New Britain herald. [microfilm reel] (New Britain, Conn.) 1890-1976, 1928-11-07
THE VICTORY OF HOOVER

EXDldlUlIe
of the hard fought Hoover-Smlth
campaign is a task employing many
minds; yet fundamentally little can
be added to the total of accurate
knowledge respecting the reasons tor
the outcome. Some would have 1t
that this Is predominantly Repub-
lican nation and that a Democratic
presidential candidate, regardless OF
his personality, his previous good
record and his fighting qualities, Is
faced with too great a handicap 10
win. Yet that does not explain why
the Democratic candidate, during the
campaign regarded as the strongest
since Wilson, failed to carry in toto
the only staunch Democratic states
OF the nation; and it does not eX-
plain why he did not roll up enough
votes in New York City to carry
New YORK state.
The peculiarities of the campaign
were many, but the undercurrents
of politics-the prejudiccs for or
against Smith-undoubtedl had a
vast effect upon the result. Smith
frankly and ably expounded import
ant issues, and there were many who
agreed with the fundamentals of his
doctrines who did not vote for him.
The prohibition issue, which many
publicists regarded as paramount.
seems to have cut into both parties
SO thoroughly that it was effectively
nuliified; Hoover got the votes OF
many vets as we'll as drys, carrying
wet states and wet cities with equal
abandon.
The huge registration, in which
women predominated, turns out to
have been boomerang for Smith and
the Democratic ticket generally, al
though not in all cases. In New
York and Massachusetts,, not to men,
ton other states, Smith the head of
the ticket ran behind certain other
Democratic candidates. This is near
ly unheard of In presidential cleo
ton; and in "explaining" such things
one mans guess is as good as an
others.
Hoover, conducting campaign Of
expediency, leaning backward in the
maintenance Of dignity, preferring to
deal in generalities when possible.
was pitted against the flamboyant,
aggressive and assertive methods OF
Governor Smith; and the conserva-
tie methods of Hoover won an out
standing victory in nation that is
supposed to like its political fare
served hot. Truly, it can be said.
Smith got the most cheers while
Hoover got the most votes. The out
pourings of people who greeted
Smith along his trips seem to have
meant little more than giving evil
dence that the people liked good
show, liked the brown derby bust
ness, felt inclined to cheer.
The electoral college method of
accounting for the victory puts
Hoover far in the lead; but all the
same. Smith seems to have done bet
ter than these figures Indicate His
popular vote is not as painful to
the Democrats as his electoral vote.
The figures as this was written, with
a little more than half the nations
total accurately known, show
Smith to be little more than g.
100000 behind the Hoover vote.
When all the returns are in this
disparity may be greater. But al
ready Smith with only half the votes
heard from. has nearly a million
more than Davis had in 1924. This
,suifies that Smith was unusually
ky In the dispersal of his votes:
... : a state by few thousands un-
fJi II ately loses it just as effectively
in the electoral college as if it had
been lost by hundreds Of thousands.
A popularity of the campaign has
been that Smith ran better in at
least two Of the rock-ribbcd Repub-
lican states than in many another
state which heretofore has been con-
coded to the other side. His run IN
Massachusetts, and in Rhode Island
indicates clearly that a change in the
political texture is taking place in
these states. Even in Connecticut
the normal Republican naiorities
We're greatly reduced, but not as
CRAFTY as the enthusiastic Smith ad-
h"rents had hoped for.
We believe Hoover will he d
cfeditable President of these United