The Outline of Ohio Politics
| Published date | 01 September 1960 |
| DOI | 10.1177/106591296001300311 |
| Date | 01 September 1960 |
| Author | Thomas A. Flinn |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
702
THE
OUTLINE
OF
OHIO
POLITICS
THOMAS A. FLINN
Oberlin
College
BSERVATION
OF
OHIO
POLITICS
may
produce
some
surprises.
~
Its
best-known
figures
have
been
Republican,
but
the
state
is
not
wedded
to
the
Republican
party.
Rural
Ohio
is
thought
to
be
solidly
Republican
in
what
is
assumed
to
be
typical
Midwestern
style,
but
not
all
of
rural
Ohio
is
Republican.
The
cities
of
the
state
are
now
Democratic
-
but
not
all
of
them.
The
lower
house
of
the
state
legislature
is
poorly
apportioned
relative
to
popula-
tion,
but
the
consequence
is
not
an
almost
permanent
majority
for
one
party
or
the
other
as
it
is
in
some
other
states.
Reports
from
the
state
legislature
make
frequent
reference
to
the
party
caucuses
which
are
evidently
potent
mechanisms,
although
these
same
reports
contain
general
references
to
urban-rural
antagon-
isms.
All
this
is
interesting
enough
to
suggest
a
closer
look.
The
immediate
purpose
of
this
study
is
to
describe
the
principal
features
of
Ohio
politics
and
the
forces
which
have
shaped
them,
in
order
that
a
clearer
view
of
Ohio
politics
may
be
obtained;
but
it is
anticipated
also
that
the
informa-
tion
and
analysis
presented
here
will
be
of
use
in
the
making
of
future
com-
parative
studies.
In
addition,
a
few
generalizations
may
be
drawn
which
reach
beyond
Ohio
politics.
:..
STATE-WIDE
COMPETITION
Ohio
is
now
and
has
long
been
a
competitive
two-party
state
in
which
the
Republicans
enjoy
the
advantage.
From
the
close
of
the
Civil
War
to
the
elec-
tion
of
1896
the
Republicans
carried
the
state
in
every
presidential
contest
(seven),
but
the
outcome
of these
elections
in
Ohio
was
invariably
close.
In
the
same
period
Ohio
elected
four
Democratic
and
twelve
Republican
governors;
many
of
these
elections
were
incredibly
even
contests.
In
1875,
the
year
before
he
was
elected
president,
Rutherford
B.
Hayes
beat
Democrat
Wil-
liam
Allen
by
about
5,000
votes
in
a
contest
which
drew
about
600,000
voters.
In
1891
McKinley,
a
popular
figure,
won
with
only
52
per
cent
of
the
two-party
vote.
From
1895
through
1958
the
Republicans
carried
Ohio
in
ten
presidential
elections,
and
the
Democrats
carried
it
in
six
elections.
But
in
this
same
period
the
Republicans
won
only
twelve
gubernatorial
contests
to
nineteen
for
their
opponents.
The
state
Senate
had
a
Republican
majority
twenty-one
times,
a
Democratic
majority
eight
times,
and
was
evenly
divided
twice.
The
House
was
somewhat
more
Republican
than
the
Senate.
It
is
interesting
to
note
that
the
election
of
1896
was
apparently
not
a
&dquo;critical&dquo;
election
in
Ohio
as
it
evidently
was
in
some
other
states.
The
close
competition
of
the
post-Civil
War
period
survived,
and
continued
on
into
the
twentieth
century.
It
is
also
interest-
ing
to
note
that
since
1895
Democratic
candidates
for
governor
have been
more
fortunate
in
Ohio
than
the
party’s
candidates
for
president
and
for
the
state
legislature.
These
features
of
Ohio
politics,
however,
are
outside
the
scope
of
the
present
study.
703
PARTY
FOLLOWINGS
Democratic
candidates
for
governor,
now
usually
get
a
clear
majority
of
the
votes
cast
in
the
state’s
metropolitan
counties’
while
the
situation
is
reversed
in
the
rest
of
the
state.
