Election 1944: Pre-convention news

[NormanStewart]

Roosevelt’s renomination virtually sure

Tentative vote now exceeds majority
By Lyle C. Wilson, United Press staff writer

Washington –
President Roosevelt has a tentative majority of Democratic National Convention votes sufficient for a fourth term nomination, barring substantial defections in the big New York delegation where James A. Farley’s strength is still to be determined.

Ohio, West Virginia, Missouri, North Dakota and Wyoming have been added to the Roosevelt column this week despite what is termed by Ohio experts here as a nominal favorite son commitment to State Auditor Joseph T. Ferguson. Washington is to select delegates this week, probably to Mr. Roosevelt’s further advantage.

More votes picked up

The fourth term campaign picked up 118 convention votes in five states this week. Washington has 18 votes. If Mr. Roosevelt could depend on the entire New York delegation, he would be reasonably certain now of 600 convention votes variously pledged, informally committed or reasonably sure. A bare majority in the Democratic convention will be 589 votes.

Of the 21 states and territories from which delegates contribute so far to the Roosevelt total, few have far to the Roosevelt total, few have formally bound their representatives to the President’s renomination. But by convention action, write-ins, commitments by party leaders or otherwise, the votes appear to be safe for the administration.

Pennsylvania in bag

Among the larger states which have already acted, there is no doubt about Pennsylvania’s 72 votes and Ohio’s 52. There is little doubt about Illinois, which casts 58. The favorite son commitment in Ohio is reported to be merely a technicality to conform with state law.

The situation in New York is more difficult to determine. The state casts 96 convention votes. That Roosevelt supporters control most of those votes goes without saying. Mr. Farley is the unknown quantity. He was against a third term and he will be a convention opponent of a fourth, although none doubts that if Mr. Roosevelt is renominated, Mr. Farley will vote for him and reveal such intention publicly.

[NormanStewart]

Editorial: Names in the news

Robert E. Hannegan, Democratic National Chairman, says it is his firm conviction that FDR will run again. We suspect so too. We also suspect that Mr. Hannegan doesn’t know any more about it than we do, and we don’t know anything about it for sure.

John L. Lewis, head of the United Mine Workers, breaks his engagement to remarry the AFL and demands the return of what Fred Perkins calls John’s $60,000 engagement ring – the check he deposited as a warrant of good faith when he applied for reaffiliation of the Mine Workers with the AFL. John reminds us of the boy who goes home with the baseball bat when the rest of the kids won’t let him be pitcher.

Capt. Robert S. Johnson knocks over his 26th and 27th enemy planes in combat over Germany, tying Maj. Richard I. Bong’s Southwest Pacific score. That’s one victory for each of Capt. Johnson’s years, and three to boot, he being 24. Maj. Bong is 23. Oh decadent American youth, oh effete democracy!

Francis Biddle, Attorney General of the United States, dines on crow at Chicago, confessing in effect that he talked too big the other day when he said that in wartime “no business or property is immune” to a presidential seizure. Can it be that somebody has called Mr. Biddle’s attention to a document known as the Constitution – or to a little matter known as public opinion – or to an event scheduled for November?

[NormanStewart]

Hannegan denies any Dewey smear

Claims criticism was objective

New York –
Robert E. Hannegan, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, denied today that his address at the Jackson Day dinner castigating Governor Thomas E. Dewey was in any way intended as a “smear” of the leading Republican presidential contender.

Mr. Hannegan said in an interview today:

I felt that as long as I was speaking in New York, I should dwell on Governor Dewey’s record and his qualifications for the Presidency. I don’t think anything I said can be considered a “smear.”

Wrote own speech

Mr. Hannegan admitted that Charles Michelson, known as an astute political manipulator and often charged with engineering “smear campaigns” in the past, was taking an active part in the preconvention drive of the Democrats, but denied that Mr. Michelson was the author of the speech the national chairman made at the Hotel Commodore dinner.

He said:

I consulted with several people about my speech. But I wrote it myself.

Mr. Hannegan said that he was convinced that for the welfare of the country and of the Democratic Party the President must run for a fourth term. In reply to a question that if the war was won this year, would the President feel obligated to remain in power to insure a victory in the peace conference. Mr. Hannegan declared, “That might be a different story. He refused to enlarge on his point.”

The national chairman reiterated assertions made in his address last night that he had not discussed with the President his own desires or intentions with regard to the presidential race this year.

He said:

But in my trips through the country, I have talked with all kinds of people and they are unanimous in demanding the fourth term.

Mr. Hannegan declined to comment on assertions made by Harrison E. Spangler, chairman of the Republican National Committee, that the speech here Tuesday night was the opening barrage in the fourth-term drive.

