1968 United States presidential election in Tennessee

The 1968 United States presidential election in Tennessee took place on November 5, 1968. All 50 states and the District of Columbia were part of the 1968 United States presidential election. Tennessee voters chose 11 electors to the Electoral College, who voted for president and vice president.

1968 United States presidential election in Tennessee

← 1964 November 5, 1968 1972 →
  Richard Nixon portrait.jpg George C Wallace.jpg Hubert Humphrey crop.jpg
Nominee Richard Nixon George Wallace Hubert Humphrey
Party Republican American Democratic
Home state New York[a] Alabama Minnesota
Running mate Spiro Agnew Curtis LeMay Edmund Muskie
Electoral vote 11 0 0
Popular vote 472,592 424,792 351,233
Percentage 37.9% 34.0% 28.1%

Tennessee Presidential Election Results 1968.svg
County Results

President before election

Lyndon B. Johnson
Democratic

Elected President

Richard Nixon
Republican

Tennessee voted more or less equally for the candidates, resulting in Republican candidate Richard Nixon of New York and his running mate Governor Spiro Agnew of Maryland receiving a plurality of the votes as opposed to a majority.

Nixon carried Tennessee with 37.85% of the vote to American Party candidate George Wallace’s 34.02% and Democratic candidate Hubert Humphrey's 28.13%, a victory margin of 3.87%. Nixon's victory was due to his large margins in traditionally Republican East Tennessee, while Wallace and Humphrey basically split Middle Tennessee and West Tennessee.[1][2] As of the 2016 presidential election, this is the last election in which Hamilton County did not support the Republican presidential candidate.[3]

ResultsEdit

1968 United States presidential election in Tennessee[1][2]
Party Candidate Votes Percentage Electoral votes
Republican Richard Nixon 472,592 37.85% 11
American George Wallace 424,792 34.02% 0
Democratic Hubert Humphrey 351,233 28.13% 0
Write-ins Write-ins 10 0.00% 0
Totals 1,248,617 100.00% 11
Voter turnout -

