Arizona republican., 1916-08-10
Some Democratic Figuring

oOne OenOCFdtiC TI9uFin9
 A democratic exchange has done some figuring on the result of the presidential campaign which leaves nothing more to be done. except to get ready for the re-inauguration of Presi- dent Wilson. It includes the following with l4s electoral votes, as certainly democratic: Alabama. Arkansas. Flori- da, Georgia. Kentucky. Louisiana. Miss issippi. North Carolina, Oklahoma. South Carolina, Tennessee. Texas and Virginia. Kentucky is by no means a certain democratic state. but assuming that it should turn out to be one, Will son would need IF more votes.
 Our exchange, however. readily makes up SS of the needed votes from The following list: Arizona, New Jer- sey. Indiana, Colorado. Nevada, Mis- souri. California, Montana. Maryland and West Virginia.
 On what theory our neighbor claims Indiana, Nevada, Colorado and Califor- uia. m its excitement it neglects to ex- plain. But certainly. none of them, with the exception of Arizona, can be claimed on the showing of the Wilson vote in them four years ago. There is no reason for believing that MT. Will son IS stronger in any of them than he was then, and in Arizona alone. did he receive majority of the votes cast.
 We are sure he is not as strong in Arizona as he was in 1912, when. as in California, he received many republi- can votes. which would have been cast for Mir. Taft. but for the hopelessness of his campaign. Yet, Mir Roosevelt carried California. We cannot allow Mir. Wilson sS votes in this group of states. We believe We are very liberal in conceding three votes, bringing the Wilson electoral vote to l52.
 But here is the group from which the rest of the Wilson discrepancy is to be made up: Maine. Illinois. Ohio Della ware. Connecticut. Idaho, Iowa, Kan sas. Massachusetts, Michigan. Minne- sota. Nebraska. New Mexico. New York, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota. Utah. Washington. Wisconsin and Wyoming.
 It is at this point that we begin to suspect that the writer is indulging in serious subject. If he sees any demo- cratic hope in this last group. which our neighbor regards as "at the worst, doubtful. but really leaning heavily In the direction of the democratic candi- date" he needs the joint services of an oculist and an alienist.
 What Was the showing by the states of this group in 1912? Tn Maine, Will son received 51. 900 votes, against 75.OOO for Roosevelt and Taft; Illinois. Will son. 405.0OO; Roosevelt and Taft 650,- GOO; Ohio Wilson 423,OOO, Roosevelt and Taft Os,OOO Gin this state there was. as in California, a large republi- can vote for Wilson to defeat Roose- velt:) Delaware, Wilson 23,000 Roose- welt and Taft 24.OOO; Connecticut Wilson 75.000, Roosevelt and Taft 103, 900; Idaho. Wilson 34,OOO. Roosevelt and Taft 5000: Kansas, Wilson 144,- 000. Roosevelt and Taft l95 ,0OO; Massa- chusetts. Wilson 173.O0O; Roosevelt ant Taft 2s7 GOO. Michigan, Roosevelt car ried the state defeating, Wilson by z plurality of 74.O0O, Taft receiving g plurality over Wilson of nearly 2,000; Minnesota, Roosevelt carried the stat' and defeated Wilson by plurality O. ls.000. Taft receiving 64,000 votes; Ne. braska, Wilson 109, 900: Roosevelt ant Taft 127.000; New Mexico, Wilson 20.. 000. Roosevelt and Taft 26,000: Nev York. Wilson 655,O00, Roosevelt an, Taft s46,0OO; North Dakota, Wilson 30.0O0. Roosevelt and Taft 49.0OO; Ore gon, Wilson 1000, Roosevelt and Taf sS.000. South Dakota, Roosevelt car ried the state: Utah, Taft carried tn state; Washington. Roosevelt carried the state. his plurality over Wilson 27.OO0. Taft vote 70,000; Wisconsin Wilson 164.O00 Roosevelt and Taf ls9.0OO Wyoming, Wilson l5,OOC Roosevelt and Taft 24.000
 In the second group of states, whicl our exchange regards "as practical,