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (May 12, 1944)

A revolt is broken –
Ex-New Deal critic seeks reelection

And he announces he favors fourth term
By Thomas L. Stokes, Scripps-Howard staff writer

Washington –
Another bit of evidence is at hand to demonstrate that the back of the anti-New Deal revolt in the South has been broken, as far as any practical results are concerned, to add to the substantive proof in the recent Florida and Alabama primary victories of New Deal Senators Pepper and Hill.

Senator Andrews (D-FL), in a surprising announcement that he would seek reelection in 1946, urged a fourth term for President Roosevelt in an interview at Orlando.

This is not earthquaking news, but it’s significant, for the Florida Senator has been generally anti-New Dealish in his voting, lining up with the Southern Conservatives. And he was against a third term for the President.

Opposition from governor

The Senator will probably face stiff opposition two years from now, much stiffer than Senator Pepper had May 2, from the present Governor Spessard L. Holland, who has made quite a record. Presumably Senator Andrews thinks it wise to tie up with the President, and well ahead of time, for that turned out to be the wise thing to do in the case of Senator Pepper.

Senator Andrews put the fourth term urgency on the war, speaking of the President as a leader who is needed “in the winning of the war and the making of the peace.” This is the tack being taken by Democrats normally cool to the New Deal as a way out of their dilemma.

Democrats are also drawing comfort from the Ohio primary, even though the total vote rolled up in the Republican primary was substantially larger than the Democrats.

Republican race bitter

Their optimism derives from the character and the vote-getting ability of the successful candidate for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination, Mayor Frank Lausche of Cleveland, plus an aftermath of bitterness from the hot contest among Republican candidates for the nomination.

Mayor James Garfield Stewart of Cincinnati won the Republican nomination by only a slim margin over Attorney General Tom Herbert so slim that Mr. Herbert has indicated he will contest it.

Mayor Stewart was the candidate of Ed Schorr of Cincinnati, state Republican boss. If he weathers a contest and is the candidate in November, the issue of bossism will be raised against him by the Democrats, and Mayor Lausche is the sort of candidate to make this type of campaign effective.

Lausche strong downstate

The ill feeling engendered in this contest may carry over to handicap the Republicans in November. The Republicans also have a ticket top-heavy, with Cincinnati candidates, with Senator Taft, who is up for reelection. Mayor Stewart and the candidate for Secretary of State all from that city.

Mayor Lausche showed surprising strength in downstate rural districts. He literally gobbled up Cleveland and Democrats are depending on his strength there to offset Republican downstate strongholds and, incidentally, to bolster up the national ticket in November.

Sponsors of the presidential nomination candidacy of Governor John W. Bricker have seized this situation to argue that the Governor, who ran well ahead of President Roosevelt in Ohio in 1940, will be needed on the national ticket to hold Ohio in the Republican column.

[NormanStewart]

Bricker scores farm policies

Omaha, Nebraska (UP) –
Utilization of new crops and general farm conservation have been hampered by the bureaucratic administration of the nation’s farm program, Ohio Governor John W. Bricker, candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, said today.

Mr. Bricker, en route to Lincoln, Nebraska, for an address, called for an end to “pig killing,” asserting that “you cannot convert scarcity to plenty.”

Farmers must be free to produce to capacity, he said, and must be given full information and instruction from proper authorities.

[NormanStewart]

Dies to retire from Congress

Beaumont, Texas (UP) –
Rep. Martin Dies (D-TX), chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities, said today in a telegram to Beaumont friends that he would not seek reelection.

Mr. Dies has spent the last several days in a Galveston hospital for treatment of a throat ailment. It was understood he planes to enter the May Clinic at Rochester, Minnesota, for an operation. After that, he said he would reenter the private practice of law.

[NormanStewart]

Barkley backs Roosevelt as best qualified for job

Washington (UP) –
Senate Democratic Leader Alben W. Barkley (DKY) today unequivocally endorsed a fourth term for President Roosevelt with the assertion that a vast knowledge of the war and close relations with Allied leaders make him best qualified to guide the nation through the “treacherous cross-currents” it must traverse to achieve victory and write a lasting peace.

Mr. Barkley, who recently submitted his resignation as Senate Majority Leader after the President vetoed the tax bill, prefaced a glowing testimonial to Mr. Roosevelt by emphasizing that he had not discussed a fourth term with him and did not know whether he would accept renomination. He added, however, that he thought the President would do so.

He said in an article in the current issue of Collier’s Magazine:

Nothing that I shall say in this discussion… is to be construed as indicating that he will seek a fourth term or permit a fourth term to seek him. I do not know what his intentions are and I may never know until events reveal them.

Any man, honored already beyond any other American, might well prefer the quiet and refreshing shades of individual peace amid his books and memories. Or he might infinitely prefer to spend his remaining years making an accurate chronicle of the events in which he has played so great a part.

