User:FK8438/翻譯

1868 年美國總統選舉

1868年11月3日
294張選舉人票 獲勝需148 選舉人票票
投票率	78.1% ▲ 4.3 pp
获提名人 尤利西斯·S·格兰特 霍雷肖·西摩 政党 共和黨 民主党 家鄉州 伊利诺伊 纽约 竞选搭档 Schuyler Colfax Francis Preston Blair Jr. 选举人票 214 80 胜出州/省 26 8 民選得票 3,013,421 2,706,829 得票率 52.7% 47.3%
Template:1868 United States presidential election imagemap 紅色 底色的州份為共和黨Grant/Colfax所獲勝的州份, 藍色 底色的州份為民主黨Seymour/Blair所獲勝的州份, 綠色 州份代表該州因內戰而無法參與選舉。
选前President Andrew Johnson National Union Party (United States) 當選President 尤利西斯·格兰特 共和黨

1868年美国总统选举是第21次美國總統選舉，也是美国重建时期的第一次选举,於1868年11月3日舉行。这次选举中，共和党候选人尤利西斯·S·格兰特击败了民主党的霍雷肖·西摩。这是美国内战结束和废除奴隶制后举行的第一次总统选举。根据第一次重建法案，这是非裔美国人可以在重建的南部各州投票的第一次选举。 1865 年，在共和党人亚伯拉罕·林肯林肯遇刺案后，现任总统安德鲁·约翰逊继任总统。来自田纳西州的战时民主党人约翰逊曾在 1864 年担任林肯的竞选伙伴，获得了全国联盟的票，该票旨在吸引共和党人和战时民主党人。上任后，约翰逊与共和党国会就重建政策发生冲突，遭到弹劾，差点被免职。约翰逊在 1868 年的民主党全国代表大会上获得了连任的一些支持，但经过几次投票后，大会提名了曾担任纽约州州长的西摩。 1868 年共和党全国代表大会一致提名格兰特，他是内战结束时最高级别的联邦将军。民主党人批评共和党的重建政策，并“明确地在反黑人、亲白人的平台上进行竞选”，[2] 而共和党人则以格兰特的声望和联盟在内战中的胜利为目标进行竞选。 格兰特赢得了选举人票，但他在普选中的差距较小。除了他在北方的吸引力之外，格兰特还受益于南方新获得选举权的自由人的选票，而许多南方白人的政治权利暂时被剥夺有助于共和党的优势。由于三个前同盟州（德克萨斯州、密西西比州和弗吉尼亚州）尚未恢复联邦，他们的选民无法在选举中投票。

選舉背景

美國奴隸制度和重建和公民权利在聯邦中是一个备受争议的问题。格兰特支持国会激进共和党人的重建计划，该计划支持第14条修正案，赋予自由人充分的公民权利，包括男性选举权。 民主党纲领谴责共和黨的“黑人至上主义”，并要求恢复各州的权利，包括南部各州自行决定是否允许成年自由人选举权的权利。共和党人指责民主党人决心拒绝任何自由人的投票，无论是否健康。 而民主党人指责共和党人想给所有被释放的人投票，不管他们是否健康。

Nominations

共和黨總統候選人初選

主条目：1868年共和黨總統候選人初選

Grant/Colfax campaign poster

1868年共和黨票
尤利西斯·格兰特	史凱勒·科法斯
總統	副總統
第6屆 美國陸軍司令部指揮官 (1864–1869)	第25屆 美國眾議院議長 (1863–1869)

到了 1868 年，共和党想獨立的为該黨的总统候选人提名一位受欢迎的總統候選人。在選舉前，民主党控制了许多北方大州，这些州拥有很大比例的选举人票。尤利西斯·S·格兰特加入了共和黨，并在1868年5月20日至21日在伊利诺伊州的芝加哥举行的共和党大会的第一次投票中被提名为该党的參選人。众议院议长史凱勒·科法斯在第六轮投票中被提名为副总统，击败了早期最受欢迎的俄亥俄州参议员 本杰明·韦德。 共和党的纲领支持南方的黑人选举权，作为前奴隶的黑人應該获得完全的美國公民身份。共和黨亦支持让北部各州单独决定是否赋予黑人选举权。當時，該黨的主要政見為反对使用美元赎回美国债券，鼓励移民，支持归化公民的全部权利等，并赞成激进重建派而不是安德鲁·约翰逊总统更为宽松的政策。

