pollster noted that the cases of government fraud had been so widespread that they

had become part of America's "daily conversation."21 Since most of the corruption

had stemmed from the federal bureaucracy, an entity which Taft strongly opposed and

criticized on numerous occasions, he appeared to gain from the Democratic troubles if

nominated. Eisenhower, likewise, had no tangible connection with any of the

institutions charged with fraud and was unharmed by the corruption issue. Initially,

Eisenhower's identification as a political outsider helped him edge Taft on the

corruption issue. A Gallup poll released in mid-February found that forty-five percent

of those surveyed believed Eisenhower was the man to restore law and order to the

federal government versus thirty-one who favored Taft. Among registered

Republicans, Taft held the edge forty-nine to thirty-six percent.22 A poll released a

week later found that fifty-five percent of respondents believed Truman was incapable

of ending corruption within the Democratic administration, giving the GOP, no matter

which candidate took the nomination, the advantage over its opponents.23

 Public opinion also coincided with Taft's positions on a number of minor

issues. On fiscal policy, for example, a February 19 Gallup poll found that forty-four

percent of respondents thought that Taft would do a better job at reducing government

spending as opposed to thirty-six who thought Eisenhower would be more likely to

trim the budget. Among those identifying themselves as Republicans, the numbers

were fifty-nine for Taft to twenty-seven for Eisenhower.24 Sixty percent of

independent voters believed that Republican anti-spending arguments were



21 Harris, Is there a Republican Majority?, 33.

22 Washington Post, 21 February 1952.

23 bid, 1 March 1952.

24 bid, 20 February 1952.