National Affairs: Primary Problems

(2 of 3)

Harriman, on the other hand, appears to have no opportunities whatever of winning primaries. His strategy is to duck all primaries by refusing to declare himself formally as a candidate for President. Said Harriman in Des Moines recently: "I am not going into any primary elections. I would ask that my name be withdrawn if it is proposed." Harriman's hopes are based on the possibility that Kefauver can knock off Stevenson by defeating him in some key primaries. The Harriman camp assumes that the party professionals would deny Kefauver the nomination no matter how many primaries he might win. Then Averell Harriman, his record unsullied by primary defeats, could come forth with his big bloc of New York votes, and offer himself to the convention.

Some Easy, Some Hard. Stevenson does not have the clear-cut choices of Harri man and Kefauver. He must weigh the risks of entering specific primaries against the loss of face he may suffer by not entering them. In some of the 19 states that will hold primaries next year, his decision is relatively simple: he would, for example, be foolhardy to enter Ohio's primary if popular Governor Frank Lausche runs as a favorite son; on the other hand, he would be foolish not to enter the primary in his home state, Illinois, where his victory is a foregone conclusion.

But in other states the problem of the primaries calls for shrewd appraisal. Among these:

New Hampshire, to be held March 13, is the first of the state primaries and therefore a focal point for national interest. Few of Stevenson's followers want any part of the New Hampshire primary; they can recall all too clearly the tall man who slogged through the snow in 1952, pumped hands on all sides and drawled, "I'm Estes Kefauver." By his 1952 primary win in New Hampshire, Kefauver was able to place his backers at the head of the state organization. He has done his best to maintain his New Hampshire strength, not failing to keep up a steady flow of postcards from as far away as Pakistan. Nevertheless, there are signs that Kefauver's New Hampshire support is wavering and that a Stevenson organization is in the making.

Minnesota, March 20, holds high opportunity for Stevenson. His statements in favor of rigid 90% farm supports assured him of support from the potent organization of Senator Hubert Humphrey, as evidenced by the endorsement of Stevenson this week by Minnesota's Democratic Farmer-Labor Party (see above). Minnesota's Democratic leaders feel certain that they can hand Stevenson a big enough win to wipe out the effects of a possible setback in New Hampshire. Kefauver has little strength in Minnesota; Harriman has none.