Springfield Weekly Republican

TWO PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEES APPEAR ABOUT TALKED OUT

Public Will Be Disillusioned to Find Economic Forces Greater Than Philosophies Exist After Election

By DAVID LAWRENCE

New York, Nov. 1-With one week to go, the two presidential nominees are about talked out.

Neither one presented any new idea in the speeches broadcast last night from New York and Boston. They both continue to accuse the other of everything from misfeasance to nonfeasance. They promise a better world but the listeners-in are too confused by all the speech-making to take it too seriously.

Tactics and stage management have made the speeches and their setting seem as if the campaign managers were trying to win localities rather than regions. Thus Gov. Roosevelt tried hard to win to his banner some of the disaffected Smith supporters in Massachusetts. His references to the man who was standard bearer four years ago were affectionate and pointed.

Mr. Hoover sought to give the conservative New Yorkers a bit of fear with reference to the group consisting of La Follette, Norris, Hearst and Huey Long, who, he said, are supporting the Democratic nominee so staunchly that they expect to have a voice in the administration of Gov. Roosevelt if he attains the presidency.

This point is not new, but Mr. Hoover gave it emphasis in this section, where the alliance implies a radicalism that is not palatable to business. As for Gov. Roosevelt at Boston, he struck a glancing, but nevertheless important, blow at the industrialists when he asked them what they would think of a political leader who took reprisals at them for their effort to intimidate their employees on the matter of voting.

Whether this is to be taken as a threat or a warning that Mr. Roosevelt would consider it fair to try to get even with these industrialists, if elected, is hard to say.

Strange as it may seem, while the governor was talking in New England, a list of contributions to both Republican and Democratic campaign funds was filed at Washington and it shows men of wealth and big industry putting up big sums of money, some to the Democratic and some to the Republican party.

Whoever is elected big business and finance will have a finger in the pie. Presidential candidates usually know who contributes the big money and they feel a sense of appreciation which is inescapable. Corporations cannot, under the law, give money to campaigns, but corporation executives can do so personally and the list shows they are doing it. When the campaign committees receive the money, they use it to influence votes. That is what it is given for.

And in this campaign most of the money is coming from business men or wealthy individuals not active in business. Their interests are far flung.

So if it is assumed by Mr. Hoover that the La Follettes and the Norrises and the Huey Longs own Mr. Roosevelt, so might it be assumed that the conservatives will influence him if he is reelected. Even Mr. Hearst, who rarely appears as a contributor, gave $25,000 to the Roosevelt fund, along with John J. Raskob and Bernard M. Baruch, so it is apparent the Democratic nominee is going to have plenty of conservatives, progressives and radicals with a stake in his future policies.

Ideas Fodder for "Mikes"

All this is merely another way of saying that in political campaigns for the presidency nowadays ideas are simply fodder for the microphones, while behind the scenes money talks and exercises its restraints against radicalism or expresses its appreciation for the conservatism that has favored it in part.

The pledges of the candidates are developing a striking similarity. Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Hoover both think relief is a local problem and the federal government must be brought in only in an extremity. Both hope jobs will come to the unemployed. Both favor self-liquidating projects and public works as far as practicable. Both promise, in general terms, to save the nation and each thinks the other unwarranted in the innuendos and personality attacks. The American people are expected to umpire the dispute with their ballots, while millions of people are unaware of the disillusionment that must come when it becomes apparent after election that economic forces bigger than any group of radicals or conservatives, bigger than candidates, hold sway in the world.

(Copyright, 1932, by The Republican Publishing company.)