--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunday, November 18, 2000 Volume XXV, No. 40
Roswell, New Mexico
In this issue:
Election 2000:
---- How did LTS...do?
-- Our Election Eve Forecast
-- Actual Results
---- How Did Others Do?
---- Who did Second Best?
The Real Losers on Election Day:
The Bush-Cheney Team
---- No Electoral Vote Strategy
---- No Focus, No Itinerary, No discipline
---- Every Republican has a right to be angry with the Bush-Cheney
Team
---- Bob Dole set an example which Bush did not learn from
---- An Electoral College Strategy is not Theoretical Physics
The East: Our Projections
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Election 2000:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How did LTS... do?
While this question has not been foremost in our minds, we can report
to you that Let's Talk Sense... proved to be the best forecaster
of the outcome of the 2000 election.
With no decision on Florida, and in our opinion at this point, New
Mexico, we have missed correctly projecting the outcomes in only
two states: Wisconsin, which was one of two changes we made based
on the Bush and Gore image changes over the course of three debates,
and West Virginia, which our models simply failed to register as
a Bush win at any point during the year. (We owe a US Senator's
Chief of Staff a cheap meal as a result of that particular miss.)
We called Wisconsin for Bush, but Bush needed (or perhaps, needs)
a 2/100ths of 1 percent switch to carry the state. In West Virginia,
we were off by an embarrassing 3.04%.
Our pre-election issues, which included projected popular vote totals
state-by-state, as well as an Electoral College projection, were
far closer to the actual outcome than any other known projection,
forecast, or guess, by any other published site....be it poll, political
website, newspaper, pundit or any other known entity. [If anyone
has any contrary information, please forward it to this address.]
If Florida and New Mexico go for Bush, we will have missed the final
outcome by 6 votes. Our final popular vote projection for Bush is
.34% (34 hundredths of one percent, for those of you who are math
averse) too low. For Gore, we ended up 2.53% low . For the fifth
consecutive presidential cycle we have forecast the minor party
vote too high. This is consistently the least accurate component
of our formulae and the psephological models they produce.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our Election Eve forecast
called it this way:
Bush 282 Gore 256 Nader 0 all others 0
48,301,000 46,345,000 4,336,000 2,370,000
(47.66%) (45.73%) (4.28%) (2.34%)
Total vote: 101,352,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actual Results:
Bush 246 Gore 262 Nader 0 All Others 0
(Unknown: 30----With Florida and New Mexico undecided)
BUSH GORE NADER ALL OTHERS
49,658,276* 49,921,267* 2,756,008* 1,113,738**
(48.00%) (48.26%) (2.66%) (1.08%)
Total vote: 103,449,289 (incomplete)
*incomplete
**totals of Buchanan, Browne, Phillips, Hagelin, and an estimate
of 114,276 for 16 others, plus write-ins.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How Did Others Do?
A website called "Real Clear Politics" had it 446-92 in
favor of Bush. Apparently the Bush Campaign (as I implied in the
Election Eve issue) had a similar view. [See Comments Below]
We did see that both the Gallup and Zogby polls came in on election
day with a predicted 2-point win for Gore, but both organizations
projected a sizeable electoral vote win for Bush.
The Rasmussen poll missed 8 states and projected a win for Bush
of 5 points and a margin of over 120 electoral votes.
The Battleground Poll was just as inaccurate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who was 2nd Best?
As big fans of the on-line magazine "Mullings," we are
proud to say that Rich Galen, the author of that literary digest
was the second closest to the mark.
Rich scored it 297 - 241 in favor of Bush, and ended up missing
the outcomes in 9 states---one more than the Rasmussen Organization,
but much, much closer in the Electoral College forecast.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Real Losers on Election Day:
The Bush-Cheney Campaign Team
No Electoral Vote Strategy
We hate to say we told you so----but we are going to do just that.
Because we stated over and over again, month after month that the
Bush electoral vote strategy seemed to be no strategy at all, and
that the entire campaign lacked any geographical focus or perceptible
understanding of the situation.
Obviously we found this hard to believe, and continuously doubted
our own misgivings. Surely, we reasoned, a staff which has so many
talented people, consummate communicators and truly outstanding
strategists on public policy issues and political persuasion---which
it did, and still does---MUST ALSO have electoral vote strategists.
One Washington DC-based reader repeatedly told us that our misgivings
were on target and that we were giving the Bush Team far too much
credit. The fact is, he said, "They do NOT know what to do
in terms of an electoral vote strategy." He was correct. So
were we.
We kept saying month after month, and finally, again, on election
eve, we reiterated:
"[the Bush Team must] "have information we don't...which
shows they are going to win very, very, comfortably....otherwise)
the focus of the Bush campaign makes very little sense...
"...Every time we catch a news story, they are in California
(which they lost by a million votes), Washinton (lost by over 100,000)
, Oregon, Illinois (lost by a half million), Minnesota (lost by
over 50,000), Iowa, and West Virginia....***
"...Instead it is Gore-Lieberman whose itinerary we would have
scheduled for Bush..."
No Focus, No Itinerary, No Discipline
The main point is this: Pennsylvania was winnable, and as we repeatedly
stated, the Bush strategy should include BOTH Pennsylvania and Florida,
but they MUST have one of them or they are doomed. We were shocked
when told by phone election night--around 6:00 PM New Mexico time--that
Florida had gone to Gore.
