increased support from the white working class. Taft's opponent also did little to hinder his efforts, as Ferguson and his labor backers played their roles assigned by the Taft campaign-Ferguson as a puppet of labor and the unions themselves as outside agitators-with great aplomb. From the outset, virtually every prominent labor leader came out against Taft. On January 21, 1950, the AFL began its anti-Taft drive at the dedication of its new state headquarters in Columbus. AFL President William Green and Minnesota Senator Hubert H. Humphrey attended the ceremony and both spoke out against Taft and the Ohio GOP. Green proclaimed that Taft was the "champion of the anti-labor cause" and that it was labor's "solemn duty to make him the former champion this November." CIO leaders such as Jacob Potofsky and Philip Murray also attacked Taft at the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America convention in May and Green denounced the Senator again in July and August.56 The labor press also vigorously employed anti-Taft rhetoric. The CIO News, the national press organ of the organization, ran unflattering news stories on the Senator in nearly every issue leading up to the campaign. On June 3, the paper ran an election report on the Buckeye state which was essentially a campaign speech written by Kroll. He claimed, "Behind the symbol of State Auditor Ferguson are other realities- the realities of a better and brighter world for the people of Ohio and of our whole country." The August 28 edition ran five articles on the campaign, including a favorable review of an anti-Taft comic book and an assessment of Taft's foreign policy stance-which was determined to be favorable to Korean aggression. Beyond these polemical flourishes, the CIO mounted serious grassroots efforts to mobilize its membership to support Ferguson. The CIO News reported that both the 56 Cincinnati Enquirer, 22 January and 30 January, 1950; New York Times, 2 February, 16 May, 17 May, 19 July, and 10 August, 1950. 57 CIO News, 3 July, 28 August, 4 September, 1950.