The following article was written for the Crimson by T. N. Carver, David A. Wells Professor of Political Economy in the University

My reasons for voting for Mr. Hoover are as follows:

First: He represents, politically as well as personally, the best element of his party while Governor Smith represents, politically at least, the worst element of his party, namely Tammany.

Second: Mr. Hoover has shown remarkable capacity, in every kind of situation, to get every one to work enthusiastically with him, and he has done it without authority, without a "big stick", with nothing but the soundness of his ideas and the persuasiveness of his quiet efficiency.

Third: He is conducting his campaign on a high plane of constructive argument. He does not stoop to raucous denunciation, he does not rant. He speaks as a serious student of national problems, recognizing their difficulties, and dealing with them as an engineer and economist. He does not make promises which he knows that he can not fulfill leaving himself loopholes of escape from their literal fulfillment. He has not tried to carry water on both shoulders by appealing both to the wets and the drys, both to the free traders and the protectionists, both to big business and its enemies. He has not, as has Governor Smith, suggested a change from the census of 1890 as the basis for immigration quotas and then changed his tune when he found that it was not popular.

Fourth: I think that statesmanlike qualities fit one better for the presidency than such vaudeville attractions as a brown derby and the Sidewalks of New York.