The Idaho recorder., 1922-11-24
IDAHO ELECTION
ANALYSIS MADE,

Analyzing the results of the elec-
ton held in Idaho on November has
: been the principal occupation of party
leaders, of those interested in affairs
OF public nature, Of politicians and
of editors, says the Boise correspon-
dent of the Salt Lake Tribune. This
analysis has brought out some inter-
esting side lights. First, while a gov
ernor was elected in C. C. Moore on
an antiprimary plank, the people
elected Legislature which, while both
houses will be in control politically
Of the Republican party, is pledged to
the enactment of primary law that
Will be satisfactory to :he ejojle; and,
second, the Republican plurality in
this state was reduced some 10000
votes, which is serious matter ire
spective of the boast of party ma
chlnery men that they won a Sweep
ing victory. Republican party leaders
realize this. They are even now at
tempting to find the remedy that will
bring back the lost plurality, for they
see difficulties ahead unless reuniting
of the functions of the party is
brought about.
The state board of canvassers has
not made the official count of the re-
turns. In fact, county boards of can
vassers are but now engaged in this
work. Speaking in general terms,
however, it can be said that at the
election held III This state 125, 900
votes were cast, divided on governor
as follows: For c. c. Moore, success
| full Republican candidate, $4,000; Fl.
+. Sanuels, Progressive party candi-
| date, 10000; for NJ. Alexander, Dem
ocratic candidate, $4,000. Governor
elect Moore's plurality is approx
mately 10000
Vote IS Compared.
Comparing this vote with the vote
cast two and four years ago, it is |
found that Governor d. w. Davis, |
who retires January 1, 1923, polled |
total of 75,74S; Ted Walters. Demo
cratic candidate, polled $500, and |
S. d. Fairchild, Progressive candi- |
date, polled 28,752. Davis plurality
was 7,239, as against the 10000 plu-
rali.y that Moore is credited with at |
the recent election. The Democratic
vote was about normal, but Fairchld's |
vote was over 10000 less than the
vote that Samuels polled, so that the
Progressives this year gained approx
imately $4,000 votes.
What leaders of all parties have
concluded happened in the last cleo
ton was this: The primary sentiment
in the state aroused by the campaign
Of United States Senator w. f. Bo
rah, and the Independent vote, which
cannot be classed either Republican,
Democratic or Progressive, divided.
TIE bull. OF that vote, which it has
been figured by unbiased Observers
prior to the election would go to Alex
ander, lod~ad Instead with Samuels,
vh-ich accounts for the increase e
the Progressive vote. The balance Of ;.
ii split, part going to Alexander and
part to Moore. Republicans who could
not bring themselves 10 vote on the
Progressive ticket because of it's afiii-
iation with the NOnpartisans and who
disliked 10 vote for a Democrat, con-
cluded that as long as most of the
Legislative candidates were pledged TO
the enactment of a direct primary
they would vote for Moore and take a
chance on the bill passing the legisla-
ture and being signed by him. Re
nuhIicans who wanted to vote their
convictions for the primary, knowing
that Moore had declined on the stump
10 make ar out-and-out declaration
he would sign a primary bill, voted
for Alexander or for Samuels, who
we're pledged to signing such bill.
Rut thev divided their vote and j. was
This division that resulted in the cleo
tioD returns thai followed.
BallOting Divided.
Until the advent of Senator Borah &
into the state and he launching Of his
primary campaign, it was generally
conceded that tire race was between
Moore and Alexander with Samuels lc
third. But The liberal vote was di-
vided thereafter. Senator Borah
sought TO bring Moore out openly for
the primary, in which event he would
have thrown his strength to him. But !
Moore declined 10 come out. Borah
refused 10 go outside of his party,
and the big independent vote was left
10 decide itself where II would throw '
lis strength. The result was that the {
strength was divided, and on this di.
vision Samuels profted instead OF
Alexander.
But while Govenor-eiect Moore oe-
cl;ned to state on the stump that ne
would sign a direct primary bill, II
ono is passed by the legislature, can
I 4 nor