The Press TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1964. United States Elections

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30588, 3 November 1964, Page 12

The Press TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1964. United States Elections

A strange American election campaign ends with the universal assumption of a landslide victory for President Johnson. The public opinion polls, which are responsible for the assumption, drained away suspense from the campaign at an early stage. From early September President Johnson has held an unprecedented lead of 30 per cent. Polls have been wrong before; but the miracle of President Truman’s election in 1948 (with normally Democratic newspapers and States against him) would be a minor matter compared with the election of Senator Goldwater today.

The American people were to be offered this time “ a choice, not an echo ”. Senator Goldwater, favoured by the Right wing of the Republican Party, was to base his challenge on a conviction that the Federal Government was a vast, ever-growing octopus, its tentacles strangling the '■uthority of the State and local governments and the liberty of individuals. He also alleged mismanagement of military and international affairs. But the campaign quickly descended from a searching examination of the nation’s direction when a personal issue supervened. Senator Goldwater himself became the central issue of the campaign. A critical attack on him was mounted by a large majority of the metropolitan newspapers which generally support Republican nominees, by leaders of the politically independent academic, professional, and foreign policy group, who are normally divided between the parties, and by the bush, ess and financial communities, which usually favour the Republican candidate. •

According to a “ New York Times ” correspondent, Tom Wicker, some of Senator Goldwater’s ill-chosen words, one or two examples of his political courage (or obstinacy), the character of some of his associates and supporters, and the effectiveness of the Democrats in “ publicising, “ magnifying, and perhaps even distorting these “ things ”, have cast Mr Goldwater “ against the “ mainstream of American thought ”■—the mainstream that political theorists have been projecting for years as the “ national consensus ”. A widespread fear that Senator Goldwater might act outside the national consensus, prejudicing and damaging a wide range of interests that are now generally accepted, has been produced. This fear is in contrast with the reassurance Americans find in President Johnson, moving confidently in the mainstream of thought. That is not to say that the nation is everywhere enthusiastic about Mr Johnson; it is not. But since he took over from the assassinated President Kennedy, Mr Johnson’s stature as a national leader has grown. His sensible reaction to such momentous events as China’s bomb test, the change of leadership in Russia, and the crisis in South Vietnam has impressed voters who would dislike him 'or other reasons.

Predictions of a landslide in the Presidential election have caused much concern about the Senate and the House of Representatives elections. Many worthy Republican candidates may be submerged with Senator Goldwater. It is even possible that opposition in Congress will be reduced to a powerless fragment, and the United States thus lose the advantages of the two-party system. A strong Congress is particularly desirable when the Administration is headed by a practised politician naturally disposed to use his power. Some newspapers that changed their usual affiliation to oppose Senator Goldwater are showing growing uneasiness about where their enthusiasm may lead. For instance, the “ New York Herald Tribune ” now advises its readers to vote against Goldwater and Miller but to vote for the rest of the Republican “ ticket ”. Whether the voters detect the danger to the two-party system, and how they will respond, are important aspects of voting today.