Zogby = Democratic fraud + 
Zogby = Democratic fraud +
The Arkansas race could have been called by a trained chimp, so that really doesn't leave much.
Zogby was wrong in his guesses.
DOBBS: Welcome back. Republicans retake the Senate, tighten their grip on the House. We'll be talking with Ron Faucheux and Ron Zogby about the change in power in just a few minutes. We'll also be talking with them about what they got right and what they got wrong, but first this News Alert.
(NEWS ALERT)
DOBBS: The election, one of the most well financed in this country's history, big spenders galore. Nearly a billion dollars raised for Congressional contests. The new McCain-Feingold law will limit some of the special interest money in future elections, but it certainly will not stop candidates from spending their own money, as they did in this election. More than a dozen candidates running for governor or Congress committed a million dollars or more to their own campaigns.
In New Jersey, Republican Doug Forrester personally outspent Democrat Frank Lautenberg seven to one, spending more than $8 million of his own money. Forrester lost anyway.
In West Virginia's House race, Democratic challenger James Humphreys spent almost $6 million out of his pocket. That's about $82 a vote, and he lost to incumbent Shelley Capito, who did not spend a dime of his own money.
Elizabeth Dole laid out less than three cents per vote of her own money to win the North Carolina Senate contest, while challenger Erskine Bowles spent $4 per vote.
But the candidates -- used their personal wealth to excess, that was in the gubernatorial contests. Texas banker Tony Sanchez spent $64 million of his own money, or that's about $37 per vote to lose to Republican governor Rick Perry, who spent $23 million. Independent New York billionaire Tom Golisano spent an incredible $85 per vote, more than $54 million of his own money trying unsuccessfully to unseat Republican Governor George Pataki, who won a third term.
And California Republican Bill Simon spent almost $10 million of his personal fortune. That's about $3 and a half per vote. He did pretty well in a losing race against Democratic Governor Gray Davis.
The lesson from all of this in the selection, deep pockets don't really sometimes amount to much, at least in the polling booths.
The election results have given President Bush the ability to push the Republican agenda through Congress now. The scale of the Republican victory has left Democrats in disarray.
Joining me now, two leading political analysts pollster John Zogby, Zogby International, Ron Faucheux, editor and publisher of "Campaigns and Elections" magazine.
Gentlemen, just as you predicted -- both of you, I want to compliment you, you knew the Republicans would retake the Senate. I can't congratulate you heartily enough -- what happened, Ron?
RON FAUCHEUX, EDITOR, "CAMPAIGNS AND ELECTIONS": Well, I think a lot of things happened, and one of the things that I think a lot of us underestimated was the effects of September 11 on how voters saw national leadership, and how they saw politics. I think it made voters want strong leaders, genuine leaders, leaders who are sincere, and I think that helped President Bush, and it certainly gave him an opportunity to rev up the Republican base. I think this election was not so much about ideology and partisanship as it was about leadership, and I think the president's leadership served very well. One of the things...
DOBBS: Ron, let me interrupt you. I'm sorry, Ron, I think you are one of the best and the brightest certainly, but you just sit there and tell us that you and your brilliant colleagues didn't notice that President Bush had a 67 percent approval rating going into this election, I mean, I have got to scratch my head a little bit.
FAUCHEUX: No, everybody noticed that, but what people didn't notice was his ability as a weapon of turnout for the Republicans. The Republicans in the White House and in the Republican National Committee were very, very wise in using the president as a turnout weapon -- because he has near unanimous support among Republicans, and he doesn't turn off swing voters, so they were able to use him around the country very effectively in the last few weeks, and we talked about this was going to be a turnout race, and everybody kept looking at the ability of the Democrats to turn out their base.
DOBBS: What was the turnout? What was the turnout? FAUCHEUX: The turnout -- the turnout differential was the ability of the Republicans to rev up their base.
DOBBS: No, what was the level of turnout? Did it surprise you?
FAUCHEUX: No, it didn't. It was about what you could expect. It was high in certain places because of heated contests, and it was generally low to moderate in other places.
DOBBS: John, what do you think? Did you notice that approval rating for President Bush?
JOHN ZOGBY, ZOGBY INTERNATIONAL: Yes, absolutely. Lou, the major story yesterday was that George W. Bush was elected President of the United States. He campaigned in 15 states in the last four days, he spent a considerable amount of the political capital that he had garnered after September 11, and it paid off in the polling booth. It paid off the polling booth for Republicans all over.
It was his final push that energized Republicans, it was a good voter turnout. Monday before the election, I said there would be a decent voter turnout, and I was looking at African-Americans and Latinos. They turned out to vote, but not as much as the -- as the Republicans in the suburbs and the rural areas came out and a lot of that had to do with President Bush energizing them.
DOBBS: Energizing them, and it appears, just as Ron is suggesting here, the Republicans learned a lesson. They actually learned that maybe there is some good result to be had from organized -- organizing, energizing at the local level to get the vote out.
ZOGBY: I want to comment on that. Yes. I want to comment on that. Yes. The Democrats have had the best get out the vote operations produced by labor and other organizations. You know, the taped message of Bill Clinton or Jesse Jackson targeted to certain bases. The Republicans used that for the first time Sunday, Monday and Tuesday, they used it well to their advantage. That was a test for 2004.
DOBBS: What do you guys make of this sudden interest on the part of the Republican Party in putting campaign ads on minority radio stations, minority newspapers, appealing to the ethnic and diverse vote for support? That's a big deal, isn't it?
FAUCHEUX: Well, Republicans have done that in the past. They generally haven't done well, particularly in the African-American community, and have been fighting a tough battle in the Hispanic community. But Republicans have figured out, and there are a number of elections that are good examples of that, the Maryland governor's election for example, where, if they appeal to some elements of the Democratic base, even though they may not be able to win it, they may be able to soften it up enough so that it doesn't produce the kind the Election Day turnout that overwhelms them.
DOBBS: John, could this be -- could it be that we're looking at a watershed moment here, because not only in Maryland, as Ron suggests, but Georgia and a number of other states, the black, the African-American, the Hispanic vote, the Republicans went straight after it, and had some success in bringing them to the ballot box.
ZOGBY: Less success with Latinos and African-Americans. No, we don't have very good exit poll data, and we won't for a while. But I think more so to the swing voter, to the soccer mom, to the socially liberal independent who lives in the suburbs, this is a message on the Republican Party, we're not anti-black, we're not anti-Hispanic, we're a big tent. It's a way of neutralizing any of the negatives that the Republican Party has...
DOBBS: That sounds almost cynical, John, you say they are not anti- this or they are that, is there possibility here that there is a reality that the Republican Party is really a grown-up, mature, enlightened organization now, that actually welcomes people in, nodding to questions of polemics?
ZOGBY: Oh, sure. There is no question about the fact that they're welcoming them in. It is just that nobody is standing in line to get in.
DOBBS: Well, John, every process has a beginning, right? We'll find out if this is the beginning. Now, gentlemen, you guys were the best and you were really wrong.
ZOGBY: Ron, you go first.
DOBBS: And I want to go -- I want to go through a few of these. Now seriously, no one got this -- we can stipulate. No one got this right. But I want to go through a few, Ron, and we've got very little time, so I'd like just some quick sort of explanations. You were wrong in Colorado, you picked Strickland over Allard.
FAUCHEUX: That's right.
DOBBS: What happened?
FAUCHEUX: Well, I think that was part of President Bush generating a big, big Republican base turnout. Allard looked like he was the classic sitting duck about to get beat.
DOBBS: And he won pretty well. Minnesota Mondale over Coleman, you picked Mondale.
FAUCHEUX: And ultimately, what happened there was, I think, the same thing happened. I also think the Wellstone funeral memorial ended up hurting the Democrats in Minnesota.
DOBBS: And both of you -- and I should point out, both of you alluded to that very distinct possibility as a result of that. You were right, Ron, on a number of things, but I will just highlight a few.
Arkansas Pryor over Hutchinson, Missouri Talent over Carnahan, which was a strong call at the time. In North Carolina, Dole over Bowles, as many were suggesting she was weakening. John, you want to have some fun?
ZOGBY: Yes, sure. I made a lot of those calls, and fell flat on my face, certainly, I think, in Colorado and in Illinois.
But I think, basically, it was a turnout election, and I go back to 1998, there were ten states that were too close to call. Eight percent of the voters told us they made up their minds on Tuesday. I suspect that a lot of that happened here as well.
You know, there were some slight subtle shifts as a result that we were able to pick up, you know, on Sunday night and on Monday night, but I think a big swing came as a result of President Bush's trips, and those showed up at the polls on Tuesday, when people ultimately made their final decision.
DOBBS: The top here, gentlemen, as we wrap it up, President George Bush did something no one thought he could do, and our historic hats off to him. Is that it?
FAUCHEUX: Yes, I think even though George Bush is president of the United States, most people in politics still underestimate him.
DOBBS: John?
ZOGBY: I did owe that, yet I repeat again, George W. Bush was elected president of the United States on his own yesterday. He really did a magnificent thing for his party.
DOBBS: And you, gentlemen, did magnificent work here analyzing this race through all of these weeks and months leading up to this election, my hats off to you, and our thanks for leading us through it all. Thank you very much Ron, John.
Coming up next, we'll be looking at your thoughts, going over your e-mails, also former Enron chief financial officer Andrew Fastow has entered a plea in a Houston court. We'll have that story as well, next.
AZ GOV: SALMON NAPOLITANO MAHONEY(I)
Survey USA: DEM BY 2
ACTUAL: DEM BY 4
CA GOV: SIMON DAVIS
Survey USA: DEM BY 6
ACTUAL: DEM BY 5
CO SEN: ALLARD STRICKLAND
Zogby: DEM BY 5
Survey USA: REP BY 4
ACTUAL: REP BY 6
FL GOV: BUSH MCBRIDE
Maxon-Dixon: REP BY 8
Zogby: REP BY 16
Survey USA: REP BY 5
ACTUAL: REP BY 13
IL GOV: RYAN BLAGOJEVICH
Survey USA: DEM BY 14
ACTUAL: DEM BY 7
IL SEN: DURKIN DURBIN
Survey USA: DEM BY 19
ACTUAL: DEM BY 22
IA GOV: GROSS VILSACK
Survey USA: DEM BY 14
ACTUAL: DEM BY 8
IA SEN: GANSKE HARKIN
Survey USA: DEM BY 22
ACTUAL: DEM BY 10
MD GOV: EHRLICH TOWNSEND
Mason-Dixon: REP BY 1
Survey USA: REP BY 5
ACTUAL: REP BY 3
MI GOV: POSTHUMUS GRANHOLM
Survey USA: REP BY 6
ACTUAL: REP BY 4
NJ SEN: LAUTENBERG FORRESTER
Mason-Dixon: DEM BY 7
Zogby: DEM BY 13
Survey USA: DEM BY 10
ACTUAL: DEM BY 10
MN SEN: COLEMAN MONDALE
Zogby: DEM BY 6
ACTUAL: REP BY 3
MO SEN: TALENT CARNAHAN
Zogby 53-45: REP BY 8
Survey USA: REP BY 2
ACTUAL: REP BY 1
NC SEN: DOLE BOWLES
Mason-Dixon: REP BY 6
Zogby: REP BY 10
Survey USA: REP BY 4
ACTUAL: REP BY 9
NV GOV: GUINN NEAL
Survey USA: REP BY 35
ACTUAL: REP BY 46
OH GOV: TAFT HAGAN
Survey USA: REP BY 18
ACTUAL: REP BY 20
OK GOV: LARGENT HENRY RICHARDSON(I)
Survey USA: DEM BY 4
ACTUAL: DEM BY 0
OK SEN: INHOFE WALTERS
Survey USA: REP BY 17
ACTUAL: REP BY 21
PA GOV: FISHER RENDELL
Survey USA: DEM BY 19
ACTUAL: DEM BY 9
RI GOV: CARCIERI YORK
Survey USA: REP BY 3
ACTUAL: REP BY 10
KS GOV: SHALLENBURGER SEBELIUS
Survey USA: DEM BY 7
ACTUAL: DEM BY 8
KY SEN: McCONNELL WEINBERG
Survey USA: REP BY 37
ACTUAL: REP BY 28
NH SEN: SUNUNU SHAHEEN
Zogby favors Sununu(R) - no data
Becker Institute: DEM BY 6
Amer. Research Grp: REP BY 4
ACTUAL: REP BY 4
NY GOV: PATAKI McCALL GOLISANO(I)
Survey USA: REP BY 15
ACTUAL: REP BY 16
SC SEN: GRAHAM SANDERS
Maxon-Dixon: REP BY 17
Survey USA: REP BY 1
ACTUAL: REP BY 11
SC GOV: SANFORD HODGES
Maxon-Dixon: REP BY 7
Survey USA: DEM BY 6 (TYPO?)
ACTUAL: REP BY 6
SD SEN: THUNE JOHNSON
Zogby: REP BY 5
ACTUAL: TIE
TN GOV: HILLEARY BREDESEN
Survey USA: REP BY 4
ACTUAL: DEM BY 3
TN SEN: ALEXANDER CLEMENT
Mason-Dixon: REP BY 10
Survey USA: REP BY 11
ACTUAL: REP BY 10
TX GOV: PERRY SANCHEZ
Zogby 58-38: REP BY 20
Survey USA 53-43: REP BY 10
ACTUAL: REP BY 18
TX SEN: CORNYN KIRK
Zogby: REP BY 4
Survey USA: REP BY 8
ACTUAL: REP BY 12
Has anyone else heard anything like this? He sure does not sound too partisan in this interview, but who knows.