The Leon reporter. (Leon, Iowa) 1887-1930, 1915-08-26
THE PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARY.

Are we in favor of the presidential
primary in theory and against it in
practice?
Three years ago everybody but the
cid moss Jacks was for presidential
primaries. 1t was held to be essen
tial to clean politics to take the nom
nations out of the hands of the boss
es and place them in the hands of
the voters. Pending an amendment
to the constitution that would author
ize huge national primary in which
a presidential candidate could be
nominated directly by the voters, it
was insisted that every state must
have a preferential primary. In a
preferential primary the voters could
be allowed to choose between all the
candidates, and the delegates, also
selected by the voters, must support
the candidate for whom their prefer
ence might be expressed. Yes, sir!
Let all the candidates for party NOM
ination file their declaration of can
didacy in every state primary, and
let the voters of every state pick out
the candidate to whom the support
of that state must be thrown in the
convention. That was the essence Of
the presidential primary idea as
worked out in a. good many states
during the last three or four years.
Now, however, it is proposed that
all the would be candidates shall not
be allowed to go before the people
for an expression of their preference.
If there are two candidates in the
whole west, it is insisted that one of
them must go away back and be
seated without giving the people a
chance to say whether they want to
support him or not. The whole west,
according to this figuring, must rally
round the candidacy of a single man
This is urged on the ground that
otherwise tho west may divide its
support and thereby succumb to the
keener political maneuvering of the
east. There is old fashioned politics
in the suggestion, and it is only by
old fashioned political methods that
it can be carried out.
II two strong men aspire to Office
and only one is to be allowed to try
for it, who is to decide which it shall
be? Oh, let the prominent support
ers of the aspirants get together and
hold little conference that will
eliminate the one that may be de- |
cided on as least available. Intensely
practical, to be sure, but what does
that course do with the primary
principle, to which the dear public is |
understood to be devoted! If the |
voters are to be given a chance to |
vote for only one candidate, who |
really selects the nominee? The vot-
ars? Not at all. AS between two |
candidates in whom the voters are
understood to be especially interest
I'd, they get chance to vote only
sor the one previously selected by
he bosses to receive the voters sup
port. Is that direct nomination.!
n fact, it is less direct than if the
people sent their representatives to
state convention and let them
lame the candiaate to whom the sup
port of the state would be given.
The people have not delegated to the
posses the right to select the nomi-
leSs.
The idea of going to the trouble
and expense of holding a presidential
to ratify the bosses selec-
ion for a presidential candidate is
lbsurd. Presidential primaries will
'e held in many western states next
pring. If the support of these states
$ sure to go to a western candidate,
nd if the name of only one western
andidate is to be submitted, what
re the taxpayers getting in return
or their money they have invested
n the elaborate primary?
Are we for the primary principle
nd against the application of it, or
City Journal.