 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 County results Municipality resultsWalsh: 40–50% 50–60% 60–70% 70–80% Weeks: 30–40% 40–50% 50–60% 60–70% 70–80% 80–90% >90% Tie: 40–50% | |||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
TheUnited States Senate election of 1918 in Massachusetts was held on November 5. IncumbentRepublican SenatorJohn W. Weeks ran for a second term in office but was defeated byDemocratic former GovernorDavid I. Walsh.
Primaries were held September 24. Both Walsh and Weeks were unopposed after their respective opponents, former Boston mayorJohn F. Fitzgerald and GovernorSamuel W. McCall, withdrew from the race.
Walsh became the first U.S. Senator from Massachusetts elected to a full term as a member of the modernDemocratic Party. (A previous Democratic U.S. Senator,Robert Rantoul Jr., served only one month in 1851 after winning a special election.) This was the only senate seat that Democrats flipped during this cycle, and it was the first time that this seat had been won by a non-Republican since1855.
The election was held mid-way through PresidentWoodrow Wilson's second term in office. Following the sinking of the passenger shipLusitania and two years of debate, the United Statesentered World War I with a declaration of war on Germany on April 6, 1917, and spent much of 1917 and 1918 building up a sufficient fighting force to contribute to theAllied effort in Europe.
SenatorJohn Wingate Weeks had been a leading conservative critic of the Wilson administration and a candidate for president in 1916, though his appeal was limited toNew England.[1] He failed to win the Republican nomination when thenational convention settled onCharles Evans Hughes, who lost narrowly to Wilson. Weeks kept up his criticism of Wilson as American war involvement grew, calling Secretary of WarNewton Baker a "pacifist by nature" and publicly calling the president's management of materiel and domestic coal into question.[2]
Early in the campaign,[when?]progressives hoped that GovernorSamuel W. McCall would seek a rematch of the 1913 race, when he lost a protracted battle for the Republican nomination to Weeks on the thirty-first ballot.[3] That election, which was decided by a caucus of the Republican state legislators, was held before the adoption of theSeventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and thedirect primary system in Massachusetts, both progressive reforms which ostensibly gave McCall a comparative advantage. Weeks's anemic showing in the presidential campaign also hinted that he could be vulnerable.[1]
McCall formally announced his intent to seek the Senate seat in August, criticizing Weeks as one of a class of Senators who represented capital over the interests of the people. His campaign also accused Weeks of vote buying for hosting dinners for various ethnic societies. McCall's campaign also argued that among the ethnic minorities, the Polish community of Massachusetts would support McCall.[a][4]
The governor's campaign was aggressive but surprisingly brief; he withdrew by the end of the month, shocking observers.[5] His decision was made upon determination that the conservativeW. Murray Crane wing of the party remained loyal to Weeks and would ensure his re-nomination.[1]
Senator Weeks was unopposed for re-nomination.
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | John W. Weeks (incumbent) | 77,659 | 99.90% | |
| Write-in | All others | 79 | 0.10% | |
| Total votes | 77,738 | 100.00% | ||
Walsh was unopposed for the Democratic nomination.
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | David I. Walsh | 46,356 | 99.98% | |
| Write-in | All others | 10 | 0.02% | |
| Total votes | 46,366 | 100.00% | ||
Walsh formally accepted the Democratic nomination at the state convention in Worcester on October 23. He pledged to "endeavor with all the ability and strength which I possess to assist... President Wilson in the... solution of those great problems... when peace shall come." He promised "unwavering support to President Wilson and his world work" and vowed to leave "nothing undone to help lighten the burdens ... of him whom Providence has chosen to direct us in these momentous times."[9]
Days later, Weeks responded to the implicit criticism that he had obstructed the war effort: "I do not know of a man in the Senate who wants to do anything that might in any way interfere with the war's progress, but while conceding thatgovernment by dictation is necessary, I am not ready to abnegate my right to form my own judgments."[10]
Despite abandoning his challenge, Governor McCall refused to campaign for Weeks in the general election; in addition to dividing the Republican vote, McCall thereby deprived Weeks, considered a drab speaker, of his widely regarded oratory talent.[1]
| Party | Candidate | Votes | % | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | David I. Walsh | 207,478 | 49.66% | |
| Republican | John W. Weeks (incumbent) | 188,287 | 45.06% | |
| Independent | Thomas W. Lawson | 21,985 | 5.26% | |
| Write-in | All others | 92 | 0.02% | |
| Total votes | 417,842 | 100.00% | ||
Walsh defeated Weeks by nearly 20,000 votes, making him the only candidate to be elected on the Democratic Party ticket in the state.[1]
Walsh's victory was credited to his progressive record as governor, his ability as an orator, and his Catholicism, as well as the personal support of President Wilson in contrast to Weeks's strident opposition. Walsh was the lone gain for the Democratic Party in the1918 Senate elections.[12] Observers also credited the result to the active campaign against Weeks by advocates of afederal amendment to guarantee women's suffrage.[13]
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
