Larry Sabato has another great post, this one in part about the Wisconsin recall election. I love Sabato's stuff, it's very informative and insightful while quite nonpartisan at the same time. Not an easy trick in this day and age. (You'll have to scroll down at Sabato's blog to see the posts mentioned here)
I've been noting with dismay the amount of conspiracy theorizing and delusional ranting by some on the left who question the results of the Wisconsin recall election--in part because early exit polls showed a 50-50 split, rather than the healthy margin of victory that Walker ended up with. I've remarked to others that some Dems sound just like Republicans--after they lose--with their cries of voter fraud. But Sabato has a very reasonable explanation:
"The Wisconsin recall is yet another example of the limitations of exit poll results, which are not always accurate, at least in their top-line, horse race numbers. The first waves in the Wisconsin exit poll showed a 50-50 race, so the early reporting and projections on TV bore little relation to the reality of the tabulated vote. Could we all make a note to discount the top-line results of the November 6 exit poll -- and the news media's breathless projections derived from it? They were wrong on election night 1992, forecasting a big Clinton victory when it turned out to be a quite modest five percentage point (43%) victory over President George H.W. Bush. Then there was that not-so-minor snafu back in 2000 with the exit poll in Florida. And exit polling in 2004 created the Kerry administration for several hours; the unadjusted results showed Kerry winning handily in almost all the swing states, to the chagrin of President George W. Bush's campaign staffers.
"The truth is, Republicans disproportionately distrust the media and pollsters, and many won't be interviewed coming out of the ballot stations. Apparently, there's no good way to correct for this."
For the presidential race, Sabato does some neat number-crunching on independent voters and notes that many are women who are quite unhappy with Obama--but who say they are unlikely to vote. On the other hand, there are significantly large numbers of unregistered voters out there--who tend to be young and nonwhite--who would vote strongly for Obama if his team could get them registered and to the polls.
OK candidates, I think you know what you have to do.
Thursday, June 07, 2012
Wednesday, June 06, 2012
Some Post-Recall Thoughts
The Wisconsin recall election is over; Scott Walker won.
That's a bitter pill to swallow for some, but it's the reality, and there's plenty to be discussed in the aftermath. Here are a few thoughts:
Money Talks
Some will write off the Walker win to his 8-1 advantage in fundraising. And having the money to saturate the state with his message certainly was a big help to Walker. We continue to see the threat that the Citizens United ruling has posed to our democracy. Even some on the right have raised concerns about a system that simply allows the most wealthy to have the loudest voice. Whether we can move the country toward meaningful campaign finance reform is a tough question. Unfortunately, the media is part of the problem. Elections are a cash cow for broadcast media in particular, and with print media withering on the vine, media companies are likely to welcome revenue from any source they can find. It's hard to imagine that will not influence coverage of this issue.
But I wonder if it's a little too easy to write this victory off to Walker's advantage in advertising. It's not like the issues weren't discussed at length, over time, in a variety of mediums. This wasn't really a case of voters being blinded by personality or a slick message. Living in Minnesota, I wasn't subjected to the advertising barrage, but I wonder if this was really the deciding factor.
The Generation Gap
I continue to think the biggest, and most underappreciated, political divide in the country is that between people under 40 and those over. Walker's strategy clearly included working up the resentments of older voters who no longer had school-age kids. A lot easier to put down educators when you're not dealing with them on a regular basis, and a lot easier to call for tuition hikes when you're not the one saving up college costs. Another possible big blunder on the Dems' side was the decision to hold this election in the summer, while college students were not in school and more difficult to organize.
Are Unions the Problem?
There are a lot of reasons to dislike Scott Walker's policies and approach to governance, but at essence this was perceived as a fight between unions and the governor. And most people aren't in unions. Should we say, "We just have to educate people about the positive contributions unions make" ?? Didn't we try doing that for the last six months? This is a problem that I have no answer for at the moment. Most people aren't in unions, and it's easy for politicians like Walker to use that as a wedge issue, suggesting that those in unions have it better than the rest of us--so why be sympathetic to them? The simple fact is, those in unions do, in some ways, have it better than some of us. Of course, the obvious question is why should we be in a race to the bottom in terms of wages and benefits? But that, apparently, is not how people are thinking of the issue.
