Evening star., 1939-09-25

| ~ future. there is
,~ absolutely no
Charles G. Ross. basis on which
to make firm prediction of the
outcome on either side.
1t comes trippingly from the
tongues of the New Dealers who
want a third term for President
Roosevelt that the war assures that
result. The prophecy is too facile.
1t leaves out too many "ifs." Prob
ably Mr.. Roosevelt will win the arms
embargo fight in Congress, but what
II he loses? What if the isolationists
succeed in building up an effective
public sentiment against repeal, as
their prototypes in the famous fight
over the League of Nations sue
ceeded IN swinging the country away
from the policies of Woodrow Will
son? Will the third-term chances
Of Mr.. Roosevelt in that case be
advanced? To the contrary, defeat
OF the Roosevelt proposals in Con-
gress; betokening as it would q
strong sentiment against them in
the country, would amount to a
reputation of the President from
which the third-term movement
could scarcely hope to recover. Even
IN the expected victory for repeal,
scars may well be left and new
alignments created, both to such an
extent as fatally to cripple the
Presidents chances-if not at the
nominating convention, then at the
polls in November.
Argument Seen Unchanged.
Conditions may yet arise-one
such condition, of course, being our
entrance into the war-that will give
new force to the argument for an
other term for the President. But
as things stand today, it seems to me
that the argument is neither more
valid nor less valid than it was q
month ago.
We are not in the war. The over
Whelmlng present sentiment of the
people is against our getting into the
war. In the neutrality fight, each
side maintains that it has the bet
ter prescription for keeping us out.
Today, then, there is no stream"
to give any point to the Lincolnian
adage about not changing horses.
The determination of the people to
keep out of war being what it is,
there is every reason to believe that
IN June of next year we shall be
neither at war nor on the brink Of
war, and so there will be no stream"
to be crossed at that time either.
So much for one Of the weaknesses
IN the much-parroted prophecy Of
interested New Dealers that the war
means a breakdown of the third
term tradition. Another, Of course,
and most glaring ore, is the fact
that the President has not yet said
that he wants third term.
No guess today as to whom the
Democrats will nominate is worth
the paper it is written on.
Dewey May Be Hurt.
The same is true with respect to
the Republicans. A few observations
may be ventured. A month or so
ago. the three leading contenders
for the presidential nomination ap-
peared to be Vandenberg, Taft and
Dewey. They are still regarded as
the leaders, but new estimate of
their respective chances needs to be
made.
The war has probably hurt Dewey.
II there was doubt about entrusting
the leadership Of the country to a
man so young and so comparatively
inexperienced in public affairs, that
doubt must now be heightened. 1t
is Dewey's great misfortune, too,
that the series Of speeches he is
scheduled to make this fall, giving
his views on national issues, will
come when the country is preoccu-
pied with the war and its effects on
America. Dewey's chances must be
rated definitely lower than they
were.
In the opinion of this and many
other observers, Vandenberg a month
ago was the top candidate. Since
then the neutrality issue has come
to a furious head, and the Senator
from Michigan has gone all out for
retention of the arms embargo. In
the fight now beginning, he is
certain to be one of the most ef-
fective opponents of the Presidents
policy.
Long Held Views.
The fight may strengthen him as
candidate, or it may destroy him.
There can be no question of his
sincerity; the position he is now
taking Is in full accord with the
views he has long held and earnest
ly expressed. In opposing repeal of
the arms embargo, he risks the loss
OF the large Polish vote in his State
OF Michigan and he runs afoul of
business, interests which may have a
potent influence on the Republican
nomination.
Taft, on the other hand, is lined
up with the Democratic President
IN favor Of repeal. He has been
steadily on that side. His sincerity
on the issue is no more to be doubted
than Vandenberg's.
Which will be advantaged by this
hight which cuts so sharply across
party lines? Only time can tell.
1t is only possible to say, as was said
at the beginning of this column, that
the war has drastically changed the
shape Of things political in the
United States and made all prophecy
L.