Talk:List of United States presidential candidates

Standards for inclusion

Apparently in the past this article seems to have been limited to Democratic and Republican candidates. Now it includes a spotty column of "Other" candidates. I propose that this "Other" column include all those candidates who were able to obtain ballot access in enough states to have won the election. A recent issue of Ballot Access News documents all such candidates going back to 1856 -- there were never more than five in any election (four or fewer in all elections except those of 1976 and 2000). Link. -David Schaich ^Talk/_Cont 02:46, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

That seems sensible. john k (talk) 13:40, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, thinking on it further, I'm not sure this makes sense, because it would exclude Strom Thurmond in 1948, who actually won four states, but include the Socialist Labor candidate, who got 29,000 votes. I'd prefer something which, say, included all candidates who got over 0.1% of the popular vote, or something like that. That would include:

• 1856 - Fillmore (American)
• 1860 - Breckinridge (Southern Democratic), Bell (Constitutional Union)
• 1864 - None
• 1868 - None
• 1872 - O'Conor (Straight Out Democrat)
• 1876 - Cooper (Greenback Labor), Smith (Prohibition)
• 1880 - Weaver (Greenback Labor), Dow (Prohibition)
• 1884 - St John (Prohibition), Butler (Greenback)
• 1888 - Fisk (Prohibition), Streeter (Union Labor)
• 1892 - Weaver (Populist), Bidwell (Prohibition), Wing (Socialist Labor)
• 1896 - Palmer (National Democratic), Levering (Prohibition), Matchett (Socialist Labor), Bentley (National Prohibition)
• 1900 - Woolley (Prohibition), Debs (Socialist), Barker (Populist), Maloney (Socialist Labor)
• 1904 - Debs (Socialist), Swallow (Prohibition), Watson (Populist), Corregan (Socialist Labor)
• 1908 - Debs (Socialist), Chafin (Prohibition), Hisgen (Independence), Watson (Populist), Gillhaus (Socialist Labor)
• 1912 - Roosevelt (Progressive), Debs (Socialist), Chafin (Prohibition), Reimer (Socialist Labor)
• 1916 - Benson (Socialist), Hanly (Prohibition), Reimer (Socialist Labor)
• 1920 - Debs (Socialist), Christiansen (Farmer-Labor), Watkins (Prohibition), Ferguson (American), Cox (Socialist Labor)
• 1924 - LaFollette (Progressive), Faris (Prohibition), Foster (Communist), Johns (Socialist Labor)
• 1928 - Thomas (Socialist), Foster (Communist), Reynolds (Socialist Labor)
• 1932 - Thomas (Socialist), Foster (Communist), Upshaw (Prohibition), Harvey (Liberty), Reynolds (Socialist Labor)
• 1936 - Lemke (Union), Thomas (Socialist), Browder (Communist), Colvin (Prohibition)
• 1940 - Thomas (Socialist), Babson (Prohibition), Browder (Communist)
• 1944 - Thomas (Socialist), Watson (Prohibition)
• 1948 - Thurmond (State's Rights), Wallace (Progressive), Thomas (Socialist), Watson (Prohibition), Teichert (Socialist Labor)
• 1952 - Hallinan (Progressive), Hamblen (Prohibition), Hass (Socialist Labor)
• 1956 - Andrews (State's Rights)
• 1960 - none
• 1964 - none
• 1968 - Wallace (American Independent)
• 1972 - Schmitz (American), Jenness (Socialist Workers), Spock (People's)
• 1976 - McCarthy (Independent), MacBride (Libertarian), Maddox (American Independent), Anderson (American), Camejo (Socialist Workers), Hall (Communist), LaRouche (Labor)
• 1980 - Anderson (Independent), Clark (Libertarian), Commoner (Citizens), Hall (Communist)
• 1984 - Bergland (Libertarian), Serrette (New Alliance)
• 1988 - Paul (Libertarian), Fulani (New Alliance)
• 1992 - Perot (Independent), Marrou (Libertarian), Gritz (America First), Fulani (New Alliance)
• 1996 - Perot (Reform), Nader (Green), Browne (Libertarian), Phillips (U.S. Taxpayers), Hagelin (Natural Law)
• 2000 - Nader (Green), Buchanan (Reform), Browne (Libertarian), Phillips (Constitution), Hagelin (Natural Law)
• 2004 - Nader (Independent), Badnarik (Libertarian), Peroutka (Constitution), Cobb (Green)

That seems to be a reasonable compromise that insures that any candidate with any real impact on the race or any real notability gets mentioned. Another issue is that the list only includes nominees, when obviously Hubert Humphrey and George Wallace were more significant presidential candidates in 1972 than Linda Jenness - I'm not sure how to deal with that. john k (talk) 14:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Of course Thurmond should stay -- I had assumed he wasn't in the BAN list because his party claimed to be the Democratic Party (and in many states was), but it does appear he was not on the ballot in enough states to have been able to win. He and his party are obviously a special case, with strong appeal and organization only in a narrow region. I think including all those who were on enough ballots, or received at least 0.1% of the total popular vote, or carried at least one state would work well. -David Schaich ^Talk/_Cont 04:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I've added, in bold, the ones who were in enough states, but received less than 0.1% of the vote. In terms of winning a state, what should we do about 1960, when segregationist "unpledged electors" (who later voted for Harry Byrd) won Mississippi and got half the electors in Alabama? Should we list Byrd? john k (talk) 14:29, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand it will affect the layout somewhat, but I don't believe Abraham Lincoln should be considered a Republican nominee in 1864, as he was a nominee from the National Union Party, which existed only in that election but was intentionally different from both the Republican and Democratic parties, as it contained erstwhile members of both organizations. Lincoln-Johnson should be listed as coming from "OIher" in the 1864 election only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.8.55.249 (talk) 03:30, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

1804-1856

The section on candidates from 1804-1856 states that all candidates "who received at least 1 electoral vote" are listed. The article then goes on to list several candidates who did not win at least 1 vote in the electoral college (Birney in '44 would be one example). Someone who knows by what criterion these are classified should change the wording to correct this. Nathaniel Greene (talk) 20:33, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

(talk) 15:57, 4 January 2021 (UTC) 

Pre-12th Amendment: 1789–1800

George Washington is noted as being a candidate in the 1796 election. This directly contradicts his decision to decline a third term so he wouldn't set a precedent to die in office. Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20190320192745/https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/digital-encyclopedia/article/george-washingtons-farewell-address/

Is this a mistake, or did George Washington run for a third term, however short? Thanks in advance for whoever has the answer SpecialAgentCake (talk) 19:23, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

See 1796 United States presidential election. Washington received 2 electoral votes:

• "two electors cast votes for Washington, who had not campaigned and was not formally affiliated with either party." Dimadick (talk) 19:53, 1 March 2021 (UTC)