How accurate is it to say that the SPD lost the 1949 election due to the leadership of Kurt Schumacher?

• Decide a stance and state this explicitly in the first sentence, eg. Schumacher was responsible to a large extent. Often, it is easier to agree with the statement; I would be inclined to do so here.• There should be an introduction, two paragraphs on Schumacher's leadership (as the focus of the Q), and two or three other paragraphs on alternative explanations, such as: Adenauer's strength as a leader, US support for the CDU, general political background of West Germany at the time. • For each paragraph, COMPARE TO OTHER FACTORS with a linking sentence to evaluate RELATIVE SIGNIFICANCE, of why a factor was more/less important than others.• Paragraphs on Schumacher: - For: seen as weak after time in Dachau and lost arm and leg, criticised Catholics (45% pop.), socialist policies too extreme for middle classes. • Adenauer's leadership: no as SPD demonstrated success under better leadership (Ebert, Brandt), focused on anti-Communist policies, 'Christian socailism'. Only 1.9% lead, suggesting Schumacher could have reformed and won. SPD also had advantge of being far older political party and better established.• US support: no as elections were free, reason US endorsed CDU was due to Schumacher's lack of staunch anti-communist and desire for reunification.• Political climate: closely associated with hated Communists in East, SPD lost many former political strongholds in East. Narrow margin: Schumacher could have adapted to be more conservative and appeal to conservative regions.