Eureka weekly sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1887-1902, 1888-02-25
WISER ruAn urs nAcKEss.

To our mind, Mr.. Blame IN MS Win
drawL as o Presidential candidate, 10
much wiser than his supporters. The
latter seem to think that . calamity has
overtaken the Republican party which is
practically beyond reparation. They re-
fuse to see or to acknowledge anything
but their idolized leader. There can be
no question that Mr.. Blaine has the most
earnest and enthusiastic personal follow.
ing in America. Clay and Webster, and
Calhoun and Benton were all popular in
their day, but neither Of them ever be.
came President. In this country there
seems TO be more silent than demonstra-
tive voters. We believe that Mr.. Blaine
realized that he could not be elected and
wisely withdrew as . candidate. While
ne bias elements Of strength he also has
elements Of weakness. IL was his weak.
ness in the East rather than Cleveland's
strength that gave the Democracy the
election in 1884. Mr.. Cleveland was
then an unknown man, and did not
awaken in the Democratic masses that
degree Of enthusiasm which would have
been aroused by Tilden or Hendricks or
Thurman, or some other leader OF long
standing. On the surface there was not
the enthusiastic rally for him that was
made for General Hancock four years be-
fore. But he is better known to-day, as
o safe, strong man, and will In every res.
pect prove . more acceptable candidate
than he did In his first race. Mrs. Cleve.
land also appears to be . woman OF rare
good sense, without frills or nonsense Of
any kind, and she has brought to him .
great deal of strength. Mr.. Blaine evi.
IDENTIFY saw all this and determined not to
hazard another defeat. Many people
have jumped ct the conclusion that be.
cause he came so near carrying New
| York In the last election that he is q re.
markably strong man, and just the one
TO pit against President Cleveland in the
coming contest. But such people have
not studied the figures. As q matter Of
fact, all over the East, Blaine made a
much poorer run against the unknown
Cleveland than Garfield did against the
popular Hancock. We are not now talk.
ing about the relative ability or merit Of
Candidates. That is quite another thing.
1t is the cold figures from the books
that we are dealing with. In 1880 Gar
field received SO, 245 more votes than the
Democratic candidate in Massachusetts,.
while in 1884 Blaine had only "a, 1872
plurality, and fell 1884 short of any ma
jority at all. In Michigan In 1880 Gar.
field had nearly $4,000 majority, while
in 1884 Blaine had but 3,30S plurality.
In New York in 1880 Garfield had 81.
OBS plurality, while Blaine lost the State
in 1884 by LOAF. In 1880 Garfield re-
ceived PA out Of 1863 electoral votes,
while in 1884 Blaine received but 1872 out
OF 40l. On the popular vote in 1880
Garfield received 9,464 more than the
Democratic candidate, while in 1884
Blaine received %, COS less than the
Democratic candidate. In 1850 Garfield
received 2G,!.5l more votes than the
Democratic candidate in Wisconsin,
while in 1884 Blaine's plurality was bu.
l4,69S. In 1880 Garfield CARED Connec.
ticut by 1856 votes. while in 1884
Blaine lost it by 1876. In 1880 Garfield
carried Indiana by 6.642 votes. while in
1884 Blaine lost it by 6,527 votes. Gar.
field wal beaten in New Jersey in 1880
by q plurality Of 2,0l0, while Blaine in
1884 was beaten by q plurality Of 4,4l2.
If there is any thing in these figures that
shows MIR. Blaine to be indis'
pensable to Republican success w CON
TESS that we cannot see it. He ran fai
behind Garfield in all Of the close
States.