Evening star., 1936-01-31

New Deal was
neither original nor convincing. But
his political challenge to Roosevelt, a
threatened bolt in the Democratic
party, produced an overnight situation
in American politics comparable to
Theodore Roosevelt's Boston state
ment in 1912 that his hat was in the
ring as the foe of President Taft.
The parallel between AL Smiths
blast in 1896 and the colonels in the
early campaign Of 1912 is exact, ex-
cept that Col. Roosevelt, leading the
Progressive Republicans "a years ago.
threatened with cold, determined
malice to defeat his Conservative ad-
versary, President Taft, or wreck his
party, while AL Smith, leading the
Conservative Democrats, threatens
with ruthless malignance to destroy a
Progressive Democrat In the White
House or to wreck his party.
Result of Parallel.
If the parallel continues in this ex-
act reverse, Franklin Roosevelt, to-
days Progressive, like Taft, old-time
Conservative, will survive the conven-
tion, but with worthless nomination,
and will be cruelty butchered in No
vember by a regular party-minded
Republican. For Wilson. Progressive
Democratic winner Of the battle of
1912, was to Taft what a Republican
reactionary would be today to Frank
lin Roosevelt.
But historical parallels never run
true. Otherwise. any one-horse sooth-
sayer could see Ogden Mills, Jimmy
Wadsworth, Herbert Hoover. or Lewis
Douglas marching to the White House
through the debris Of the Democratic
party, with AL Smith for the moment
as badly discredited as his fallen ad-
versary, Franklin Roosevelt.
Today, "a years after the first
Roosevelt smashed his party and de-
feated its President, the second Roose-
velt must figure out how nearly Al
Smith can duplicate Teddy's devastat-
ing onslaught. Has Smith his idola-
ters scattered widely enough to carry
Democratic primaries in Democratic
States from Florida to Washington?
Will the conservative South follow AL
Smith today as the ProgressiveRe-
publican Middle West followed Roose-
welt in his fight on Taft? Will
Franklin Roosevelt get his worthless
nomination by using the sheer force
of his political machine in States he
has no hope of carrying, as Taft won
in the Republican convention two
dozen years ago?
Two-Thirds Rule Vital.
Smith in the Democratic conven-
ton OF 1886 has one weapon more
fatal to the President than any shaft
that T. r. could WELD against Taft.
That is the two-thirds rule. Taft
needed and had q scant convention
majority. The President today must
have two-thirds of his Democratic
convention delegates, and If AL Smith
can draw around his banner a mere
two-fifths of the delegates in the next
national Democratic convention and
if the two-flfths will stay and fight
10 days or two weeks it's all over with
his victim, for the Democratic party
paws for the electoral advantage Of
the solid South which upholds the
two-thirds rule.
The price is the constant menace
of a row like that in Madison Square
Garden which gave Coolidge his elec-
ton certificate.
If AL Smith, as leader of the urban
democracy, can beat Jim Farley in
New York, bring in Atlantic seaboard
States north of Maryland, pick up
urban New England and two or three
sizable industrial States like Ohio,
Illinois and Indiana, along with cor
porars guard from the South, Presi-
dent Roosevelt's goose is so well par
boiled in the convention that 1t will
be easily cooked in November. He
cannot survive long emaciating row
in his party convention. No Demo-
crat can. AL Smith knew this when
he threatened to "take walk"
It will dawn on primrose path. He
will lead his party on the journey
which Marse Henry Watterson once
declared would run through the
slaughter house to an open grave"
Importance of Landon's Speech.
Now what about Landon? What
does his Kansas speech mean? Landon
probably speaks for Midwestern Re
publicanS. without whom the Repub-