It's a tough time for unions. One thing I feel pretty sure of: the Obama administration is not counting on the "ground game" and Democratic support that unions have traditionally been credited for. Whatever they can deliver will be appreciated, I'm sure, but the Obama Admin seems much more focused on its own efforts such as OFA.
Which brings us to another point.
Do Not Underestimate the Power of theDark Side Republican Ground Game
The GOP got people to turn out to the polls in huge numbers. Huge. Democrats like to think they have the superior ground game but there's really little evidence of that in recent elections. All the hard work that campaigns put into getting people to the polls is important, but you have to win the messaging side as well. This was an election where the failure was with the message, and possibly the candidate, not the turn-out-the-vote effort.
OK, So Why Did the Democrats' Message Fail?
The Dem message was: "Walker is a big ole Meanie!" The Walker message was: "I'm only a big ole meanie because I have to be to fix our messed up government!"
Walker has done a masterful job of convincing people we need to take some strong medicine to fix the problems we face. Where he is kind of evil is the way he targets unions, teachers, college students, etc., as the people who have to take the medicine. But it's an effective message and obviously people responded to it. We're in for a very scary election if Mitt Romney is anywhere near as effective as portraying himself as a "reformer" who makes tough decisions.
And I do think the Dems had a little bit of an uphill climb because some voters simply did not think a recall was appropriate. Allegations and likely future indictments aside, Walker did not break any laws, was not obviously corrupt, and wasn't involved in a personal scandal. He was a duly elected official pursuing his policies, and he had the support in the Legislature to pass most of his agenda. I'm agnostic on whether his opponents were "right" to recall him. But obviously some voters had a problem with it on principle.
What Does this Mean for the Fall?
Looking at this from a national perspective, this recall election hurts Obama, but not as much as if he had been actually supportive of Barrett or made any effort to help him. I don't know why exactly Obama made the calculation, but obviously from the beginning he saw little or no upside to becoming involved in this dispute. That is no doubt disappointing to many, but as events have turned out, it might have been the right call. If he had gotten invested and the result had been the same, every.single.pundit.on.TV would be talking about what a devastating loss this was for Obama. That's not the headline today.
I think there's no doubt Romney will try to take a page from Walker's playbook and portray himself as the guy who will make tough decisions in order to fix big problems. It's a little harder sell, considering who Romney is and what his record as governor was, but it blunts the criticisms about his history with Baine--sure, people got hurt but on a larger scale he did more good than harm, right?
Obama needs to get out in front of this and co-opt that message. He can point to the auto industry bailout, the Stimulus Act, even the ACA, as tough decisions that pissed some people off but were good for the country in the long run.
Second-guessing an effort like this is easy. Armchair pundits such as yours truly can pick apart any effort with the benefit of hindsight. What shouldn't be forgotten is the hard work people put into this and the difficult realities that we're left with. Hopefully those who supported the recall effort will get over their dissappointment and keep working for the things they believe in. If the fight was worth fighting yesterday, it's just as worthwhile today.
That's a bitter pill to swallow for some, but it's the reality, and there's plenty to be discussed in the aftermath. Here are a few thoughts:
Money Talks
Some will write off the Walker win to his 8-1 advantage in fundraising. And having the money to saturate the state with his message certainly was a big help to Walker. We continue to see the threat that the Citizens United ruling has posed to our democracy. Even some on the right have raised concerns about a system that simply allows the most wealthy to have the loudest voice. Whether we can move the country toward meaningful campaign finance reform is a tough question. Unfortunately, the media is part of the problem. Elections are a cash cow for broadcast media in particular, and with print media withering on the vine, media companies are likely to welcome revenue from any source they can find. It's hard to imagine that will not influence coverage of this issue.
But I wonder if it's a little too easy to write this victory off to Walker's advantage in advertising. It's not like the issues weren't discussed at length, over time, in a variety of mediums. This wasn't really a case of voters being blinded by personality or a slick message. Living in Minnesota, I wasn't subjected to the advertising barrage, but I wonder if this was really the deciding factor.