Results by countyEdit

County Richard Milhous Nixon
Republican
Hubert Horatio Humphrey
Democratic
George Corley Wallace
American
Margin[b] Total votes cast
# % # % # % # %
Anderson 10,233 47.04% 7,198 33.09% 4,323 19.87% 3,035[c] 13.95% 21,754
Bedford 1,870 22.30% 2,416 28.81% 4,099 48.88% -1,683[d] -20.07% 8,385
Benton 1,468 30.70% 1,059 22.15% 2,255 47.16% -787 -16.46% 4,782
Bledsoe 1,477 46.65% 957 30.23% 732 23.12% 520[c] 16.42% 3,166
Blount 12,753 57.10% 5,176 23.17% 4,407 19.73% 7,577[c] 33.92% 22,336
Bradley 6,924 50.01% 2,762 19.95% 4,159 30.04% 2,765 19.97% 13,845
Campbell 4,024 52.54% 2,268 29.61% 1,367 17.85% 1,756[c] 22.93% 7,659
Cannon 780 25.55% 809 26.50% 1,464 47.95% -655[d] -21.45% 3,053
Carroll 3,757 41.80% 1,932 21.50% 3,298 36.70% 459 5.11% 8,987
Carter 9,467 64.68% 2,160 14.76% 3,009 20.56% 6,458 44.12% 14,636
Cheatham 669 16.96% 778 19.73% 2,497 63.31% -1,719[d] -43.59% 3,944
Chester 1,408 32.79% 849 19.77% 2,037 47.44% -629 -14.65% 4,294
Claiborne 3,101 59.75% 1,314 25.32% 775 14.93% 1,787[c] 34.43% 5,190
Clay 814 42.13% 667 34.52% 451 23.34% 147[c] 7.61% 1,932
Cocke 5,645 72.80% 950 12.25% 1,159 14.95% 4,486 57.85% 7,754
Coffee 3,337 29.87% 3,040 27.21% 4,794 42.91% -1,457 -13.04% 11,171
Crockett 932 20.71% 703 15.62% 2,865 63.67% -1,933 -42.96% 4,500
Cumberland 3,115 51.81% 1,428 23.75% 1,469 24.43% 1,646 27.38% 6,012
Davidson 44,175 32.34% 44,543 32.61% 47,889 35.06% -3,346[d] -2.45% 136,607
Decatur 1,409 36.79% 877 22.90% 1,544 40.31% -135 -3.52% 3,830
DeKalb 1,532 39.33% 847 21.75% 1,516 38.92% 16 0.41% 3,895
Dickson 1,291 18.99% 2,034 29.91% 3,475 51.10% -1,441[d] -21.19% 6,800
Dyer 2,826 26.41% 2,033 19.00% 5,842 54.59% -3,016 -28.18% 10,701
Fayette 740 13.34% 2,236 40.32% 2,570 46.34% -334[d] -6.02% 5,546
Fentress 2,026 57.80% 671 19.14% 808 23.05% 1,218 34.75% 3,505
Franklin 1,700 18.62% 2,489 27.27% 4,939 54.11% -2,450[d] -26.84% 9,128
Gibson 4,093 26.77% 3,962 25.92% 7,233 47.31% -3,140 -20.54% 15,288
Giles 1,264 17.01% 2,203 29.64% 3,966 53.36% -1,763[d] -23.72% 7,433
Grainger 2,788 67.26% 761 18.36% 596 14.38% 2,027[c] 48.90% 4,145
Greene 7,957 58.26% 2,947 21.58% 2,753 20.16% 5,010 36.68% 13,657
Grundy 618 17.33% 1,307 36.64% 1,642 46.03% -335[d] -9.39% 3,567
Hamblen 6,382 57.86% 2,390 21.67% 2,259 20.48% 3,992[c] 36.19% 11,031
Hamilton 29,302 34.54% 23,441 27.64% 32,080 37.82% -2,778 -3.28% 84,823
Hancock 1,489 72.88% 318 15.57% 236 11.55% 1,171[c] 57.32% 2,043
Hardeman 1,171 20.18% 1,709 29.45% 2,924 50.38% -1,215[d] -20.93% 5,804
Hardin 2,910 45.55% 1,153 18.05% 2,325 36.40% 585 9.16% 6,388
Hawkins 6,217 60.78% 2,213 21.64% 1,798 17.58% 4,004[c] 39.15% 10,228
Haywood 1,152 20.51% 1,709 30.42% 2,757 49.07% -1,048[d] -18.65% 5,618
Henderson 3,591 51.99% 1,230 17.81% 2,086 30.20% 1,505 21.79% 6,907
Henry 2,068 23.89% 3,149 36.38% 3,439 39.73% -290[d] -3.35% 8,656
Hickman 760 17.33% 1,152 26.27% 2,473 56.40% -1,321[d] -30.13% 4,385
Houston 232 12.82% 636 35.16% 941 52.02% -305[d] -16.86% 1,809
Humphreys 866 19.90% 1,391 31.96% 2,095 48.14% -704[d] -16.18% 4,352
Jackson 673 24.90% 1,122 41.51% 908 33.59% 214[d] 7.92% 2,703
Jefferson 5,494 67.11% 1,494 18.25% 1,199 14.65% 4,000[c] 48.86% 8,187
Johnson 3,107 79.02% 450 11.44% 375 9.54% 2,657[c] 67.57% 3,932
Knox 47,202 52.44% 24,528 27.25% 18,277 20.31% 22,674[c] 25.19% 90,007
Lake 409 16.99% 737 30.61% 1,262 52.41% -525[d] -21.80% 2,408
Lauderdale 1,080 15.99% 2,108 31.21% 3,566 52.80% -1,458[d] -21.59% 6,754
Lawrence 4,343 41.26% 2,191 20.81% 3,993 37.93% 350 3.32% 10,527
Lewis 455 17.91% 1,088 42.83% 997 39.25% 91[d] 3.58% 2,540
Lincoln 1,167 16.14% 1,848 25.56% 4,214 58.29% -2,366[d] -32.73% 7,229
Loudon 4,299 54.58% 1,581 20.07% 1,996 25.34% 2,303 29.24% 7,876
Macon 2,173 58.04% 530 14.16% 1,041 27.80% 1,132 30.24% 3,744
Madison 6,143 29.14% 5,517 26.17% 9,420 44.69% -3,277 -15.55% 21,080
Marion 1,959 30.59% 1,661 25.94% 2,784 43.47% -825 -12.88% 6,404
Marshall 1,202 19.68% 1,527 25.00% 3,379 55.32% -1,852[d] -30.32% 6,108
Maury 3,048 20.88% 3,401 23.30% 8,148 55.82% -4,747[d] -32.52% 14,597
McMinn 6,098 52.92% 2,889 25.07% 2,535 22.00% 3,209[c] 27.85% 11,522
McNairy 2,979 41.21% 1,377 19.05% 2,872 39.73% 107 1.48% 7,228
Meigs 729 43.81% 493 29.63% 442 26.56% 236[c] 14.18% 1,664
Monroe 4,749 53.38% 2,926 32.89% 1,222 13.73% 1,823[c] 20.49% 8,897
Montgomery 3,248 22.52% 5,538 38.39% 5,638 39.09% -100[d] -0.69% 14,424
Moore 224 15.71% 346 24.26% 856 60.03% -510[d] -35.76% 1,426
Morgan 1,803 47.46% 968 25.48% 1,028 27.06% 775 20.40% 3,799
Obion 2,420 25.92% 2,235 23.94% 4,680 50.13% -2,260 -24.21% 9,335
Overton 1,258 31.25% 1,592 39.54% 1,176 29.21% -334[c] -8.30% 4,026
Perry 519 25.58% 726 35.78% 784 38.64% -58[d] -2.86% 2,029
Pickett 884 59.41% 405 27.22% 199 13.37% 479[c] 32.19% 1,488
Polk 1,808 45.02% 1,454 36.21% 754 18.77% 354[c] 8.81% 4,016
Putnam 3,693 35.83% 3,541 34.36% 3,073 29.81% 152[c] 1.47% 10,307
Rhea 2,428 40.70% 1,301 21.81% 2,237 37.50% 191 3.20% 5,966
Roane 6,033 45.74% 3,258 24.70% 3,898 29.55% 2,135 16.19% 13,189
Robertson 1,802 22.47% 2,315 28.86% 3,904 48.67% -1,589[d] -19.81% 8,021
Rutherford 4,168 24.72% 4,921 29.18% 7,773 46.10% -2,852[d] -16.91% 16,862
Scott 2,406 58.24% 991 23.99% 734 17.77% 1,415[c] 34.25% 4,131
Sequatchie 663 29.82% 549 24.70% 1,011 45.48% -348 -15.65% 2,223
Sevier 7,629 74.67% 1,112 10.88% 1,476 14.45% 6,153 60.22% 10,217
Shelby 73,416 31.66% 81,486 35.14% 76,996 33.20% 4,490[d] 1.94% 231,898
Smith 1,089 24.96% 1,443 33.07% 1,831 41.97% -388[d] -8.89% 4,363
Stewart 443 17.43% 1,041 40.97% 1,057 41.60% -16[d] -0.63% 2,541
Sullivan 20,251 50.60% 9,783 24.44% 9,991 24.96% 10,260 25.63% 40,025
Sumner 4,519 27.41% 4,376 26.54% 7,592 46.05% -3,073 -18.64% 16,487
Tipton 1,422 16.86% 2,071 24.55% 4,943 58.59% -2,872[d] -34.04% 8,436
Trousdale 252 15.80% 694 43.51% 649 40.69% 45[d] 2.82% 1,595
Unicoi 3,327 65.49% 910 17.91% 843 16.59% 2,417[c] 47.58% 5,080
Union 1,956 66.71% 527 17.97% 449 15.31% 1,429[c] 48.74% 2,932
Van Buren 327 29.30% 282 25.27% 507 45.43% -180 -16.13% 1,116
Warren 1,858 24.07% 2,046 26.51% 3,814 49.42% -1,768[d] -22.91% 7,718
Washington 12,882 56.66% 4,930 21.68% 4,925 21.66% 7,952[c] 34.97% 22,737
Wayne 2,417 58.51% 506 12.25% 1,208 29.24% 1,209 29.27% 4,131
Weakley 2,858 30.50% 1,988 21.21% 4,525 48.29% -1,667 -17.79% 9,371
White 1,423 29.91% 1,584 33.30% 1,750 36.79% -166[d] -3.49% 4,757
Williamson 2,788 28.69% 2,063 21.23% 4,867 50.08% -2,079 -21.39% 9,718
Wilson 2,736 24.21% 2,916 25.81% 5,648 49.98% -2,732[d] -24.18% 11,300
Totals 472,592 37.85% 351,233 28.13% 424,792 34.02% 47,800 3.83% 1,248,617[e]