民主黨候選人初選

主条目：1868 Democratic National Convention

Seymour/Blair campaign poster

1868 Democratic Party ticket
Horatio Seymour	Francis Preston Blair Jr.
總統	副總統
	File:Francis P. Blair, Jr.png
18th Governor of New York (1853–1854 & 1863–1864)	Former U.S. Representative for Missouri's 1st (1857–1859, 1860, 1861–1862, & 1863–1864)
Campaign

Democratic candidates:

• 
  Former Governor Horatio Seymour of New York
• 
  Former Representative George H. Pendleton of Ohio
• Senator Thomas A. Hendricks of Indiana
  Senator Thomas A. Hendricks of Indiana
• 
  General Winfield Scott Hancock of Pennsylvania
• 
  President Andrew Johnson
• 
  Former Lieutenant Governor Sanford E. Church of New York

• 
  Former Representative Asa Packer of Pennsylvania
• 
  Governor James E. English of Connecticut
• Former Governor Joel Parker of New Jersey
  Former Governor Joel Parker of New Jersey
• 
  Senator James Rood Doolittle of Wisconsin
• 
  Associate Justice Stephen J. Field of California
• 
  Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase of Ohio

民主党全国代表大会于1868年7月4日至9日在纽约市举行。在黨內預選投票中的領先者是乔治·H·彭德尔顿（George H. Pendleton）（1864 年民主党副总统候选人），他在前15次黨內投票中领先，随后在不同的投票中领先。 由 Andrew Johnson 总统、Winfield Scott Hancock、Sanford Church、Asa Packer、Joel Parker、James E. English、James Rood Doolittle 和 Thomas A. Hendricks 订购。 不受欢迎的约翰逊勉强在弹劾不通過後，在第一轮投票中赢得了65票，未達到提名所需总票数的三分之一，因此失去了竞选总统的资格。 与此同时，大会主席、前纽约州州长霍雷肖·西摩在北卡罗来纳州的第四轮投票中获得了九票。 这一出人意料的举动引起了“热烈的欢呼”，但西摩對此表示拒绝，並說道：

I must not be nominated by this Convention, as I could not accept the nomination if tendered. My own inclination prompted me to decline at the outset; my honor compels me to do so now. It is impossible, consistently with my position, to allow my name to be mentioned in this Convention against my protest. The clerk will proceed with the call.

By the seventh ballot Pendleton and Hendricks had emerged as the two front-runners, with Hancock the only other candidate with much support by this point. After numerous indecisive ballots, the names of John T. Hoffman, Francis P. Blair, and Stephen Johnson Field were placed in nomination, but none of these candidates gained substantial support.

For 21 ballots, the opposing candidates battled it out: the East battling the West for control, the conservatives battling the radicals. Pendleton's support collapsed after the 15th ballot, but went to Hancock rather than Hendricks, leaving the convention still deadlocked. The two leading candidates were determined that the other should not receive the presidential nomination; because of the two-thirds rule of the convention, a compromise candidate was needed. Seymour still hoped it would be Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, but on the 22nd ballot, the chairman of the Ohio delegation announced, "at the unanimous request and demand of the delegation I place Horatio Seymour in nomination with 21 votes—against his inclination, but no longer against his honor."

Seymour had to wait for the rousing cheers to die down before he could address the delegates and decline.

…如果不将我自己和民主党置于错误的位置，我就无法获得提名。上帝保佑你对我的善意，但我不能成为你的候选人。 …

"Take the nomination, then!" cried someone from the floor.

... but when I said that I could not be a candidate, I mean it! I could not receive the nomination without placing not only myself but the Democratic party in a false position. God bless you for your kindness to me, but your candidate I cannot be.

Seymour left the platform to cool off and rest. No sooner had he left the hall than the Ohio chairman cried that his delegation would not accept Seymour's declination; Utah's chairman rose to say that Seymour was the man they had to have. While Seymour was waiting in the vestibule, the convention nominated him for president unanimously.

Exhausted, the delegates unanimously nominated General Francis Preston Blair, Jr., for vice president on the first ballot after John A. McClernand, Augustus C. Dodge, and Thomas Ewing, Jr., withdrew their names from consideration. Blair's nomination reflected a desire to balance the ticket east and west as well as north and south.

