Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue


Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

August 06, 1968 - Image 2

Resource type:
Michigan Daily, 1968-08-06

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

4 e r A41gan Daily
Seventy-seven years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students of the University of Michigan,
under authority of Board in Control of Student Publications







420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich.

News Phone: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily exp ress the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.



The marketplace of politics:
A dilemma for liberals

(Continued from Page 1)
conservative, with extremely conservative members in the South
and parts of the Midwest and West, and with queer liberal cousins
in a handful of eastern states.
Part of this impression is based on merely visual evidence. For
example, the girls who work behind the Rockefeller desks have
a certain casual poise of dress and manner; they look like the
Mt. Holyoke and Wellesley students they very often are. They are
people who but for the more conservative nature of their family
backgrounds would be supporting Eugene McCarthy. They have
a sense of their own place in the campaign efforts of their can-
didate, which the youthful partisans of Ronald Reagan lack.
Thus, they work hard and effectively at what they have been
assigned by their political elders like leading cheers, and manning
information tables. But they shun answering questions, theoriz-
ing on the campaign or the nation's problems, or giving the im-
pression in any way that they are more important to the Rocke-
feller organization than they actually are.
Many Rockefeller delegates are equally recognizable. Most of
the Negroes, most of the Jews, most of the eastern accents are
Rockefeller backers. The Reagan delegate, who was a Nixon man
probably two weeks ago and certainly two months ago, is harder
to catalogue.
THE REAGAN YOUTH, on the other hand, looks for all the
world as 'if something extraordinary had slipped into his genetic
structure at conception which stamps him thereafter as an unde-
niable Reaganite. He is clean-cut and neatly, if not stylishly or dis-
tinctively, trimmed. He has evanescent good looks, an adolescent

THE QUESTION of the week for G.O.P.
delegates and hopefuls is "Will you
support whoever the party nominates?"
The Republicans are very sensitive to
that question in light of the debacle of
1964, when liberals like Governors Rom-
ney and Rockefeller and now-Mayor John
Lindsay of New York refused to campaign
for the party's nominee, Barry Goldwater.
The Republicans, like the Democrats,
seek a man who will unify their party for
the November contest. It is only in such
unity that any party can hope to muster
the necessary forces for a strong cam-
paign fight. And the fruits of victory in a
presidential contest are sweet indeed. Po-
litical parties thrive on the patronage
and power that victory brings, and so
they must seek a leader who can bring
them that goal.
But demands of unity in non-ideologi-
cal parties avoid out of necessity the is-
sues and paper them over when they can,
by issuing a broadly-worded platform
that promises everyone roughly what
they want.
T HEDIRKSEN compromise amendment
to the platform report on the Vietnam
war is just such a compromise because
it leaves the road open to both political
compromise or further escalation.
But there is another feature to the de-
mands of the party's presidential nom-
inees that is more threatening than just
the avoidance of the issues - the desire
of the party for a "party man" to lead
them in the next four years. I
This is the issue that is most in Nixon's
favor. He has spent the last four years
tirelessly stumping the country in sup-
port of various Republican candidates
and fund raising drives. He has, as one
NBC commentator put it, "eaten so much
chicken and green peas that it's a little
surprising he doesn't get up, at sunrise
and crow."
This long built-up and well-developed
collection of political debts, this over-
riding devotion to the good of his party,
enhances Nixon's standing in the dele-
gates' eyes far more than any number of
position papers or non-political achieve-
ments that pin-point his ideology and
DEMOCRATIC Party suffers from
a similar syndrome. In a speech before
the New Jersey state convention a few
weeks ago, a strong pro-Humphrey man
argued from the analogy, "Does a foot-
ball team let the fans in the bleachers
choose their captain, or do the players
know best who they want to lead them?"
Humphrey has been loyal to the party,
and in his cheerful ebullience has vocal-
ly seconded all that the President has
said and done.

The traditional methods of political
dealing have their value. But rewarding
numerous small favors and single-minded
party devotion with the biggest political
prize available is a dangerous trade to
And this very trade comes at a time
when the roles of leader of the nation
and leader of the party are particularly
disjoint, if not contradictory. The men
who most appeal to their respective par-
ties are not men who appeal to the coun-
try - to the independents who hold the
balance of votes that will determine the
outcome of the election.
And these men fail miserably in at-
tracting those people who mean the dif-
ference between a society of hope and
one of despair. It is not polemical to ar-
gue in those terms, for emotional and
psychological appeal are a very real part
of politics and national unity, a unity im-
plying trust and devotion of the populace
to their political leaders.
THE QUESTION of unity, for the Repub-
licans at least, most often comes from
the middle and near-right side of the
party, which is the bulk of their strength.
They want the liberal wing to accept
their man, be it Reagan or Nixon, for
they know they cannot win without it.r
But the bulk of the Republican Party
represents the status quo. They do not
want change, but want the "trouble"
stopped. They want America to get back
to "the business of business," which is
what they believe America is all about.
And for the liberals, the question of
unity is an embarrassing one -- it is a
question they would rather not have to
face. Mayor Lindsay, the strangest look-
ing Republican of them all, has been
asked the question most often, and his
answers,hthough politically adroit, only
point up his dilemma:
Support Nixon? Yes. Support Reagan?
"That isn't going to happen so I'm not
worrying about it," he says.
But with Reagan's announcement of
candidacy yesterday, and the possibility
of growing support from the most reac-
tionary elements of the party, the prob-
lem is one Lindsay and his fellow liberal
Republicans must face - not for the good
of the party, but for the good of the
IN THIS YEAR of crisis at home and
abroad, the Democrats and Republicans
must face their responsibility to the na-
tion and select those who would be best
for the country over those who have been
best for the party.