What on earth had they been doing taking banker's hours (kicked
back in Austin) on this campaign, AND gallivanting in California,
Minnesota, Washington and Iowa, when NEITHER Florida NOR Pennsylvania
were in the bag. Some might call it stupid, arrogant, not-ready-for-prime-time!
We don't know if that is fair, but we aren't impressed. We do know
that Al Gore was working like a demon all the time.
Every Republican has a right to be Angry
with the Bush-Cheney Team
Every Republican who ever gave $25 to Bush-Cheney (let alone those
who worked their butts off to get out the vote) has a right to be
mad as hell.
If you don't know what you are doing, get help. The absence of that
kind of managerial awareness in the Bush camp is telling, and serves
as a warning for those of us who care about the success of a Bush
Administration---if we are fortunate enough to get one. They have
some real gaps.
Now look at what we have: Either a president-elect who is going
to get in by the skin of his teeth, and start out in a hole (this
is the BEST-case scenario by the way), or we are going to have Al
Gore.
Neither of these alternatives was necessary. This election could
have been won (and should have been won) by a half million in the
popular vote, and with a total in the range of 290 to 299 electoral
votes. All that was needed was knowledge, discipline, and focus.
The knowledge was the easiest---you can determine from electoral
history, demography and the current political climate in a given
state whether your candidate's image, policy positions and message
will play. You have to have the focus to go where your candidate
will play, and the discipline to not waste time where he won't sell----and
the complete discipline, dedication and personal commitment to never
go home and kick back---even for a day----until the thing is over.
Bob Dole set an Example
If Bob Dole, at 72, can tell his staff to put together a 96-hour
marathon finish to the campaign in 1996, which he did----WHEN HE
KNEW HE WAS GOING TO LOSE-----then George W. Bush should have had
the focus, the guts, the moxie, and the heart to gut it out to the
end. There aren't enough excuses in the world to make up for the
poor execution of his campaign scheduling if he ends up not winning
this thing.
(Many Republicans, and most conservatives never have a kind thing
to say about Bob Dole, but what he did in '96---according to many---SAVED
the House and the Senate for the Republicans. The selflessness and
dedication he showed, at his age, in his personal circumstances,
which were hopeless----contrasts sharply with what we got in the
closing days of the Bush campaign.)
An Electoral College Strategy
is not Theoretical Physics
It would be one thing if there had been simply no way around this-----that
there was just no way to know these things. But while campaigns
are difficult, the electoral vote strategy is not brain surgery,
much less rocket science or theoretical physics.
The Bush Team did the truly difficult tasks very well----the message,
the media, the policy issues, the convention, the debate preparation.
The Electoral College strategy is a matter of paying attention to
absolutely accessible, understandable and demonstrably verifiable
data. The failure to pursue a coherent strategy for victory in the
Electoral College may haunt us for years to come. There is no excuse
for it, and no explanation other than ineptitude.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The East
OUR PROJECTIONS ON SEPTEMBER 17 (Unless otherwise indicated)
(Popular vote, projections shown in 000's)
|
(Proj.) |
|
(Proj.) |
|
Projected |
|
Actual |
|
|
Bush |
Actual |
Gore |
Actual |
Winner/Margin |
|
Winner/Margin |
|
Maine |
253 |
285 |
287 |
316 |
Gore |
31 |
Gore |
31 |
N.H. |
221 |
234 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Revised 11/6) |
239 |
273 |
232 |
266 |
Bush |
7 |
Bush |
7 |
Vermont |
98 |
119 |
129 |
148 |
Gore |
31 |
Gore |
29 |
Mass. |
858 |
877 |
1,456 |
1,610 |
Gore |
598 |
Gore |
734 |
Conn. |
576 |
546 |
722 |
796 |
Gore |
146 |
Gore |
250 |
R.I. |
128 |
133 |
228 |
255 |
Gore |
100 |
Gore |
122 |
N.Y. |
2,302 |
2,236 |
3,854 |
3,768 |
Gore |
1,552 |
Gore |
1,532 |
Penn. |
2,198 |
2,215 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Revised 11/6) |
2,177 |
2,264 |
2,241 |
2,465 |
Gore |
64 |
Gore |
201 |
N.J. |
1,357 |
1,253 |
1,600 |
1,742 |
Gore |
243 |
Gore |
489 |
Del. |
120 |
137 |
131 |
181 |
Gore |
11 |
Gore |
44 |
W.V. |
281 |
330 |
345 |
291 |
Gore |
74 |
Bush |
39 |
Md. |
743 |
771 |
950 |
1,093 |
Gore |
207 |
Gore |
322 |
D.C. |
21 |
17 |
161 |
162 |
Gore |
141 |
Gore |
145 |
Summary:
We projected the region 127-0 for Gore on September 17 and revised
that in our Election Eve edition, switching New Hampshire to Bush
and calling it 123-4 for Gore. In the final analyis, West Virginia
went for Gore, our only incorrect call in the region. The East went
118-9 for Gore----and continues to demonstrate why it is easily
the worst region in the nation for Republican presidential candidates
and Republicans in general.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***True, you could say, well, they came close in Iowa and Oregon, and they won West Virginia. West Virginia is the only point well taken. It is clear now the polls they were reading from West Virginia were accurate, thus the anomaly of the Mountaineer State's voter behavior this year (I bet it has something to do with Gore's image----no Alpha male he, a little too sissified for the Hatfield and McCoy types).