Blair had worked hard for the Democratic vice presidential nomination and accepted second place on the ticket, finding himself in controversy. He had gained attention for an inflammatory letter addressed to Colonel James O. Broadhead, dated a few days before the convention met, in which he wrote that the "real and only issue in this contest was the overthrow of Reconstruction, as the radical Republicans had forced it in the South."

General election

Campaign

Republican campaign poster, created by superimposing a portrait of Grant onto the platform of the Republican Party

The 1868 campaign of Horatio Seymour versus Ulysses S. Grant was conducted vigorously, being fought out largely on the question of how Reconstruction should be conducted.

The Republicans were fearful as late as October that they might be beaten.

Grant's antisemitic General Order No. 11 during the Civil War became a campaign issue. He apologized in a letter for the controversial order. In his army days he had traded at a local store operated by the Seligman brothers, two Jewish merchants who became Grant's lifelong friends. They became wealthy bankers who donated substantially to Grant's presidential campaign.

Grant/Colfax humorous campaign card

Grant took no part in the campaign and made no promises. The Republican campaign theme, "Let us have peace," was taken from his letter of acceptance. After four years of civil war, three years of wrangling over Reconstruction, and the attempted impeachment of a president, the nation craved the peace Grant pledged to achieve.

Seymour/Blair campaign photograph

Seymour answered none of the charges made against him, but made a few key speeches. Some newspapers exaggerated his faults. As governor, Seymour had sent troops to Gettysburg, but some press tried to portray him as disloyal to the Union. The New York Tribune led the cartoon campaign with the picture of Seymour standing on the steps of the City Hall calling a mob of New York draft rioters "my friends." The Hartford Post called him "almost as much of a corpse" as ex-President James Buchanan, who had just died. Additionally, Republicans alleged that insanity ran through the Seymour family, citing as evidence the suicide of his father.

Blair went on a national speaking tour in which he framed the contest with Ulysses S. Grant and the pro-Reconstruction Republicans in stark racial terms, warning of the rule of "a semi-barbarous race of blacks who are worshipers of fetishes and poligamists" and wanted to "subject the white women to their unbridled lust." Republicans advised Americans not to vote for Seymour, as Blair might succeed him.

Northern and Southern Democratic Sheet Music

Blair had a reputation for outspokenness and his campaign speeches in 1868 attacked Radical Republicans. Samuel J. Tilden, a member of the national committee, asked Blair to confine his campaigning to Missouri and Illinois for fear he "would hurt the ticket" because of his stance on Reconstruction.

Seymour, who had not taken an active role in the campaign to this point, went into the canvass, seeking to steer the campaign away from the harshness of Blair's attacks on Radical Reconstruction. Seymour emphasized his idea that change in the South should be accomplished at the state level, without national interference. The Democrats campaigned for immediate restoration of all states, the "regulation of the elective franchise in the states by their citizens", and amnesty for past political offenses, while State civil authority should take precedence over military action. The president and the Supreme Court should be respected rather than attacked, as he claimed the Republicans had done. The Democrats would be careful to reorder national priorities.

Results

Horatio Seymour 获得 2,708,744 票，格兰特获得 3,013,650 票。 民众投票的接近程度令当时的政治精英感到惊讶。 [15]共和党众议员詹姆斯 G. 布莱恩称格兰特的微弱多数是“一个非常令人吃惊的事实。”[16] 布莱恩是一位敏锐的民意判断者，无法解释民主党投票的规模。 [17]爱尔兰裔天主教徒和其他移民已经在纽约定居了近四分之一个世纪。 Seymour 以極小的劣勢输掉了印第安纳州、康涅狄格州和宾夕法尼亚州等北部地區的選舉人票，以及南部新黑人选票的影响，这引发了人们对大多数白人投票给 Seymour 的怀疑。 民主党在南方表现不佳，新获释的非裔美国人大量投票。除了乔治亚州和路易斯安那州之外，共和党人占据了南部的每个州，在那里，三K党和白茶花骑士团的暴力和欺诈行为让民主党人占了多数。 [19]