Can he do it? Can he voluntarily renounce any obligation or opportunity to complete the job? I do not think so.

Defends Roosevelt

He unfolded a staunch defense of some of the charges brought by the President’s critics.

• That a fourth term would lead to “dictatorship:”

There can be no such thing as dictatorship which some honest people fear and others pretend to fear, so long as the American people have the right of free choice. There is no pretense anywhere that they do not have a free choice. No sort of coercion of the individual voter is possible or would be attempted or countenanced.

• That the President has violated propriety by breaking the no third term precedent: In accepting a third term, he said, Mr. Roosevelt “fulfilled the very conditions which George Washington Gave in his farewell address as the reason for his own retirement, to wit, that the conditions existing in the country no longer required him to serve as President…” He said he believed Mr. Roosevelt would have liked to retire after his second term but could not, because “the conflagration against which he had warned the people was upon us.

• The President’s use of wartime powers:

There was no way to avoid this enormous and unprecedented delegation of power.

• Mr. Roosevelt’s personal traits:

There are some who say that the President is stubborn now and then, and sometimes unforgiving. He may give way to the impulse to look at the political implications involved in a given course of action. He may even listen too much to the advise of those who always agree with him… So did Theodore Roosevelt; so did Andrew Jackson; so did Grant; so did Hoover.

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (May 13, 1944)

Bricker attacks finance policies

Omaha, Nebraska (UP) –
Governor John W. Bricker, candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, believes the nation’s finances must be put in order and the public appraised of the exact purposes for which its money is spent.

Mr. Bricker spoke at a banquet sponsored by the Nebraska Bricker-for-President Committee last night.

He condemned “New Deal bureaucracy,” “deficit spending” and “absolutism” and said that if he is elected President, he will work for restoration of representative government, abolition of “needless bureaus” and “super-czars,” and for distribution of as much present federal activity as possible “back into the hands of state and local governments – where it belongs.”

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (May 14, 1944)

Stokes: CIO’s strength in politics is spotlighted

Conservative camp showing alarm
By Thomas L. Stokes, Scripps-Howard staff writer

Washington –
The CIO, by taking a couple of scalps in the South, where they used to chase labor organizers out of town, has suddenly attracted attention as a political force to be reckoned with in this uncertain political year.

It is being given some credit for the defeat in the recent Alabama primary of Rep. Joe Starnes, member of the Dies Committee, for which the CIO has no affection. On the heels of this success, the word went around that the CIO was out to get the head man himself, Rep. Martin Dies

Now. Mr. Dies suddenly announces he is not going to run again. The reason given was ill health, but the CIO likes to think perhaps the threat of a campaign against the Texas Congressman had something to do with it. Whatever the reason, the jubilation was fervent.

Effective politically

The CIO’s unfriendliness to the Dies Committee was intensified recently when a Committee report attacked the CIO Political Action Committee because of alleged Communist affiliations.

It is news when a labor organization can be effective politically in the South, and the CIO claimed a share, too, in the victories of New Deal Senators Pepper in Florida and Hill in Alabama.

Only nine years ago, a labor organizer friend of the writer was shot in a Southern mill town and was chased away in a shower of bullets falling around the auto driven by his wife, who had to take him 7 miles to a hospital. There were mill towns where this organizer had to sneak down backstreets and slip furtively into the officers or homes of sympathizers.

This has all been changed now.

30 on ‘purge’ list

Emboldened by its success in the South, the CIO Political Action Committee has drawn up a “purge” list of 30 Southern Congressmen and Senators, which was read into the Congressional Record yesterday by Senator Eastland (D-MS) during debate on the anti-poll tax bill.

The organization’s apparent headway in the South is beginning to open the eyes of politicians elsewhere, particularly Republicans, for the CIO Political Action Committee, directed by Sidney Hillman, is going down the line for President Roosevelt and the New Deal.

Its theory is that it may prove the decisive factor in the big urban centers in the East and the industrial Midwest, which are touch and go this year. It is putting on an intensive campaign to register workers, particularly those who have moved into Eastern and Midwestern centers to work in war industries.

Conservatives alarmed

Labor is learning the primary lessons of precinct politics, with well-organized, doorbell ringing brigades. Checks are being made in war plants on registration, and workers are being pressed to become eligible. Labor leaders woke up after the 1942 Congressional elections to discover that many thousands of workers who had migrated to key Midwestern states had not qualified themselves to vote.

The fear of shrewd politicians in the conservative camp is already manifest in the noise they are making about the CIO Political Action Committee and by their attempts to circumscribe the use of a $750,000 fund subscribed by union members for use all over the country. The conservatives contend this is in violation of the Connally-Smith Act’s prohibition against acceptance of contributions by a political committee from a labor union or corporations.

