Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1914-10-13
Cong. Peters, Election Analysis

LONG,. FeteFS GIeCtlON Analysis
In the Judgment of the National
/ Congressional committee the following
by Hon. John A. Peters, congressman
from the Third district of Maine, is the
first actual analysis of the Maine elec-
ton:
The only way the vote in Maine can
parison with preceding years." Mr..
Peters says. The year 1910 marked
high tide for Democracy in Maine. In
that year, the Democrats for the first
time in many years carried the State,
electing Governor, both branches of
the legislature, United States Sen
ator and two of the four Representa-
| tives in Congress.
I'm 1912, at the State election in
September, there as no division among
Republicans and they regained the
and three Congressman. the Democrats
still holding one.
! In 1912, at the Presidential election,
after the state election in September,
the Republicans divided, $4,000 voting
for Mr. Roosevelt and $4,000 for Mr.
| Taft.
I'm 1914, the Progressives nominal
ed a complete and separate ticket for
State and county officers and candi-
| dates for the legislature. They cast
$4,000 votes for their candidate for
Governor as against $4,000 for the Re-
publican candidate and $1,000 for the
Democratic candidate. But notwith-
standing this the Republicans have re-
tanned their three Congressman, which
is a remarkable result considering the
Progressive vote which aggregated
1850 for the four Progressive candi-
dates for Congress.
THE Democrats have elected their
Governor but by an insignificant plu-
rality considering the bunch of $4,000
Progressive votes which substantially
all came out of the Republican party.
Before now, Democratic candidates for
Governor in Maine have been defeat
ed and still received more votes than
did Curtis, the Democrat, elected this
year.
THE matter of governorship, how
ever, is always fought out on local
lines. In the election of Congressman
national issues are considered. Take
Mr.. McGillicuddy's (Dem.) District
(Second) for example. He has now
been elected three successive times.
The first time he got substantially
$4,000 votes, the second time $4,000 and
this time $4,000.
1T is about the same in all the Dis
tricts-the total Democratic vote is
shrinking about 5000 every election. In
1910, it was 70,500; in 1912, $500, and,
this year, 6O,100. Although 10000 Pro-
gressiyes who voted for Roosevelt in
1912 did not vote for the Progressive
candidate this year, still the Demo-
cratic vote shows it's expected shrink
age, indicating that Progressives are
not going to the Democrats.
1.-THE Republican or anti-Democratic
vote is steadily increasing in Congress
siona1 election and in about the same
ratio that the Democratic vote is
shrinking If this continues and If the
Progressive vote as a separate vote
keeps on diminishing the Democrats
will be nowhere in 1916.
mo comfort can be squeezed out of
the Maine situation for the Admins
tration. 1t was claimed before the
matter was thoroughly understood
that the large Democratic plurality in
the second District amounted to an
Endorsement of the Administration.
The fact is Mr.. McGillicuddy got 1000
less votes than he did in 1912, and
from the figures would have been de-
feated had not the Republicans been
divided. A big bunch on anti-Demo-
cratic votes being cast from the Pro-
gressive candidate for Congress in
that District is what shrank the Re-
publican vote below normal by the ex-
act amount of the Progressive vote.
with the Democratic candidate in
that District receiving less votes by
1000 than in 1912; with the total DEM
ocratic vote in the four Districts
shrinking $500 from 1912 and 10.4O0
from 1910: with the Republicans still
holding three Districts out of four in
17,50O the result represents a great
victory for the Republicans and shows
the inherent and increasing strength
of their position.
Those Convenient Wars