The Generation Gap
I continue to think the biggest, and most underappreciated, political divide in the country is that between people under 40 and those over. Walker's strategy clearly included working up the resentments of older voters who no longer had school-age kids. A lot easier to put down educators when you're not dealing with them on a regular basis, and a lot easier to call for tuition hikes when you're not the one saving up college costs. Another possible big blunder on the Dems' side was the decision to hold this election in the summer, while college students were not in school and more difficult to organize.
Are Unions the Problem?
There are a lot of reasons to dislike Scott Walker's policies and approach to governance, but at essence this was perceived as a fight between unions and the governor. And most people aren't in unions. Should we say, "We just have to educate people about the positive contributions unions make" ?? Didn't we try doing that for the last six months? This is a problem that I have no answer for at the moment. Most people aren't in unions, and it's easy for politicians like Walker to use that as a wedge issue, suggesting that those in unions have it better than the rest of us--so why be sympathetic to them? The simple fact is, those in unions do, in some ways, have it better than some of us. Of course, the obvious question is why should we be in a race to the bottom in terms of wages and benefits? But that, apparently, is not how people are thinking of the issue.
It's a tough time for unions. One thing I feel pretty sure of: the Obama administration is not counting on the "ground game" and Democratic support that unions have traditionally been credited for. Whatever they can deliver will be appreciated, I'm sure, but the Obama Admin seems much more focused on its own efforts such as OFA.
Which brings us to another point.
Do Not Underestimate the Power of the
The GOP got people to turn out to the polls in huge numbers. Huge. Democrats like to think they have the superior ground game but there's really little evidence of that in recent elections. All the hard work that campaigns put into getting people to the polls is important, but you have to win the messaging side as well. This was an election where the failure was with the message, and possibly the candidate, not the turn-out-the-vote effort.
OK, So Why Did the Democrats' Message Fail?
The Dem message was: "Walker is a big ole Meanie!" The Walker message was: "I'm only a big ole meanie because I have to be to fix our messed up government!"
Walker has done a masterful job of convincing people we need to take some strong medicine to fix the problems we face. Where he is kind of evil is the way he targets unions, teachers, college students, etc., as the people who have to take the medicine. But it's an effective message and obviously people responded to it. We're in for a very scary election if Mitt Romney is anywhere near as effective as portraying himself as a "reformer" who makes tough decisions.
And I do think the Dems had a little bit of an uphill climb because some voters simply did not think a recall was appropriate. Allegations and likely future indictments aside, Walker did not break any laws, was not obviously corrupt, and wasn't involved in a personal scandal. He was a duly elected official pursuing his policies, and he had the support in the Legislature to pass most of his agenda. I'm agnostic on whether his opponents were "right" to recall him. But obviously some voters had a problem with it on principle.
What Does this Mean for the Fall?
Looking at this from a national perspective, this recall election hurts Obama, but not as much as if he had been actually supportive of Barrett or made any effort to help him. I don't know why exactly Obama made the calculation, but obviously from the beginning he saw little or no upside to becoming involved in this dispute. That is no doubt disappointing to many, but as events have turned out, it might have been the right call. If he had gotten invested and the result had been the same, every.single.pundit.on.TV would be talking about what a devastating loss this was for Obama. That's not the headline today.
I think there's no doubt Romney will try to take a page from Walker's playbook and portray himself as the guy who will make tough decisions in order to fix big problems. It's a little harder sell, considering who Romney is and what his record as governor was, but it blunts the criticisms about his history with Baine--sure, people got hurt but on a larger scale he did more good than harm, right?
Obama needs to get out in front of this and co-opt that message. He can point to the auto industry bailout, the Stimulus Act, even the ACA, as tough decisions that pissed some people off but were good for the country in the long run.
Second-guessing an effort like this is easy. Armchair pundits such as yours truly can pick apart any effort with the benefit of hindsight. What shouldn't be forgotten is the hard work people put into this and the difficult realities that we're left with. Hopefully those who supported the recall effort will get over their dissappointment and keep working for the things they believe in. If the fight was worth fighting yesterday, it's just as worthwhile today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)