In
metropolitan
Ohio
the
Democratic
gubernatorial
vote
(expressed
as
a
percentage
of
the
two-party
vote)
has
followed
an
upward
trend
from
1919
to
the
present.~
3
It
did
not
reach
the
summit
in
the
thirties
with
the
triumphant
New
Deal.
The
peaks
are
higher
in
the
forties
than
in
the
preced-
ing
decade
and
higher
again
in
the
fifties.
Offsetting
the
trend
favorable
to
the
Democrats
has
been
a
downward
trend
in
the
Democratic
percentage
of
the
non-
metropolitan
vote.4
4
These
contrary
movements
intersect
in
about
1934,
which
acts
apparently
as
a
watershed
in
the
development
of
Ohio
politics.
In
the
election
of
that
year
the
Democratic
share
of
the
metropolitan
vote
increased
slightly
while
its
share
of
the
rest
of
the
vote
dropped
significantly.
The
shift
was
large
enough
to
raise
the
Democratic
percentage
of
the
metropolitan
vote
above
that
of
the
non-
metropolitan
vote.
The
relationship
has
not
been
reversed
since
1934,
and
since
1941
the
gap
between
the
two
has
varied
between
9
and
19
per
cent.
Analysis
of
the
membership
of
the
state
House
re-enforces
the
impression
given
by
gubernatorial
election
returns.
Between
1920
and
1934
the
number
of
Democrats
from
non-metropolitan
counties
exceeded
the
number
from
urban
counties
in
every
session.
In
1934
the
number
of
the
former
was
reduced
and
the
number
of
the
latter
increased.
From
that
time
to
the
present
the
majority
of
the
Democratic
delegation
in
the
House
has
been
metropolitan
in
origin.
The
number
of
Democrats
elected
to
represent
other
areas
has
fluctuated,
but
the
peaks
are
lower
than
those
which
appeared
before
1934.
In the
period
being
considered,
1919-1959,
the
size
of
the
metropolitan
vote
has
steadily
increased.
In
1920
the
percentage
was
57.
In
1940
it
was
62,
and
in
1958
it
was
68.
Assuming
a
continuation
of
this
trend
and
a
continuation
of
voting
trends,
the
Democrats
in
Ohio
can
look
forward
to
a
happy
future.
How-
ever,
a
projection
is
not
a
prediction.
Despite
urban
Democratic
majorities
and
rural
Republican
majorities
nei-
ther
party
has
surrendered
or
can
surrender
to
the
other
complete
control
of
the
urban
or
rural
vote.
It
is
evident
from
the
inspection
of
Table
I
that
the
metropolitan
vote
is
not
yet
large
enough
or
the
Democratic
share
of
it
large
enough
to
permit
the
party
to
win
without
running
close
to
the
Republicans
in
1
Gubernatorial
election
returns
are
used
in
nearly
all
the
analysis
which
follows.
This
tends
to
exaggerate
the
strength
of
the
Democrats;
but
the
aim
is
not
to
measure
the
strength
of
the
two
parties
but
to
analyze
trends
and
party
followings.
2
For
the
period
1930
to
the
present
counties
are
classified
in
this
study
as
metropolitan
if
they
include
a
city
of
50,000
or
more
population
or
if
they
are
adjacent
to
such
a
county
and
have
10,000
or
more
persons
in
non-agricultural
employment.
This
corresponds
closely
to
the
Census
Bureau
definition.
For
the
period
before
1930
counties
are
here
counted
as
metropolitan
if
they
had
a
city
of
50,000
or
more
population.
All
counties
not
counted
as
metropolitan
are
counted
as
non-metropolitan.
From
time
to
time
for
convenience
and
variation
in
presentation
the
term
urban
is
substituted
for
the
term
metropolitan
and
the
term
rural for
non-metropolitan,
but
this
represents
no
change
in
classification.
3
Yc=46.67
+
.2563X
4
Yc=57.08 -.2639X
To continue reading
Request your trial