Professor William A. Galston, who is a scholar with the Brookings Institution, recently wrote that the 1948 presidential election is an instance at which minor parties injured the Democratic Party presidential campaign. President Harry Truman was running for re-election as the Democratic nominee, and former Vice-President Henry Wallace was the Progressive Party presidential nominee. Galston says the Wallace campaign hurt Truman, although Truman still won the election.
Pollster Samuel Lubell, who later became a political scientist, intensely studied the 1948 election, and determined that the presence of Henry Wallace in the race not only helped Truman, but that Truman would have lost without Wallace’s campaign.
Professor Galston kindly spoke with me after his piece was published, and he said he was not familar with the Lubell book “The Future of American Politics” that contained the research (published 1950), but that he certainly is aware of Samuel Lubell and that he would obtain the book and read it with interest, although he said he is very skeptical.
Last month, two other commentators wrote about the 1948 election and also did not seem familiar with the Lubell research. See this blog post from last month.
The recent Bookings Institution analysis can’t be linked, but anyone can find it by googling “William Galston” with “Cornel West”.
LESS LIARS ABOUT 1948 THAN NOW ???
The only clear result of the Henry Wallace campaign in 1948 would seem to be the victory of Thomas Dewey in New York. In 1932, 1936, 1940 and 1944, New York had given its electoral votes to FDR and the Democrats. In 1940, the American Labor Party provided the margin of victory for FDR in New York. In 1944 the American Labor and Liberal Parties provided votes needed to give FDR a victory in New York. In 1948, Dewey beat Truman in New York by 61,000 votes, while Henry Wallace received almost 510,000 votes on the American Labor ticket. This gave New York’s electoral votes to Dewey, but he still lost.