Attorney General Biddle has held there is no violation of law by the CIO political adjunct.

Incidentally, that $70,000 probably would not cover the amount spent in only two states, Florida and Alabama, by anti-New Deal interests in the recent primary elections, which obviously came, although deviously, from corporate interests.

[NormanStewart]

Bricker charges U.S. needs change

Milwaukee, Wisconsin (UP) – (May 13)
Governor John W. Bricker of Ohio said tonight that the United States needs a “change in leadership – a new President who is not afraid to speak for America.”

The Governor, who is a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, said:

We want a President who will speak for America’s rights, her convictions and ideals with the same force, the same sturdy voice and the same staunch determination with which Churchill speaks for England and Stalin speaks for Russia.

“If I am elected, that will be my policy,” he told Milwaukee’s Sunday Morning Breakfast Club, which sponsored the address.

He said:

We want cooperation with all friendly powers and are proud to fight beside our friends for freedom of the world. But we do not intend to underwrite any alien empire nor further any nation’s imperialistic ambition.

[NormanStewart]

Editorial: Pennsylvania and Dewey

Legally, the Pennsylvania delegation to the Republican presidential convention is not bound to support any particular candidate for the Republican nomination.

But logically, there is sound moral reason why the delegation should support Governor Thomas E. Dewey.

The 70 delegates to the Republican convention are not legally bound to vote for Mr. Dewey because, through the manipulation of the Republican organization, nearly all of them ran as unpledged candidates.

Under each name of the ballot, they frankly told the voters: “Does not promise to support popular choice.”

Bu, as it turned out, few of these delegates were opposed at the April 2 primary. And in many cases where there were contests for delegate, the opposing delegates likewise dodged any commitment.

So Pennsylvania voters, by and large, had no choice. There were no Dewey candidates, nor Willkie candidates, nor MacArthur candidates, nor Stassen candidates. And very few agreed to abide by the preference of the voters.

As a result, the voters utilized the next best means of demonstrating their choice.

They wrote in the names of the candidates they favored. An overwhelming majority of them said they favored Governor Dewey. The write-in vote he received in Pennsylvania was spontaneous and proportionally large. No other candidate was fairly in the running.

While delegates to the national conventions are elected under pretty loose instructions from the voters, they are, nevertheless, representatives of the electors in their party. As such, they have a moral obligation to represent the views of those voters.

The Pennsylvania delegation has a moral duty to vote for Mr. Dewey.

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (May 15, 1944)

Ferguson: Fair play in politics

By Mrs. Walter Ferguson

Political campaigns always bring out the worst in us. This year some of the stuff we read doesn’t make sense to me. For example, here’s a gem from the New Republic:

There has been a flood of talk in the press regarding a lack of visible American foreign policy. Some of this talk has come from sources hostile to the Roosevelt administration and can be discounted for that reason. Some of it, however, comes from supporters of the President who are genuinely alarmed over the way things are going.

Maybe, I don’t understand English, but the writer seems to be saying that criticism from anti-New Dealers must be regarded as unwarranted, insincere and irrelevant, while that which issues from the opposite camp is wise and constructive and therefore merits attention.

In plain terms, it means that no one except friends of the administration should be considered worthy to criticize its policies. Other Americans, we suppose, should keep their mouths shut and take what comes.

There is a steady effort to discredit the opinions of those who oppose the present Washington regime.

Harsher words have often been spoken by political rivals in the history of our nation. Mudslinging is an old device for winning campaigns. But never in modern times have so many honest Americans been smeared with charges of treason because of political differences. In the interest of national unity, this ought to stop.

The man who whoops it up for a fourth term does not necessarily want to sell out his country to the Communists. By the same reasoning, the person who disagrees with the administration or even hates Mr. Roosevelt, cannot be justly accused of Fascist leanings. Or do we have no rules for civilized warfare in political campaigns?

[NormanStewart]

Roosevelt and Dewey to go over the top in week’s primaries

Warren is boomed for No. 2 GOP spot
By Lyle C. Wilson, United Press staff writer

Washington –
It looks today as though Governor Earl Warren of California can have the Republican vice-presidential nomination if he wants it, but Republicans statesmen wish they knew whether the Governor means it or is not a candidate.

No one seems to doubt that Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York will accept the Republican presidential nomination if it is offered despite his refusal to make a pre-convention campaign. None of the Democrats – not even those who oppose the administration – seems to doubt that President Roosevelt will accept a fourth term renomination.

Appeal is geographical

But Governor Warren has the politicos guessing. Most of them do not know him but have read about the Warren family. They her that Governor Warren wants to earn a lot of money. They are beginning to be afraid that he intends to do just that by returning to private law practice.

