In determining upon all his actions, however, the President has to remember that he is dealing with two different minds.  One is the mind of the country, largely intent upon its own personal affairs, and, while not greatly interested in the government, yet desirous of seeing it conducted in an orderly and dignified manner for the advancement of the public welfare.  Those who compose this mind wish to have the country prosperous and are opposed to unjust taxation and public extravagance.  At the same time they have a patriotic pride which moves them with so great a desire to see things well done that they are willing to pay for it.  They gladly contribute their money to place the United States in the lead.  In general, they represent the public opinion of the land.

But they are unorganized, formless, and inarticulate.  Against a compact and well drilled minority they do not appear to be very effective.  They are nevertheless the great power in our government.  I have constantly appealed to them and have seldom failed in enlisting their support.  They are the court of last resort and their decisions are final.

They are, however, the indirect rather than the direct power.  The immediate authority with which the President has to deal is vested in the political mind.  In order to get things done he has to work through that agency.  Some of our Presidents have appeared to lack comprehension of the political mind.  Although I have been associated with it for many years, I always found difficulty in understanding it.  It is a strange mixture of vanity and timidity, of an obsequious attitude at one time and a delusion of grandeur at another time, of the most selfish preferment combined with the most sacrificing patriotism.  The political mind is the product of men in public life who have been twice spoiled.  They have been spoiled with praise and they have been spoiled with abuse.  With them nothing is natural, everything is artificial.  A few rare souls escape these influences and maintain a vision and a judgment that are unimpaired.  They are a great comfort to every President and a great service to their country.  But they are not sufficient in number so that the public business can be transacted like a private business.

It is because in their hours of timidity the Congress becomes subservient to the importunities of organized minorities that the President comes more and more to stand as the champion of the rights of the whole country.

Most Republicans are attributing the defeat of Ohio's collective bargaining reforms this week to a gusher of union spending, but the law might have withstood labor's barrage had Republicans maintained a united front.

From the outset, when a GOP state senator first proposed the reforms last winter, Republicans in Ohio were divided over the law. Gov. John Kasich stayed on the sidelines and didn't meddle in the legislature's business. The reforms barely passed the state senate, 17-16, with six Republicans opposed. Five state house Republicans also voted against the bill. "This is a fundamentally rigged process," said state Sen. Bill Seitz, who demanded that the law be repealed.

By contrast, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker had taken ownership of his collective bargaining reforms, which received nearly universal support from Republican lawmakers. Mr. Walker had also proposed less sweeping reforms, which exempted public safety employees, in part to ensure party unity.

Soon after the law passed, Ohio unions initiated a referendum campaign. Gov. Kasich tried to head off the referendum in August by telling the unions that he was willing to strike a compromise on the reforms, ostensibly in return for their dropping the referendum. The unions balked and used the governor's retreat to bolster their case. "We're glad that Gov. John Kasich and the other politicians who passed SB 5 are finally admitting this is a flawed bill," said the referendum's spokesperson Melissa Fazekas. Meanwhile, many Ohio state lawmakers continued to grumble that the governor had gone too far. The state's popular conservative talk-radio host, Bill Cunningham, also scored the governor for not negotiating with the unions prior to signing the law and urged listeners to overturn the law.

One lesson from the Ohio rout is that Republican governors should take ownership of reforms rather than allow state lawmakers to take charge. Another is to prepare and rally the troops before waging a major offensive. Ohio Republican lawmakers were ill-equipped to counter labor's attacks. Making matters worse, they were betrayed by some in their own ranks. The governor took on a war he wasn't prepared to fight and paid the price. Unfortunately, the biggest casualty may be taxpayers who would have benefited from the reforms.