The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1931-01-14

l ~ kl1 VtbV AAbt E. wa ~
Fargo has ambitions to be congress
man and he might toss his hat into
/ the ring during the general shakeup
Poised against this, however, Is the
fact that the I. v. AS hardly would
dare to run two congressman from
the Red River valley. at least at the
beginning Of a new deal.
Just how close a battle between
! Sinclair and BurtnesS would be in the
| north district would be indicated by
analysis Of recent election returns
| Each has neyer run outside Of his
own district, where each is admit
tedly popular, SO some other measure
Is necessary to serve as a guide.
Returns from the g~ubernatorial
election of 1928 probably are as reli-
able as any. One could take the 1925
| senatorial contest and show the. dis
trict to be heavily Nonpartisan. Or
he could take the 1880 gubernatorial
returns and show it heavily I. v. A.
In fact there are 81 many ways OF
figuring itethat those who start are
liable to end up with their heads full
of figures.
Majorities have bobbed around like
fleas in a sandpile in recent elections
and N a show anything he
chooses. All he has to do Is to select
his election.
The 1928 campaign raj the last one
truly indicative since North Dakota
always reflects its governor for a Sec
ond term.
Analysis of the 1928 gubern' .orial
vote shows the north district I. v. A.
by just 866 votes. that is, Shafer de-
feated T. H. Thoresen by that :.ar-
gin in the proposed first district. In
the state at large, however, Shafer
won by 1908 votes. This gave him a
margin of 8,137 votes in the proposed
second district.
OF the proposed first-district -oun-
ties, Shafer carried IL. They were
Pembina, Walsh, Grand Forks, Trail.
Steele, Nelson, Foster, Ramsey, Cava-
lier, Towner, Pierce and Ward. His
majoritieS in these counties tOtaled
5000. Thoresen carried the remain
ing counties with majorities aggregat-
ing 1854. The difference is an I. v.
a. dJOIl u oOO.
Vote Records Interesting
An interesting sidelight, however, IS
provided by examination of the SEN
atorial returns at the same time. In
Grand Forks, Ward, Bottineau, VIII
liams. Steele, Ramsey and Pembina
counties, Shafer piled up majOrities
totalling $3.50 while Thoresen got
majorities totalling 1857 from the
Nonpartisan counties listed, a margin
OF 4,502 for Shafer.
Senator Lynn j. Frazier, running
against r. A. Nestos for the senate,
got aggregate majorities of 3,488
while Nestos' majorities totalled zoos,
a margin of 1890 for Frazier. All of
which shows the instability Of po-
litical majorities and the FACT that
much depends on the candidate.
Few of Burtness' supporters had
carried their deductions this far We'd
nesday, but it was apparent that they
looked with jaundiced eye IN the
Bond-Cain bill. They could see o
than a possibility OF their friend.
Burtness, being eliminated and they
were not keen about it.
There were hints in some quarters
that the bill was designed to weaken
the Burtness cohorts demand for
east-west districts and make them see
the light of getting the situation into
such a mess that nothing comes of it.
There We're other hints that the bill
was designed to line up the Nom
p%artiSans against it and thus throw
upon them the blame for failure to
reapportion. This argument IL weak
ened. however. by the fact that the
Nonpartisans would need help from
the I. Y. AS to block anything which
requires only a majority vote.
Other Bills Expected
Other bills to divide the state into
east-west districts are expected. All
will go to the reapportionment COM
mittee in each legislative branch.
A table showing the vote for gov
ernor by counties in 1928, and the
majorities given each candidate, fol-
lows: