Roosting Chickens, and Results from the 2004 Election

2 Nov., 2004 | John Armor (Congressman Billybob)

[Congressman Billybob]

It’s time for the chickens to come home to roost. Here are my predictions, word for word, from 30 August, 2004:

“It isn’t necessary to wait until the end of the Republican Convention to make this year’s predictions. Bush will have a 5% lead after the convention. That will increase to 10% by November 2, and the Electoral College results will be a landslide for Bush. At the same time, the Republicans will gain two seats in the Senate, and 11 seats in the House.

“Outside Washington, Republicans will gain one governorship, 121 seats in the various state legislatures, and a substantial number of other state and local offices. Lastly, all these specific predictions are minimums. Any results that don’t match my predictions should be greater than my numbers.”

For those who want to look it up, the title of that article is: “Why John Kerry is Now Toast.”

Up until the last minute the MSM (Mainstream Media) were nearly unanimous in saying that this election is “a statistical tie” or “too close to call.” Yet the actual result was that President Bush led by three percent as this is written, and will win the Electoral College by 281 to 259. Why was the MSM consistently wrong in reporting on the election on 1 November?

I got the direction right, but the strength of the victory wrong. Why did I get the dynamics of the race correct, more than two months in advance?

Many of you know me under my pen name on the Internet, as The (More er Less) Honorable Congressman Billybob from Western Carolina. Sounds like someone who just fell off the turnip truck, doesn’t it? Truth is, I am a Ph.D. dropout in political science from American University. (Done the course work; still owe them a dissertation.) I pay attention to statistics.

When the political scientists finish analyzing this election, here’s what they will find: Unions are the both the money and volunteer backbones of the Democrat Party. But unions have been shrinking steadily in their percentage in the population. Union households are now only about 14 percent of all households. On the other hand, households which have a veteran in them are now about 26 percent of all households.

In prior elections, that comparison was irrelevant. Though union households voted mostly (but not entirely) for Democrats, veteran households were roughly split between Republicans and Democrats. Not this year. In 2004 the veterans voted by a margin of about 65 to 35 percent for Bush. They also provided money and volunteers to the Republican cause like union members long have for Democrats. I think research will establish that the animosity of most veterans against Kerry, both for his exaggerations about his Vietnam service and lies about his fellow veterans when he returned, was the key to his defeat. Kerry’s votes against military funding and programs over his twenty years in the Senate also contributed to that result.

Here’s how I stated this decisive factor, more than two months before the election: “Kerry had already decided, along with his high-powered, top-dollar, experienced advisors, that he was going to feature his Vietnam experience. Rather than set it aside and deal with more recent subjects, Kerry decided to hang his campaign hat on his four months and 12 days on Swift Boats in Vietnam. His representatives forced that subject into the speeches of most people at the Democrat Convention. Kerry himself slammed the point home from his opening salute to the final paragraphs of his speech accepting the nomination. When John Kerry sat down after that speech, his campaign was already doomed to defeat.”

The fate of my other predictions are these: I said the Republicans would gain two seats in the Senate; they did gain two, as this is written (pending others in Florida and South Dakota). I said the Republicans would gain 11 seats in the House; they did gain three as this is written

At the state level, I said the Republicans would gain one Governorship in the eleven races this year; they gained one. I said the Republicans would gain 121 seats in the state legislatures; these results are not yet known, but the gain will not be as high as I predicted.

And as I said, if my numbers were off, the actual results should be higher. So here’s my final score card: Presidency, wrong by seven percent. Senate, right. House, low. Governors, right. State legislatures, right direction, wrong number by unknown amount.

The fundamental problem with the MSM is they are overstocked with people who can talk like they know what they are doing. But their bench is thin for people who actually do know what they are doing. There are people who really understand the dynamics of American elections. But they are more likely to be somewhere in the blogosphere than to be on the network news or published in the MSM.

As we used to say during a game of tag, on the playground of the elementary school at Salisbury State Teachers College half a century ago:

“Gotcha.”

- 30 -

About the Author: John Armor is a First Amendment attorney and author who lives in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina. CongressmanBillybob@earthlink.net

- 30 -

[Congressman Billybob]

Thank you for your note. And thank you for your success in Idaho. (Senator Larry Craig is a longtime friend, and I have done gold mining near Loman.)

My estimate that was most wrong was the 121 seat gain in the legislatures. It looks like when all the dust settles, the recounts are finished, and a few more Democrats decide to become Republican, that the Repubs will have a slight gain there.

Repubs now have, after a long climb upwards, a slim majority of all the state legislative seats. But when you include Southern Democrats in the political equation, conservatives have a substantial majority in that group.

Billybob

[Delphinium]

(Senator Larry Craig is a longtime friend, and I have done gold mining near Loman.)

We are very proud of Larry Craig, and gold mining in Idaho.