Talk:List of United States presidential election results by state

Order
These ought to be in ascending chronological order. 1948, 1952, 1956, …, 1996, 2000, 2004. —Markles 20:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Synthesis needed
The table right now, great and useful as it is, is not very informative at a glance. I'm now trying to create a supplementary analytical table that would give data that will be helpful in quickly determining a state's voting history. See the current process at my sandbox. Jmj713 (talk) 22:06, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and added the table in. I know I'm missing one state; I'll add that in as soon as I can. Jmj713 (talk) 17:18, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

List of states by participation in United States presidential elections
Not realizing that this page existed, I created List of states by participation in United States presidential elections, which duplicates some content here but also provides a handy win/loss column. Keep separate? Merge? I think it's rather neat and elegant on its own. bd2412 T 18:25, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I would say merge them. Certainly there's no reason to delete the nice table you created, but the two articles do seem a little redundant. Orser67 (talk) 20:25, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

1864
In the 1864 election, the Union-occupied Tennessee and Louisiana held elections, but their electors weren't counted. Should they be included in the chart? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.126.10.21 (talk) 02:23, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Regions
In what world is South Dakota and North Dakota considered part of the West and not the Midwest? Liz Read! Talk! 23:36, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

1824
The 1824 column is the only column to contain the full surnames of the candidates, rather than their party. I'm sure there's a reason for this (though I don't know enough about American History to know what that reason is) but it makes the column about 60% wider. I propose that instead, we follow the convention of the first two elections, and only include the candidate's initials, JQA, JA, WC or HC. To denote which are the candidates initials, and which are the party's initials, we make candidate's initials italic. Currently, the winner of the election is bold and italic, so it would instead only be bold. Only in cases where the winner was an initialed candidate (such as GW or JQA) would the text be both bold and italic.

Thoughts? Are there any site-wide rules or conventions this violates? I have the text all ready to go, and will make the change if no one has any objections. JesusIsMyZoloft (talk) 02:48, 10 September 2023 (UTC)


 * The real problem with the 1824 election is that Adams, Jackson, Crawford, and Clay, were all members of the same political party. There was not a formal concept then of an exclusive party nominee, though that typically came about in other elections. BD2412  T 03:19, 10 September 2023 (UTC)