale (inc.) 74,319 55.1%
Democratic Fred C. Martin 60,455 44.9%
Total votes 134,774 100.0%

Virginia (Special)

Democratic former Governor Harry F. Byrd was elected after defeating Republican Henry A. Wise.

United States Senate special election in Virginia, 1933[6]
Party Candidate Votes % ±
Democratic Harry F. Byrd (inc.) 119,377 71.31% -28.53%
Republican Henry A. Wise 44,648 26.67% +26.67%
Independent John M. Daniel 1,543 0.92%
Socialist Elizabeth L. Otey 1,130 0.68% +0.68%
Prohibition Hewman H. Raymond 704 0.42% +0.42%
Majority 74,729 44.64% -55.04%
Turnout 167,402
Democratic hold

See also

References

  1. ^ a b "U.S. Senate: Party Division". U.S. Senate. Retrieved April 18, 2017.
  2. ^ Whaples, Robert (March 1995). "Where Is There Consensus Among American Economic Historians? The Results of a Survey on Forty Propositions". The Journal of Economic History. Cambridge University Press. 55 (1): 144. doi:10.1017/S0022050700040602. JSTOR 2123771.
  3. ^ "AR US Senate Special" – via OurCampaigns.com.
  4. ^ a b "CO US Senate Special" – via OurCampaigns.com.
  5. ^ a b "NC US Senate Special" – via OurCampaigns.com.
  6. ^ a b "VA US Senate Special". Retrieved January 15, 2014 – via OurCampaigns.com.
  7. ^ "AZ US Senate" – via OurCampaigns.com.
  8. ^ Jeremiah D. Crowley, of Marcellus, ran also for State Engineer in 1910; for Lieutenant Governor in 1912, 1914 and 1920; and for Governor in 1916, 1922, 1926 and 1930
  9. ^ "Statistics of the Congressional and Presidential Election of November 8, 1932" (PDF). Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House. Retrieved July 8, 2014.
  10. ^ "General Election Results - U.S. Senator - 1914-2014" (PDF). Office of the Vermont Secretary of State. Retrieved June 17, 2015.
This page was last edited on 14 June 2019, at 11:23
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.