Talk:1892 United States presidential election

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

United States: Presidential elections Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. presidential elections (assessed as Mid-importance).

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Electoral picture peculiarity

Why is the graphic depiction of electoral votes skewed? Rarely nowadays does one see democratic votes colored red and and republican votes blue. --maru (talk) Contribs 20:51, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This post has been copied to Wikipedia talk:Style for U.S. presidential election, yyyy#Electoral picture peculiarity. Please direct your responses there.

— DLJessup (talk) 21:40, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Other 3-time nominees

The article states that only Cleveland and FDR were nominated by the same political party for President three consecutive times. Among the minor parties, the Socialists ran Debs and Thomas multiple times. Other multiple candidacies include Dodge (Proh), Munn (Proh), Hass (Soc. Labor), and Dobbs (Soc. Workers). Chronicler3 03:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the article states that only Cleveland and FDR were nominated by the Democrats three consecutive times.

— DLJessup (talk) 16:57, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"He was the second of four presidential nominees (as of 2020) to win a significant number of electoral votes in at least three elections, the others being Andrew Jackson, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Richard M. Nixon."

This is not even close to correct, there are at least 6: Thomas Jefferson and William Jennings Bryan in addition to those above. Possibly 7, if you count John Adams when he was Washington's VP - there was no distinction then between electoral votes for P and VP. Any others? Sgtbilko99 (talk) 23:03, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect map

Maine should have 6 votes, not 8; South Carolina should have 9 votes not 8; as per US archives - see link in article MrMingsz (talk) 06:55, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Women voting

Wyoming, which allowed women to vote in all elections, became a state in 1890, so wouldn't this be the first presidential election since 1804 (before 1807, women could vote in New Jersey) in which women participated? Seems like that would be worth mentioning, but maybe I'm missing something. Jwsinclair (talk) 00:29, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How come Weaver had so little success in his home state?

James B. Weaver won neighboring Kansas, including most of the counties directly bordering Iowa, but didn't win even one county in his home state Iowa. How come? Please add this info if you have it. -- 77.7.152.171 (talk) 16:34, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Political Party Platforms

I understand that there is some desire to reduce the platforms I have typed up into the article, to make mention exclusively of their main points, but I don't see how that would be in any way more effective than simply having the platform displayed itself. With the platform there is at least some light explanation as to why certain positions have been adopted by the party in question whereas, were the other view adopted, it would amount to nothing more than a laundry list. I don't really see how they detract from the article. --Ariostos (talk) 18:36, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers don't match source

Popular vote counts in the table don't agree with the source given (https://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?year=1892&f=0&off=0&elect=0): Harrison 5,190,799 vs 5,190,819 votes Bidwell 270,879 vs 270,889 votes and Simon Wing is not on the source at all. I don't know which numbers are correct nor where Wing's figures come from, but either the numbers should be changed to match the source or better source given. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tapanit (talk • contribs) 19:44, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the Prohibition Party here?

There is a Prohibition Party member who doesn't have a popular vote or percentage. Should he be removed? Why is he there? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xdude gamer (talk • contribs) 19:20, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]