The Governor’s appeal is strictly geographical. He demonstrated that he could carry California for the Republicans after long years of Democratic rule. California casts 22 electoral college votes.

Furthermore, the Republican presidential nominee probably will be from New York and surely will not come from farther west than Ohio. Presto! Governor Warren, from a doubtful state, becomes the ideal vice-presidential running mate for 1944.

Bricker is strong

As delegate sentiment is recorded so far, Governor Dewey may be a first ballot nominee at Chicago. He and Governor John W. Bricker of Ohio are not far apart in actually pledged delegates, though on the basis of various informal commitments Governor Dewey has a claim of one kind or another on close to 500 delegates.

Governor Bricker’s forthright campaign for the nomination is in no way belittled by the fact that he is frequently mentioned as a possible running mate for Governor Dewey.

Governor Dewey’s early ballot nomination would enable him practically to dictate the vice-presidential nomination. That is where Governor Warren’s reluctance may be put to the test. Some persons believe the Dewey supporters eagerly want the Californian on the ticket.

Stassen also supported

Former Governor Harold E. Stassen of Minnesota would have considerable support. He is a lieutenant commander serving in the South Pacific. The Farmer-Laborites and Democrats have merged in Minnesota after years of courtship which began in 1936.

But do not overlook Rep. Everett Dirksen, a smart Illinois Republican, who is campaigning for a place on the ticket, or Eric Johnston, the West Coast industrialist who has just been reelected president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Mr. Johnston daily behaves more like a candidate for office. He is regarded as a spokesman for enlightened capitalism. He writes books and he travels like Wendell L. Willkie. Mr. Johnston leaves this week for Moscow to talk with Marshal Joseph Stalin.

If Mr. Johnston’s presence in Russia soon is impressively brought to your attention – do not be surprised.

[NormanStewart]

Delegate majorities are in the offing

By Russell Turner, United Press staff writer

Washington (UP) –
Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York and President Franklin D. Roosevelt were expected to emerge at the end of this week as the opposing candidates for the next four years in the White House as the result of new state conventions and primaries this week in four states.

Though neither “candidate” has said he would run, the President’s improved health and Governor Dewey’s heavy backing by already chosen delegates to the GOP convention are taken as general indications that neither will refuse to be “drafted.”

Mr. Roosevelt is already assured of a fourth term nomination if he decides to run. A United Press survey of primaries and conventions already held shows that he has 662 delegates pledged – many more than the majority needed for selection on the first ballot.

Dewey is also strong

Governor Dewey now has 436 delegates pledged or prepared to support him, which is only 94 short of the 530 needed to win the nomination.

With 208 more GOP delegates to be chosen this week, Governor Dewey is almost certain to win a large block of votes which should give him the nomination – barring an unforeseen convention upset – either on the first or at least the second ballot.

Governor Dewey’s biggest gain this week is expected in California, where a 50-man Republican delegation is scheduled to go to Governor Earl Warren, a Dewey man and himself vice-presidential timber.

Mr. Roosevelt already has an advance pledge of California’s 52 Democratic delegates.

Schedule for the week

The dates and contests this week in each state are as follows:

MAY 15
Oklahoma Democratic State Convention. Delegation of 22 already pledged to Mr. Roosevelt.

MAY 16

• California state and presidential preference primary, with President Roosevelt’s domestic policies the main issues. Seat of Senator Sheridan Downey (D-CA) is at stake, along with 23 House seats.

• Montana Democratic and Republican State Conventions. Eleven Democratic delegates pledged to the President if he runs. Eight Republican delegates will be uninstructed and will be contested by supporters of Governor Dewey and Governor John W. Bicker of Ohio who is actively campaigning against Governor Dewey.

• New Jersey state and presidential preference primary. Republicans will name 34 convention delegates and the Democrats 3, each block probably going to Governor Dewey and Mr. Roosevelt, respectively.

• Delaware Democratic Convention. Expected to be pro-Roosevelt. Delaware GOP convention delegates meet May 20 to determine whom they will back.

MAY 17

• Arkansas Democratic Convention. Twenty delegates already pledged to Mr. Roosevelt.

• South Carolina, first of three Democratic conventions.

• Vermont Republican Convention. Delegation of nine will be traditionally unpledged. Vermont Democrats meet the next day to choose six convention delegates.

MAY 18

• Mississippi Independent Republicans (so-called lily whites) meet to choose convention slate which will be contested by regular Republican organization. The latter does not meet formally until June 7.

• Illinois State GOP Convention meets to choose delegates-at-large to fill out state delegation of 59 at national convention. Delegation originally leaned toward Gen. Douglas MacArthur but now appears to favor Governor Dewey.

• Alabama GOP Convention to choose 14 delegates.

• Oregon state primary. Included in offices at stake is the seat of Senator Rufus Holman (R-OR).

