The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1932-09-24
FALL CAMP AIGN
ISSUES CLEARLY
ARE OUTLINED
Conservative, Progressive
Courses Followed by
Major Parties.

~ Scripps-Ho1ard NcUspaper Alliance
WASHINGTON, Sept. 24.-Just as
the Democratic delegates at Chicago
adopted what was hailed as a pro-
gressive platform and chose presi-
Dental nominee with western pro-
gressive support, so are Democratic
voters in primary elections showing
preference for senatorial candi-
dates with progressive appeal.
In contrast, the Republicans,
with a conservative platform and a
conservative presidential nominee,
have been turning to conservatives
for senatorial timber.
Thus, the battle lines that the two
= major parties are forming for the
big engagement in November offer,
at least in outward appearance,
promise of an old-fashioned strug-
gle between Jeffersonian liberalism
and Hamiltonian conservatism.
The popular explanation of pro-
gressive triumphs in Democratic
primaries and conservative victories
in Republican tilts is that the voters
in both parties are registering their
protest against the "ins."
g. o. P. Choosing Conservatives
But that analysis does not wholly
explain why the Republicans of
Washington state renominated for
the senate Wesley 6 and 10 Law
Jones, Hoover conservative and ar
dent prohibitionist, while the DEM
ocrats chose as his November oppo-
nent, Homer T. Bone, wet and a
crusader for public ownership of
power plants.
Nor does it account for the choice
by Colorado Republicans of con-
sentative Karl c. Schuyler, wealthy
oil man, while the Democrats Sc
lected the Costigan-indorsed liberal,
Alva Adams, defeating their wealthy
oil man candidate, John T. Barnett.
1t may have been merely coin
cidence that Iowa Republicans over
whelmingly defeated progressive
Senator Smith w. Brookhart, while
Oklahoma Democrats overwhelnr-
ingly renominated progressive SEN
ator Elmer Thomas.
Putting Out the "Ins"
Resentment against the "ins" may
explain:
Why Wisconsin Republicans
turned out two militant progress
sives, Governor Phil La Toilette and
Senator John j. Blaine, choosing in
stead the conservatives, ex-Gover-
nor Walter Kohler and John Chap
pie.
Why Louisiana Democrats ousted
Senator Edwin S. Broussard, high
tariff reactionary, giving his place
on the ticket to Representative John
OVerton, who espoused progressive
Senator Huey P Longs pet pro-
gram of limiting large incomes and
inheritances.
And why Georgia Democrats nom
mated for senate Governor Richard
Russell, choice of organized labor,
turning down conservative Repre-
sentative Charles Crisp, because of
his advocacy of the sales tax and
his responsibility for shifting the
electricity tax from power compa-
MES to consumers.
Democrats Vote Own Ticket
BY accident, or otherwise, the
two parties have been choosing
senatorial nominees of contrasting
political compilations, men whose
rurported economic and political
views coincide with the purported
views of the respective presidential
nominees and the declarations of
the respective party platforms.
In Washington. Iowa and Wiscon-
sin, Democrats, who in years past
had participated in Republican pri-
maries, voted this year in their own
primaries.
With the aid of progressive Re-
publicans, they hope to place those
states in the Democratic column in