沿着边境，肯塔基州、马里兰州和特拉华州以压倒性优势走向民主党，在肯塔基州的情况下，受到对激进重建主义者的敌意影响，这导致该州第一个战后政府几乎完全由前同盟国组成。 [20]在肯塔基州[21] 或马里兰州[22] 之前或之后，没有哪位民主党总统候选人获得更高的选票百分比，在这些地方，对黑人选举权的敌意非常普遍。 [23] As for Delaware,[24] only the Democratic tickets of Johnson/Humphrey in 1964 (which was elected with the largest percentage of the popular vote since 1824) and Obama/Biden in 2008 (which had the first Delawarean on a national ticket) carried得票率较高的州。 两个边境州，密苏里州和西弗吉尼亚州，都在共和党的控制之下，将他们的选举人票投给了格兰特。 [25]西摩勉强带着他的家乡纽约州，但布莱尔，主要是因为激进党的登记系统，没能带着密苏里州。密苏里州民主党人高兴地说：“布莱尔将军在他的选区、他的城市、他的县和他的州遭到殴打。” [26] 在西弗吉尼亚州，前同盟者被暂时禁止投票或担任公职。据估计，有 15,000 至 25,000 名白人居民因此被剥夺了选举权。 [27]

Of the 1,708 counties making returns, Grant won 991 (58.02%) and Seymour 713 (41.74%). Four counties (0.23%) split evenly between Grant and Seymour. Hence the Democrats, even with all the burdens of the war, still carried only 278 fewer counties than the Republicans. That cemented a solid party comeback at the grassroots level that had begun in local elections in 1867.

The 1868 election is the only election since the Civil War in which the two major party candidates won over 99.9% of the vote. Out of a total of over 5.7 million votes, just 46 ballots were cast for anyone other than Grant and Seymour.

That was the last election in which the Republicans won Tennessee until 1920, the last in which the Democrats won Oregon until 1912, and the last in which the Republicans won Missouri until 1904.

That Grant lost New York to Seymour by 10,000 votes was a source of shame and anger to Republicans. Seymour's victory in New York was made the subject of a federal investigation. On November 4, Horace Greeley spoke at the Union League Club. The ULC promptly petitioned Congress to look into the state vote. The petition was presented to the House of Representatives on December 14 and accepted by a vote of 134-35 (52 abstained). Speaker of the House Schuyler Colfax, the Republican candidate for vice president, appointed a committee of seven: five Republicans and two Democrats. The committee was most likely created because the Republicans could not lose New York without a protest. It reported to the House of Representatives on February 23, 1869. The committee decided to take no action, and Seymour retained New York's 33 electoral votes. He was willing to return to the subject as long as he lived.

In a 1943 book, novelist Irving Stone suggested that if Seymour had carried all four of the October states (Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and Iowa), the Republican-controlled Congress would have acted to prevent the possibility of any Southern states supporting the Democratic ticket. Stone claimed that the only way the Democrats could have won was by carrying every close state in the North and retaining both Georgia and Louisiana. Georgia's vote was contested at the electoral count, with the Republicans claiming the Democrats won only by "violence, fraud and intimidation," and it likely would have been disallowed if the Democratic victory had been decisive.

According to Seymour's biographer, Stewart Mitchell, the Republican Party claimed credit for saving the Union and was bound, bent, and determined to continue to rule it. The margin of Grant's popular majority resulted largely from winning a high percentage of the half-million newly enfranchised men or color. This strategy contrasted strongly with later years, when Republicans permitted complete black disfranchisement in the former Confederate states, since they had many new and secure votes in new states in the Western United States.

Popular vote Grant   52.66% Seymour   47.34% Others   0.00%

Electoral vote Grant   72.79% Seymour   27.21%

总统候选人	政党	出身	普选票(a)		选举人票 (a)	竞选伙伴
			数目	比例		副总统候选人	出身	选举人票(a)
Ulysses S. Grant	Republican	Illinois	3,013,650	52.66%	214	Schuyler Colfax Jr.	Indiana	214
Horatio Seymour	Democratic	New York	2,708,744	47.34%	80	Francis Preston Blair Jr.	Missouri	80
其他			46	<0.01%	—	其他		—
总计			5,722,440	100%	294			294
获胜需要					148			148

Source (Popular Vote): Template:Leip PV source Source (Electoral Vote): Electoral College Box Scores 1789–1996. Official website of the National Archives. (July 31, 2005). ^(a) Mississippi, Texas, and Virginia did not participate in the election of 1868 due to Reconstruction. In Florida, the state legislature cast its electoral vote for Grant by a vote of 40 to 9.

