Evening star., 1952-11-09

American voter, sweeping an entire
political era into history with one
flick Of voting machine lever,
there simply was no other word.
The voter had paid not the
slightest heed to the predictions of
political pundits that the election
would be close. He had remained
unimpressed by pollsters who pre-
sumed to tell him what he thought.
He had demonstrated his disdain
for time-honored political maxims,
including those hoariest Of "im-
mutable truths"-you don't shoot
Santa Claus; you don't switch
horses In the middle of a stream
of prosperity. He had made up his
mind that the rascalS should be
thrown out, but he had displayed
a determined selectivity in mark
ing rascals for election. He had
refused to vote in blocs, as the
political scientists expected him to
vote. Yet, in expressing himself as
an individual, he had spoken with
a mightier voice than ever.
Unanimous
Not in long time have the
American people declared them
selves with such unanimity. One
of the MAJOR ironies of last weeks
election was the fact that Gov.
Stevenson found himself indorsed
only in the not-so-solid South,
where much of his party program
was less popular than anywhere
else in the country. In 1886, when
the late President Roosevelt car
ried every State except Maine and
Vermont, that tiny island of Re-
publicanism at least was in stub
born disagreement with the rest
of the country. This time, few
Southerners would shed tears over
Eisenhower's election.
For all the solidity of the new
political map, a great many voters
(some As per cent, on the average)
stood by the Democratic standard
in every State. Yet, considering
the historical forces that were sup
posed to be arrayed against the
G. o. p, the victory could hardly
have been more dramatically de-
cisive. There was 20 years. worth
of intrenched power in the hands
of an administration with billions
of dollars and presumably thou
sands of Office holders at its beck
and call. There was the inertia
of that classic cycle so glibly de-
scribed by Harry Hopkins-t'tax
and tax, spend and spend, elect
and elect"-which many observers
had learned to accept as inevitable.
There was the impetus of world
wide political drift to the left
moving with the apparent inevi-
liability, If not the slowness, of a
glacier.
There were all these things. Last
Tuesday, the American people, with
casual good nature, brushed them
all aside. The result would dis
appoint many Americans, and
please more. But it could not fail
to impress all Americans with an
acute sense of control over their
own destiny. It was a mighty DEM
onstration of the democratic proc
ess at work-a timely recurrence
of an old miracle in which some al
ready had stopped believing. In
that sense, beyond question, it was
good.
Agreement on Whot?
The people of the United States,
then, established the fact last week
that there was among them broad
area of agreement. What had they
agreed about? The question could
not be answered definitively-it
doubtless would be debated for
weeks to come. The political cast of
the new administration might de-
pend to a great extent on how this
question was answered. It seemed
reasonably clear, though, that in
this presidential election, to a per-
haps unusual extent, the voters had
chosen more between men than
between issues. The fact that there
was no sharp definition of issues
in the campaign made it seem likely
that this would be the case. The
fact that Eisenhower ran SO far
ahead Of his party tended to REIN
force the impression that it was the
case.
It also appeared indisputable
that a major Ingredient OF the elec-
toral decision had been a simple
desire for change; that the two
candidates were weighed by the
voters in the light of this desire.
In passing judgment on Ike and
Adlai, that is, the voters were con-
cerned with their comparative
ability to clean up "the mess in
Washington"
Consolidation
But few could escape the feeling,
In the aftermath, that there must
have been more than these obvious
considerations to the decision
America made last week-more
than q desire for change, more
than q choice between two good
men. Taken in historical context,