MAY 20

• Pennsylvania GOP delegation of 70 meets in caucus in Philadelphia.
• Utah Republican Convention. Eight delegates to be chosen.

[NormanStewart]

Hillman forecasts fourth term plea

Chicago, Illinois (UP) –
A demand for a fourth term for President Roosevelt will be made before a special meeting of the CIO Political Action Committee here tomorrow, its chairman, Sidney Hillman, predicted today.

Mr. Hillman, general president of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, which opened its 14th biennial convention today, said the convention is expected to “give some time” to the CIO Political Action Committee.

Mr. Hillman was asked:

Is the Political Action Committee interested in who the Republican nominee will be?

He replied:

Yes, in a sense, we’d like to know who’s going to lose for the Republicans.

Mr. Hillman denied reports that the Political Action Committee had been out to beat Rep. Martin Dies (D-TX), who announced last week that he would not seek reelection.

Mr. Hillman said:

Mr. Dies has made wild statements that we were spending $250,000 to beat him in his home district. We haven’t spent seven cents to beat Dies.

---

Communists leery of Governor Dewey

New York (UP) –
Israel Amter, state chairman of the New York Communist Party, asserted yesterday that Governor Thomas E. Dewey has expressed “hope” of post-war collaboration with Russia because “he knows that a candidate daring to question it has no chance whatever of election.”

Mr. Amter told nearly 1,000 delegates attending the party convention that Governor Dewey is the “most likely candidate” of the Republican Party for the Presidency.

Recalling that Governor Dewey criticized American recognition of Russia four years ago, Mr. Amter said, “Mr. Dewey has not, as reported, widened his outlook.”

[NormanStewart]

The Pittsburgh Press (May 16, 1944)

Polls indicate a close race for President

Danger signals found for Democrats
By Lyle C. Wilson, United Press staff writer

Washington –
Public opinion polls forecast the closest presidential election contest this year since 1916 when California’s 22 electoral votes for Woodrow Wilson kept Charles Evans Hughes out of the White House.

There has not been a presidential contest since then whose result was not fairly obvious prior to Election Day.

Assuming even that President Roosevelt is the Democratic nominee again, there are some danger signals for the Democratic ticket in recent polls. The polls must be read, however, in light of an allowable error of some 4%.

The National Opinion Research Center, with headquarters at the University of Denver, Colorado, spotlights a couple of them in a poll survey.

Businessmen favor Dewey

There is nothing surprising, nor likely to disturb Mr. Roosevelt, in the report of the magazine Fortune poll that among a representative list of top-ranking business executives fewer than nine of each 100 wanted Mr. Roosevelt reelected.

This business and management group favored Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York of the four men suggested to them.

A Gallup poll was predicated on the European war still being on next November but under circumstances indicating it shortly would be over. The question was limited to Mr. Roosevelt and Governor Dewey.

Trouble signs for Democrats

Business and professional groups gave Governor Dewey 58% of their vote and the remaining 42% to the President.

The Roosevelt 42% was six points less than he received in 1936 from that strata of voters. But it was a 6% increase over the percentage of business and professional voters who supported the President in 1940. That represents a substantial gain which might be vital in a close contest.

The most alarming development from the Democratic standpoint is indicated in Gallup’s survey of farm sentiment. On Election Day 1940, it is estimated that 51% of farmers outside the South were for Mr. Roosevelt. By August 1943, a Gallup poll reported that support had shrunk to 39%. As of now, it has slumped further to 35%.

That means political trouble for the Democrats in the Farm Belt and in the so-called farm states which, prior to the New Deal, had been considered traditionally Republican.

---

22 for Roosevelt

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (UP) –
Oklahoma’s 22 delegates to the Democratic National Convention had instructions today to support President Roosevelt for a fourth term at Chicago in July.

Democrats at the State Convention so instructed their delegates last night after Robert Hannegan, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, predicted that Mr. Roosevelt will accept a fourth term nomination “when he weighs the national security against his personal feelings.”

Mr. Hannegan insisted, however, that he was not speaking for the President.

---

California votes

Sacramento, California (UP) –
Californians went to the polls in a consolidated wartime primary today, to ratify unopposed presidential delegate slates pledged to President Roosevelt and Governor Earl Warren and select nominees for one U.S. Senate seat, 23 posts in the House and for state legislative offices.

President Roosevelt was assured of 56 unopposed delegates to the Democratic National Convention, while Governor Earl Warren automatically will win 50 delegates to the Republican convention. The Warren delegates are expected to switch later to Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York.

---

New Jersey votes

Trenton, New Jersey (UP) –
Voters in New Jersey went to the polls today to select delegates to the national presidential nominating conventions and to nominate candidates for the U.S. Senate and House.