Geography of results

Cartographic gallery

• 
  Map of presidential election results by county
• 
  Map of Republican presidential election results by county
• 
  Map of Democratic presidential election results by county
• 
  Map of "other" presidential election results by county
• 
  Cartogram of presidential election results by county
• 
  Cartogram of Republican presidential election results by county
• 
  Cartogram of Democratic presidential election results by county
• 
  Cartogram of "other" presidential election results by county

Results by state

Source: Data from Walter Dean Burnham, Presidential ballots, 1836–1892 (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1955) pp 247–57.

States/districts won by Seymour/Blair

States/districts won by Grant/Colfax

		Ulysses S. Grant Republican			Horatio Seymour Democratic			Margin		State Total
State	electoral votes	#	%	electoral votes	#	%	electoral votes	#	%	#
Alabama	8	76,667	51.25	8	72,921	48.75	-	3,746	2.50	149,594	AL
Arkansas	5	22,112	53.68	5	19,078	46.32	-	3,034	7.36	41,190	AR
California	5	54,588	50.24	5	54,068	49.76	-	520	0.48	108,656	CA
Connecticut	6	50,788	51.49	6	47,844	48.51	-	2,944	2.98	98,632	CT
Delaware	3	7,614	41.00	-	10,957	59.00	3	-3,343	-18.00	18,571	DE
Florida	3	-	-	3	-	-	-	-	-	-	FL
Georgia	9	57,109	35.73	-	102,707	64.27	9	-45,598	-28.54	159,816	GA
Illinois	16	250,304	55.69	16	199,116	44.31	-	51,188	11.38	449,420	IL
Indiana	13	176,552	51.39	13	166,980	48.61	-	9,572	2.78	343,532	IN
Iowa	8	120,399	61.92	8	74,040	38.08	-	46,359	23.84	194,439	IA
Kansas	3	30,027	68.82	3	13,600	31.17	-	16,427	37.65	43,630	KS
Kentucky	11	39,566	25.45	-	115,889	74.55	11	-76,323	-49.10	155,455	KY
Louisiana	7	33,263	29.31	-	80,225	70.69	7	-46,962	-41.38	113,488	LA
Maine	7	70,502	62.41	7	42,460	37.59	-	28,042	24.82	112,962	ME
Maryland	7	30,438	32.80	-	62,357	67.20	7	-31,919	-34.40	92,795	MD
Massachusetts	12	136,379	69.76	12	59,103	30.23	-	77,276	39.53	195,508	MA
Michigan	8	128,560	56.98	8	97,060	43.02	-	31,500	13.96	225,620	MI
Minnesota	4	43,722	60.88	4	28,096	39.12	-	15,626	21.76	71,818	MN
Missouri	11	86,860	56.96	11	65,628	43.04	-	21,232	13.92	152,488	MO
Nebraska	3	9,772	63.91	3	5,519	36.09	-	4,253	27.82	15,291	NE
Nevada	3	6,480	55.39	3	5,218	44.61	-	1,262	10.78	11,698	NV
New Hampshire	5	37,718	55.22	5	30,575	44.76	-	7,143	10.46	68,304	NH
New Jersey	7	80,131	49.12	-	83,001	50.88	7	-2,870	-1.76	163,132	NJ
New York	33	419,888	49.41	-	429,883	50.59	33	-9,995	-1.18	849,771	NY
North Carolina	9	96,939	53.41	9	84,559	46.59	-	12,380	6.82	181,498	NC
Ohio	21	280,167	54.00	21	238,621	46.00	-	41,546	8.00	518,788	OH
Oregon	3	10,961	49.63	-	11,125	50.37	3	-164	-0.74	22,086	OR
Pennsylvania	26	342,280	52.20	26	313,382	47.80	-	28,898	4.40	655,662	PA
Rhode Island	4	12,993	66.49	4	6,548	33.51	-	6,445	32.98	19,541	RI
South Carolina	6	62,301	57.93	6	45,237	42.07	-	17,064	15.86	107,538	SC
Tennessee	10	56,628	68.43	10	26,129	31.57	-	30,499	36.86	82,757	TN
Vermont	5	44,167	78.57	5	12,045	21.43	-	32,122	57.14	56,212	VT
West Virginia	5	29,015	58.83	5	20,306	41.17	-	8,709	17.66	49,321	WV
Wisconsin	8	108,900	56.25	8	84,703	43.75	-	24,197	12.50	193,603	WI
TOTALS:	294	3,013,790	52.66	214	2,708,980	47.34	80	304,810	5.32	5,722,440	US

Close states

Red font color denotes states won by Republican Ulysses S. Grant; blue denotes those won by Democrat Horatio Seymour.