NotesEdit

  1. ^ Although he was born in California and he served as a U.S. Senator from California, in 1968 Richard Nixon's official state of residence was New York, because he moved there to practice law after his defeat in the 1962 California gubernatorial election. During his first term as president, Nixon re-established his residency in California. Consequently, most reliable reference books list Nixon's home state as New York in the 1968 election and his home state as California in the 1972 (and 1960) election.
  2. ^ Because Nixon finished first and Wallace second in Tennessee as a whole, all margins given are Nixon vote minus Wallace vote and Nixon percentage minus Wallace percentage unless stated otherwise for the county in question.
  3. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x In this county where Wallace did run third behind both Nixon and Humphrey, margin given is Nixon vote minus Humphrey vote and percentage margin Nixon percentage minus Humphrey percentage.
  4. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae af ag ah ai In this county where Nixon ran third behind both Wallace and Humphrey, margin given is Humphrey vote minus Wallace vote and percentage margin Humphrey percentage minus Wallace percentage.
  5. ^ This total includes 10 write-in votes not separated by county.

ReferencesEdit

  1. ^ a b "1968 Presidential General Election Results - Tennessee". Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. Retrieved 2016-08-25.
  2. ^ a b Woolley, John; Peters, Gehard. "1968 Presidential Election". The American Presidency Project. University of California, Santa Barbara. Retrieved 26 August 2016.
  3. ^ Sullivan, Robert David; ‘How the Red and Blue Map Evolved Over the Past Century’; America Magazine in The National Catholic Review; June 29, 2016