The state Republican organization had a full slate of convention delegates, including seven for delegates-at-large and two from each of the state’s 14 Congressional districts. Governor Walter E. Edge, former supporter of Wendell L. Willkie, heads this slate. An opposing faction, pledged to draft Governor Thomas E. Dewey of New York entered a slate for the delegates-at-large seats, and also contested state organization choices in three Congressional districts.

Delegates supporting President Roosevelt for a fourth term had no opposition.

[NormanStewart]

Jackson to pinch hit for Truman here

Washington –
Senator Harry S. Truman (D-MO), chairman of the special Senate Committee Investigating the War Program, had to cancel his scheduled address at Pittsburgh’s Jackson Day dinner tomorrow because of the press of committee business, his office said today.

Mr. Truman is the reported choice of a number of State Democratic leaders for the party nomination for Vice President, in place of Henry A. Wallace, and his Pittsburgh visit was expected to develop further support for such a move.

Senator Joseph F. Guffey (D-PA), who entertained for Vice President Wallace at a garden party here last week, advised Allegheny County Democrats of Mr. Truman’s inability to appear and obtain Senator Samuel Jackson (D-IN) instead.

Senator Jackson, appointed Jan. 28 to fill a vacancy caused by the death of Senator Frederick Van Nuys, has been an administration supporter in Senate votes.

[NormanStewart]

CIO woos the Democrats –
Guaranteed weekly wage pledge asked of party

Union group wants backing for revolutionary change in American industry practices
By Fred W. Perkins, Pittsburgh Press staff writer

Washington –
CIO union leaders, now out in front of the Roosevelt fourth term movement, hope to get a Democratic National Platform Commitment that would indorse a revolutionary change in industry practices.

They want the Democratic Party to sponsor their proposal that every workingman ve guaranteed a specific weekly wage, in good times and bad, come hell or high water.

This was learned today from sources close to CIO president Philip Murray, who has made the wage guarantee a principal demand in the big wage case of the United Steelworkers before the War Labor Board.

In last week’s Cleveland convention of the steel union the statements of Mr. Murray and other officers gave the wage guarantee question an importance equal to that of the union’s demand that the Little Steel wage formula be broken to allow a pay boost of 17 cents an hour for the more than half a million employees of this industry.

The steel union, on the 17-cent demand, is up against the facts that President Roosevelt wants to make no change in wartime wage-control policies, and that under present law the War Labor Board says it cannot change its pay yardstick.

Roosevelt backing hinted

But the wage-guarantee issue is one that Mr. Roosevelt is said to be ready to regard as part of a general social security program, and the CIO forces might accept victory on this front as recompense for failure on the pay-boost question.

If the wage-guarantee theory should be enforced in one industry, it inevitably would spread through others, with the result that employers of non-white collar workers would have to revamp their financing plans. The wage would have to be paid all qualified employees during times when, according to past history of depressions, plants would be shut down.

The steel union’s proposal is that an employee’s average hourly straight-time earnings be averaged for the preceding year, be multiplied by 40 (for the legislated 40-hour week), and that the resulting sum be his weekly guarantee.

The union proposal said:

For each week during life of this contract that the employee, for reasons beyond his control, does not receive a sum equal to this minimum amount, the company shall make up the difference.

Ups and downs cited

The union pointed out that the steel industry has been subject to sharp ups and downs in activity and employment, and therefore:

There is the imperative social need to assure steelworkers that the prince and pauper era is at an end. Economic security through full employment, thereby creating freedom from want and freedom from fear, can and must be accomplished for this basic industry. This objective is not attained through the pitiful unemployment compensation payments.

Industry leaders have charged that both the political and war situations are being used by the CIO union to force adoption of a government policy that might not be attainable under ordinary conditions.

Fairless quoted

B. F. Fairless, president of U.S. Steel Corporation, testified:

A guaranteed annual minimum wage would not ensure employment, but would inevitably destroy the financial ability of the steel industry to employ. In fact, the demand for such a revolutionary change becomes fantastic unless the eventual insolvency of the steel industry is the desire.

War experience in planned production, asserted the union, makes the wage-guarantee plan feasible.

The future of every man and woman who works on a wage basis, rather than on a fixed salary, may be affected by outcome of this phase of the steel case. So may the planning of industrial operations.

The War Labor Board proceedings resume today after a two-week recess.

[NormanStewart]

New Deal secrecy hit by Landon

Chicago, Illinois (UP) –
Alf M. Landon, the 1936 Republican standard-bearer, said today that the most important qualification for a President was ability to formulate a clear domestic policy and provide the leadership to carry it through.

Mr. Landon told the 147th Rotary International District Conference:

A man can’t be a “statesman” abroad and a failure at home and be of much use in the period ahead, either to America or to the world.