States where the margin of victory was under 1% (8 electoral votes)

1. California 0.48% (520 votes)
2. Oregon 0.74% (164 votes)

States where the margin of victory was under 5% (93 electoral votes)

1. New York 1.18% (9,995 votes)
2. New Jersey 1.76% (2,870 votes)
3. Alabama 2.50% (3,746 votes)
4. Indiana 2.79% (9,572 votes)
5. Connecticut 2.98% (2,944 votes)
6. Pennsylvania 4.41% (28,898 votes)

States where the margin of victory was under 10% (35 electoral votes)

1. North Carolina 6.82% (12,380 votes) (tipping point state for a Grant victory)
2. Arkansas 7.37% (3,034 votes) (tipping point state for a Seymour victory)
3. Ohio 8.01% (41,546 votes)

Statistics

Counties with highest percent of vote (Republican)

1. Hancock County, Tennessee 100.00%
2. Monona County, Iowa 100.00%
3. Ottawa County, Kansas 100.00%
4. Jefferson County, Nebraska 100.00%
5. McDowell County, West Virginia 100.00%

Counties with highest percent of vote (Democratic)

1. St. Landry Parish, Louisiana 100.00%
2. Lafayette Parish, Louisiana 100.00%
3. Jackson Parish, Louisiana 100.00%
4. De Soto Parish, Louisiana 100.00%
5. Franklin Parish, Louisiana 100.00%

Counties with highest percent of vote (Other)

1. DeKalb County, Alabama 0.70%
2. Sullivan County, New Hampshire 0.11%
3. Strafford County, New Hampshire 0.09%
4. Carroll County, New Hampshire 0.02%

See also

• American election campaigns in the 19th century
• First inauguration of Ulysses S. Grant
• History of the United States (1865–1918)
• History of the United States Democratic Party
• History of the United States Republican Party
• Reconstruction era
• Third Party System
• 1868 United States House of Representatives elections
• 1868 and 1869 United States Senate elections
• Ohio idea

Bibliography

• American Annual Cyclopedia ... 1868 (1869), online, highly detailed compendium of facts and primary sources
• Coleman, Charles Hubert. The election of 1868 : the Democratic effort to regain control (1933) online
• Gambill, Edward. Conservative Ordeal: Northern Democrats and Reconstruction, 1865-1868. (Iowa State University Press: 1981).
• Edward McPherson. The Political History of the United States of America During the Period of Reconstruction (1875) large collection of speeches and primary documents, 1865–1870, complete text online.[The copyright has expired.]
• Prymak, Andrew. "The 1868 and 1872 Elections," in Edward O. Frantz, ed. A Companion to the Reconstruction Presidents 1865-1881 (Wiley Blackwell Companions to American History) (2014) pp 235–56 online
• Rhodes, James G. History of the United States from the Compromise of 1850 to the McKinley-Bryan Campaign of 1896. Volume: 6. (1920). 1865–72; detailed narrative history
• Simpson, Brooks D. Let Us Have Peace: Ulysses S. Grant and the Politics of War and Reconstruction, 1861-1868 (1991).
• Summers, Mark Wahlgren.The Press Gang: Newspapers and Politics, 1865-1878 (1994)
• Summers, Mark Wahlgren. The Era of Good Stealings (1993), covers corruption 1868-1877

Primary sources

• Chester, Edward W A guide to political platforms (1977) pp 86–89 online
• Official proceedings of the National Democratic convention, held at New York, July 4-9, 1868
• Porter, Kirk H. and Donald Bruce Johnson, eds. National party platforms, 1840-1964 (1965) online 1840-1956

External links

• Presidential Election of 1868: A Resource Guide from the Library of Congress
• 1868 popular vote by counties
• 1868 State-by-state Popular vote
• "How close were the US Presidential elections?" — Michael Sheppard, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2012
• Election of 1868 in Counting the Votes 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期October 6, 2017，.