Gov. Spiro T. Agnew

He is engagingly vivacious, and thoroughly imbued with bour-
'geois values. His concerns in general aren't of a philosophical or
intellectual nature; he does not follow art or literature, even as
a dillettante.
But he is self-consciously and contentiously dialectical when
it comes to things political, and often obstreperously articulate
as well. And like so many recent nickel-to-a-quarter conservative
books and pamphlets, he documents his arguments with an abun-
dance of semi-facts.
Hence, one pert Reagan lass: "Before Hubert Humphrey ac-
cepted the vice presidential nomination, he was a member of
Students for a Democratic Society, and ydu know what that is.
That's a socialist group."
"Where did you learn that?"
"I heard him say it on television, and I read it in some books."
"Students for a Democratic Society was founded in 1961, and
most of its members have been students."
"Well, I don't want to argue with you. It was something-for-
Democratic-something, I do remember that,"
"Americans for Democratic Action?"
"You could be right."
GENERALIZATIONS derived from visual impressions and some
conversations like this one can be dangerously misleading. But it is
interesting to note that even when the hunches are wrong, they
are sometimes right. To wit:
One Republican somehow just looked like a Georgian, so we
sat down across a coffee table from him and played a wild card:
"Well, how is the Georgia delegation going to vote?"
"I don't know. I'm from New Jersey."
And of the New Jersey Republicans, who are solidly committed
to their favorite son, liberal (ADA rating: 100 per cent) Sen. Clif-
ford Case, this Union County man who looked like a Georgian
was one of the lone secret supporters of Ronald Reagan.
The most damning evidence does, indeed, come from the dele-
gates themselves. Over and over again, Nixon delegates say, "I
could accept (or, would vote for) Ronald Reagan on a later
ballot; I just think Richard Nixon has a better chance of winning
against Humphrey."
FEW NIXON delegates say the same of Rockefeller. And the
votes which Rockefeller is counting on to stop Nixon on the first
and second ballots are largely votes Reagan has gleaned from the
South. Rockefeller himself has been notably unsuccessful during
the last few days before and the beginning day of the convention.
Thus, should the Rockefeller strategy be partially successful
and a Nixon-less' fight develop on the fourth or fifth ballot, there
is little reason to think the New Yorker can win it. Reagan, under
these circumstances, wouldn't necessarily win it either. Although
many of the Republicans are ideologically attuned to Reagan, few
think he can win in 1968. More likely eventuality: a compromise
candidate who both Rockefeller and the conservatives can live with.
That Republican may be Sen. Charles M. Percy of Illinois, who
is a Rockefeller supporter. Percy's political opinions and voting
record aren't nearly as liberal as they often appear in the glamour-
hungry national press (ADA rating: 38 per cent), and he has
worked hard in Illinois elections for such far-right Republican
candidates as author Phyllis Schlafly.
AND IF ROCKEFELLER does not get the nomination, as now
seems almost certain, it will be for reasons fundamental to the very
nature of the Republican Party. If Rockefeller isn't nominated, it
will -be because he is challenging the party to accept a philosophy
alien to all of its assumptions. And if a Percy-like moderate is
nominated instead, it will outline the leftmost limits to which the
Republican Party is capable of moving in those years when it is
under heaviest prodding from events.
For unlike 1964 this year's convention has a good represen-
tation from all of the segments of the party (only 20 per cent of the
delegates are returns from the Goldwater convention). The views
of the delegates to this convention are likely to compose the work-
ings and principles of the Republican Party for many decades to



Cov. Ronald Reagan Gov. Nelson Rockefeller




A. Jerome Dupont

David M. Copi
Precinct delegates
All of the following Ann Arbor candidates for Democratic precinct delegate have
announced their support for Eugene McCarthy for the Democratic nomination for
the Presidency, and are seeking election in districts where there is a contested race.
Those with black dots in front of their names have indicated they will not support
Hubert Humphrey should he and Richard Nixon be the candidates presented by the
two major parties.

Richard Nixon greets the delegates

Governors Rhodes, Love and Romney


Ward 1, Pet. 1
+ Ronald R Edmonds
Daniel R. Fusfeld
f Leonard Greenbaum
Donald A. Jones
Ward 1, Pet. 4
Eunice L. Burns
* Marcia Federbush
Gerald E. Faye
Glen Waggoner
Ward 1, Pet. 5
Donald R. Peacor
*Pringle F. Smith
Ward II, Pet. 2
0 Mary Coombs
A. Jerome Dupont
* W. Bede Mitchell

Ward I, Pet. 1
Peter R. Darrow
" Marc H. Ross
Ward IV, Pet. 3
Jean M. Casey
Kenneth L. Casey
" Raphael S. Ezekiel
Ward IV, Pet. 4
9 Marcia W. Barrabee
* Richard F. Burlingame
Douglas J. White
Ward IV, Pet. 7
'0 Joseph L. Falkson
Henry Hamburger
Solomon G. Jacobson
Ward V, Pet. 3

IGS'3EC5$ / A'
0T041t j (

ovRRU 1


Fog lI C F3& 66T A 5sROc*


~LiJI...,6iii: .
.tf lti its ,

1- WiLu.61
A~t')lT T

. .





Back to Top

© 2017 Regents of the University of Michigan