Mr. Landon charged that:

The everlasting confusion over manpower and the draft – to mention only two items out of a long list – brings the realization of the great need for an efficient administrator in the White House.

The Kansan said:

There is a marked difference between Woodrow Wilson’s publicized diplomatic exchanges and the personal secrecy of President Roosevelt.

We should have had long ago the promised report from the President on his conferences, and agreements with Stalin and Churchill. We do not know whether we are headed in the direction of a super international state – a league of nations – a federation of nations – a world court – or a balance of power alliance, or a direction not yet made known.

---

Tammany strife taken to court

New York (UP) –
A court order obtained by foes of the Tammany Hall regime of Edward V. Loughlin forced the organization’s leaders to call off a meeting of 1,000 county committee members last night and to delay adoption of a resolution endorsing a fourth term for President Roosevelt.

Mr. Loughlin charged that the motive behind the move by John L. Buckley and Dennis J. Mahon, members of Tammany’s Executive Committee, was to prevent passage of the resolution.

Mr. Buckley and Mr. Mahon, who obtained the order, alleged that the rules the committee was scheduled to adopt were not formulated properly. The proposed rules changes, they said, would have had the effect of strengthening the present leadership of Tammany.

The order is returnable next Monday.

[NormanStewart]

Background of news –
New York and the election

By Bertram Benedict

In the election in November, the state of New York will have 47 (17%) of the 266 electoral votes necessary to elect a President. This is more than the combined electoral vote of 12 other states. No wonder, then, that most of those who expect the election to be close are prophesying: “The man who carries New York will win,” nor that the Governor of New York now seems about to walk away with the Republican nomination.

For Mr. Dewey looks like a remarkably good vote-getter in New York, even if he was born and reared in Michigan. In 1938, he ran against Governor Lehman for the New York governorship and came within a hair’s breadth of winning. Mr. Lehman received 1,971,000 votes on the Democratic ticket and 420,000 on the American Labor Party ticket, for a total of 2,391,000. Mr. Dewey, receiving 2,327,000, was defeated by only 64,000 votes out of more than 4,700,000 cast.

In the same year, the two Republican candidates for U.S. Senator from New York (one for an unexpired term) lost by 438,000 votes and 355,000 votes, respectively. Two years before, the Republican gubernatorial candidate had lost by 521,000 votes. And in 1942, Mr. Dewey defeated the Democratic candidate and the American Labor Party candidate by a clear majority of 245,000.

Opposed by Willkie in 1942

Mr. Dewey received the Republican gubernatorial nomination in 1942 over the ill-disguised opposition of Wendell L. Willkie. When the state Republican leaders were obviously about to swing the party nominating convention over to Mr. Dewey, Mr. Willkie came out for a free-for-all nomination race, although disclaiming any ambitions for himself and any participation in a Stop-Dewey movement.

Mr. Willkie was understood to have warned the party leaders privately that Mr. Dewey would be defeated because of his alleged isolationism prior to Pearl Harbor. But Mr. Dewey got the nomination hands down.

Mr. Willkie himself had run well in New York against President Roosevelt in 1940. There Mr. Willkie had 48% of the major party vote, as against 45% in the nation as a whole. If one in every 25 New Yorkers who voted for Mr. Roosevelt in 1940 should vote for the Republican candidate this year, the Republicans will carry the state.

However, the fact that Mr. Dewey ran well for Governor does not necessarily mean that he will run as well for President in the Empire State. Alfred E. Smith was also a great gubernatorial vote-getter, but the state which sent him to the Governor’s Mansion in Albany four times (once in a Republican landslide year, 1924), would not vote to send him to the White House in 1928.

Yet while New York was voting against Mr. Smith as the Democratic presidential candidate, it was voting for Franklin D. Roosevelt as the Democratic gubernatorial candidate.

Hughes wins – but loses

In 1916, the Republicans nominated for the Presidency Justice Charles E. Hughes of New York, largely because he was expected to carry, in what looked like a close election, the state in which he had been elected Governor in 1906 and 1908. The expectation was realized, for Mr. Hughes carried New York by a substantial margin, but he lost the election by 23 electoral votes (Woodrow Wilson, the winner, lost his state, New Jersey).

That was really the only time since the Civil War in which the country did not vote as New York voted. True, in 1876, New York voted for its governor, Samuel J. Tilden, only to see Hayes elected, but probably Tilden was unfairly counted out; as it was, he had a popular majority.

If it is Dewey vs. Roosevelt in November, it will be the first time since 1904 (Theodore Roosevelt vs. Alton B. Parker) that both major party candidates have been New Yorkers. In the year 1884, Governor Grover Cleveland of New York carried the state and was elected President; in 1888, he lost the state and the Presidency; in 1892, he carried the state and the nation again.