Some Facts of History

History, as everyone knows, does not repeat itself. Yet the circumstances of history can, and often do, run in parallels. This may lead the careless, casual or wishful observer, spotting similar sets of circumstances, to jump to wrong conclusions.

The similarities between the 1952 and 1964 contests for the Republican presidential nomination seem striking in many ways. Will history repeat itself? Can William Scranton do this year what Dwight Eisenhower did in '52? The answer, as of last week, was: almost certainly not.

The Similarities. Remember 1952? There was Bob Taft, Mr. Republican, idol of his party's conservative wing, career politician, leading member of the U.S. Senate, a Midwesterner through and through, an outspoken individualist, who had worked long and hard for the nomination, thought he had it won, and was convinced that he deserved it by reason of service to his party and championship of his cause.

And there was Dwight Eisenhower, a late and reluctant entry, the choice of the G.O.P.'s Northeastern kingmakers, of Tom Dewey and Herb Brownell and Cabot Lodge, the man who could take over the presidency of the U.S. for the Republicans, while, as the charge went, "Taft can't win."

Ike, of course, was an international hero, perhaps the most popular man of his day. But Taft had a head start, and he seemed to have the delegates, Eisenhower's backers desperately needed a new and spectacular issue--and they found it in the Taft backers' so-called "steal" of the Texas delegation. The strategy was successful, but it engendered a bitterness rare in the history of any political party. Thus the most memorable sight and sound of the '52 convention was Illinois' Senator Everett Dirksen, who, in pleading Taft's cause, pointed his finger at Tom Dewey and cried, in an anguish of anger and disappointment: "We followed you before, and you took us down the path to defeat."

The Differences. In many ways, the candidacies of Bill Scranton and Barry Goldwater are similar to those of Ike and Taft. But there are also decisive differences. It goes without saying that Goldwater is by no means a Taft --but then, neither has Scranton anything like the stature of an Eisenhower. In 1952, Republicans scented certain victory, if only they would pick the right candidate. In 1964, many Republicans despair of victory, no matter who the candidate.

As he began his belated campaign, it was Scranton's major mission to convince such pessimistic Republicans that they are wrong--that he, Bill Scranton, could defeat Lyndon Johnson in November. Scranton did his best. His effort has been energetic and articulate. He dramatically demonstrated his own conviction that the 1964 G.O.P. nomination is worth fighting for, and worth fighting for on behalf of progressive Republicanism. He will continue doing his best until the last ballot is counted in San Francisco. But in the short time he chose to fight, his best has not been good enough.

The Disappointments. The facts were plain and simple. Goldwater got off to a long head start, showing poorly in the primaries but piling up delegate votes against little or no opposition in state conventions. At no time in 1952 did Taft have anything approaching Goldwater's delegate strength.

Scranton's entry made little, if any, dent in that Goldwater strength--a fact that politicians across the land were quick to realize. And since it is part of the profession of politics to stay off the losing side, Scranton has suffered one disappointment after another.

In highly urbanized New Jersey, for example, Scranton's brand of Republicanism is popular. Senator Clifford Case is a dedicated Scranton supporter, and many other delegates are known to favor the Pennsylvanian. Yet last week, after Goldwater appeared and spoke before the delegation, it voted to go to San Francisco uncommitted, thereby denying Scranton a breakthrough just when he needed one. In Delaware, Goldwater picked up a handful of delegates without lifting a finger; Senator John Williams, who had been set up as a favorite son in a holding action against Goldwater, announced for Barry and promised to release the delegation. In Michigan, Governor George Romney, who has been vociferous in his anti-Goldwater sentiments, warmly welcomed Barry into his state, posed proudly with him, insisted that he couldn't pick a candidate until he saw what the G.O.P. platform had to say. What overriding problem did Romney want the Platform Committee to tackle first? Said Romney: "The breakup of family life, leading to increased juvenile delinquency and other social evils."

The biggest blow to Scranton's candidacy came in Illinois. There, old Ev Dirksen proved the truth of Santayana's maxim: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Dirksen may not read much Santayana, but he remembers his past political history, and he has no intention of repeating it. This time he fully intends to be on what he feels is the winning side.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.