St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-09-16

| Maine III lSSS-
Republican vote for rresident......... 7S,734
| Democratic vote for president ........ 50, ISL
| Republican plurality. ............ 1888
| Maine, 1896
Republican vote for governor g. PA
| Democratic vote for governor. ....... 1881
| Republican plurality ................ 1883
| Maine, 1892
Republican vote for governor. ......... 66,245
Democratic vote for governor ........ 53,671
Republican plurality ........ 12,574
| Vermont. 1855
Republican vote for governor .. 4s522
Republican plurality..... ..... 2s,995
Vermont. 1872
Republican vote for governor .......... 80, 462
Democratic vote for governor .......... 1929
Republican plurality 49,. Ii, 1913
Vermont 1892
Republican vote for governor. ...... 30 100
Republican plurality. 1883
Arkansas, ISIS
Democratic vote for governor. ......... 99,229
Republican vote for governor. ......... s., 223
Democratic plurality. ......... 15.oO6
Arkansas, 1897
Democratic vote for governor LOG. 9G7
Republican vote for governor ... 81, ISL
Democratic plurality ...... 2I,OS5
Arkansas. 1892
Democratic plurality. ...... 43, 900
A careful study of the results of the
foregoing figures is instructive. mas
much as the state elections in presidential
years have been considered as all intim-
alton of the results of the pending cleo
tons. In Maine the Republican plural
ity in 1888 Oh governor was 1906. and
1890 substantially the same, although in
1890 there was heavy falling off i'll the
vote OF hOth parties. but when we reach
the figures OF 1892, we find that the Re-
publicans have gain over 1890 of only
about 1000, while the Democrats gain
more than 5000, thus reducing the
Republican plurality more than COCO
below what the Pioneer Press is pleased
10 term the panic of two years ago.
Even the letter Of James &. Blaine,
issued TO the voters of his own state
only few days before election, seems
poweriess to stay the ever-growing
sentiment of tariff reform, and when we
look at the result of the congressional
elections in Maine for 1890, as compared
with the present year, the lesson is even
more marked. The Republican con-
gressmen in 1890 received the following
majorltieS:
Thomas B. Reed 1927
Nelson Dlngley. SID
Seth l.. MI!ilken. ........... ..........3,5I5
G A. Boutelle. ......... SOB
With this result in the ..panic'' of
1890, we find that in 1892, according to
the reports from Maine, thai Mr. Reed,
who was the hero of the Fifty-frst con-
gress. is elected only by a plurality OF
about 1,S00, and his associates, if I'M
official figures are true, by not much
larger pluralities.
Whnn wa npa1vzn fbn fiu,,rac
Vermont we find that in 1890 there was
falling off of some $1,000 from the Re
| publican vote of two years before, and
| only loss of about 200 in the Demo-
| cratic vote, while in 1892 the Democratic
vote is only less than in the CORE
| spending presidential year of 1888,
while the Republican vote Is more than
5000 less than in 1883, which certainly
| does not indicate return to Repub-
| lican ideas, and leaves the Republican
| plurality in that state more than $500
| short of what 1t was four years ago.
| When we analyZe the vote of Arkan-
| saS for the corresponding years we find
| that the result Is even more marked.
| While there was only a Democratic
| plurality of about q 600 in 1890, being a
| gain of 5000 over 1888, in 1890 we find
the Democracy emerging from a most
| stubbOrnly contested political struggle
! with plurality of at least $4,000. The
| results in these three states at the pres
ent elections, when compared with
| previous elections, can point but to one
| result, if they indicate anything in
measuring the sentiment of the country,
and that is the overwhelming election
| OF Mr.. Cleveland in November. If the
| past is any guide for the future. these
| predictions are justified from the fact
| that the September elections in 1888
| showed an increase III Republican
| pluralities everywhere. This was
claimed by Republicans as an indica-
| ton of national success, which was sub
| sequently verified. We see no reason
this year to place a different construc-
ton upon the far more marked indica-
| tons of Democratic success. Me-