Historian Allan Nevins, in his foreword to Walters' biography of Foraker, suggested that Foraker did not attain the presidency, as he had hoped, because of the ambitions of other Ohio politicians. While Foraker might have secured the nomination in 1888 as a compromise candidate, had not his pledges to Sherman prevented it, having "stood aside for an older man[,] year after year he was compelled to stand aside for younger leaders. First McKinley, with Hanna at his side, was given precedence; then Taft, whom Foraker had given a start in public life, scaled the peak. Foraker, for all his administrative capacity, his wide popular appeal, and his unflinching courage, had the tragic lot of seeing a succession of associates go above him." Even Foraker's final defeat, in 1914, proved to be part of the political rise of another president from Ohio, Harding. Nevins noted the aggressive nature of Foraker's political style, and commented, "How much of his failure to reach high office was attributable to ill fortune and how much to some of his traits, readers … may judge for themselves." Cincinnati editor Murat Halstead, a contemporary, attributed the fact that Foraker did not get nominated in 1888 to the surplus of ambitious Ohio men at the convention: in addition to Sherman, Foraker, and McKinley, even Harrison had been born in Ohio.