Texas voters stick a fork in Ann Richards and her liberal pals

"You can stick a fork in George Bush because he's done." — Ann Richards, speaking at a Houston rally for Democratic presidential candidate Bill Clinton on Oct. 28, 1992 "Stick a fork in Ann Richards and her liberal sidekicks because they are cooked." — The Texas electorate, sending a message to the Texas Democratic Party on Nov. 5, 2002

As late as 6:45 Tuesday night, Richards, a former one-term Texas governor, was telling CNN's Larry King:

"We are going to have an unprecedented turnout in Texas. ... Tony Sanchez could win. But it's harder for him than it is, say, for Ron Kirk or John Sharp, who I think will be the lieutenant governor. And Kirk Watson, who's a smart young man, the mayor of Austin, will become the attorney general."

Actually, Watson — the supereminent darling of Democratic liberals — hasn't been mayor of Austin since the fall of 2001 when he resigned his mayoral post to run for attorney general.

But that minor Richards goof pales when compared to her bold — and remarkably incorrect — last-minute prediction of a virtual sweep of the state's major elected offices by Texas Democrats.

In 1998, in the lieutenant governor's race, Sharp, the Texas Democratic Party's brightest star, was defeated by Perry, a popular, two-term agriculture commissioner, by only 2 percentage points.

Four years later, Sharp — the Democrats' most electable candidate and the favorite politico of Texas pundits — lost by 6 percentage points to Dewhurst, a little-known and not particularly popular land commissioner, who had one campaign theme: "John Sharp is an out-of-step, tax-and-spend LIBERAL."

True or not, the "liberal" tag stuck, and that was sufficient reason for voters to knock out the Democrats' best candidate.

But Sharp's fall was a soft landing compared to the crash of Kirk Watson, the only unabashed liberal in a top position on the Democratic ticket.

Last February, Texas Monthly pundit Paul Burka predicted that during the 2002 campaign Greg Abbott would describe Watson with "just four words: liberal Austin trial lawyer" ... and Watson would counter "by trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear by asking, 'Who do you want fighting for you?'"

Texas voters provided a resounding answer to that question on Tuesday when they buried liberal Watson under a landslide of Abbott votes.

Ann Richards must not have cleaned her crystal ball before palavering with Larry King Tuesday night.

Not that her way-wrong predictions will bother King or CNN's slanted-news managers.

As long as Richards is ambulatory and ready, willing and eager to put a damper on Bush Republicans, she will find a place in the lights, cameras and interview chairs of TV network big shots.

In response, Texas voters will just continue to do what they do best: watch quietly, listen politely, smile knowingly and flock to the polls to baste Miz Ann and her political pals.

To contact Roddy Stinson, call (210) 250-3155 or e-mail rstinson@express-news.net. His column appears Tuesdays, Thursdays, Saturdays and Sundays.

Hey FreedomPoster! Here's the text of the e-mail I mentioned...

Please Come Out and Support Governor-Elect Sonny Perdue and Georgia's Future First Lady, Mary Perdue

Governor-Elect to Visit Dalton, La Grange,

Columbus, Albany,Savannah, Augusta, and Macon

Friday November 8

Unity Tour

9:00 am

Rally

Dalton Airport

Carpet Capital Aviation

Dalton, GA

10:00 am

Rally and Press Announcement

Airport

La Grange, GA

11:30 am

Rally

Columbus Airport

CSG Aviation

Columbus, GA

12:30 pm

Rally

Albany Airport

Piedmont Hawthorne Aviation

Albany, GA

1:45 pm

Rally

Savannah Airport

Signature Aviation

Savannah, GA

3:15 pm

Rally and Press Announcement

Augusta Airport

Daniel's Field

Augusta, GA

4:30 pm

Rally

Macon Airport

Lowe Aviaiton

Macon, GA

"As late as 6:45 Tuesday night, Richards, a former one-term Texas governor, was telling CNN's Larry King: "We are going to have an unprecedented turnout in Texas. ... Tony Sanchez could win. But it's harder for him than it is, say, for Ron Kirk or John Sharp, who I think will be the lieutenant governor. And Kirk Watson, who's a smart young man, the mayor of Austin, will become the attorney general."

The media refuses to admit it, but the REASON that all of the Democrats, as well as all of the press, missed the call on the elections this year is because NONE of them are listening to the man on the street.

If you actually go out to get a burger and dare to speak to your fellow man, everyone has been talking about how the press is too biased and how the Democrats have no new ideas.

But the elites in the media and the elites in the Democratic Party don't leave their ivory towers to go talk to the common man. They don't know what the man on the street has been saying, and consequently they haven't seen any of the sea-changes coming.

Neither the media nor the Democrats saw the 1994 Republican landslide coming. Neither the media nor the Democrats saw what was happening in the primaries this year, either (where moderates replaced extremists, e.g. Hilliard lost, Cynthia McKinney lost, Bob Smith lost, et al).

The media and the Democrats miscalled this years turnout, and they missed it in BOTH directions. They both claimed that states that ended with high turnout would have low turnout (e.g. Minnesota), and they claimed that the states that actually had low turnout would have high turnout (e.g. Texas).

The media and the Democrats miscalled the House elections this year, claiming that Democrats would pick up seats. In reality, they lost them.

The media and the Democrats both claimed that the Democrats would hold a majority of governorships after this year. Instead, the Democrats lost their own incumbent governors in states such as Vermount, Georgia, Alabama, and South Dakota.

The media and the Democrats flat out missed the nationwide trend by claiming that the Democrats would hold the Senate, too.

And the reason that both the media and the Democrats missed ALL OF THESE PREDICTIONS is because they are out of touch with mainstream America.

The media and the Democrats do NOT represent the average American. They don't know what the average American is thinking and they don't know how the average American will vote.

In short, the media and the Democrats are staffed with elites who do not listen (nor do they want to listen) to mainstream Americans.

Their predictions were wrong in 1994. They were wrong in 2000. They were wrong this year, and they will be wrong again in 2004.

Democrats and media talking heads do NOT listen to average Americans, so there is just no way that they can know what we want or what we will do.

November 6, 2002

TO: Republican Leaders and Interested Parties

FR: Matthew Dowd
Senior Adviser
Republican National Committee

RE: Midterm Election Analysis - what key lessons can be learned from the election.

The unprecedented, historic nature of last night's results cannot be overstated. By adding to the margin in the U.S. House of Representatives, Republicans accomplished last night what has never been done in a mid-term by a Republican President. And by taking the U.S. Senate back during a mid-term, Republicans have done what has never been done since the direct election of Senators began.

Before election day, Democrats were confident they would have a margin of six or so governors when election night was over. Republicans in fact retained a majority of governors in spite of having to defend 23 of 36 seats and losing some open seats. Incredibly, more incumbent Democratic governors lost on election night than incumbent Republican governors. Democrats are taking advantage of the conventional wisdom of some Washington pundits by quantifying their limited gubernatorial successes in terms of electoral votes and their impact on the 2004 election. Historically, Governors' offices do not have a lot to do with success of Presidential re-elections. Republicans held 30 Governor's offices in 1996, and lost badly. And in 2000, Bush won ten states where Democrats had governors, and Gore won nine states where Republicans had governors.

As I laid out in my memo of October 12^th (click here), "As we approach the November mid-term election, the President and the Republican Party are in a historic and positive position." President Bush's unprecedented approval ratings and level of trust with the American people provided an environment where Republican candidates could succeed on a local and statewide basis. The normal mid-term wave was stopped before it could reach shore, and Republican candidates had the advantage of a level playing field, which historically doesn't exist in a mid-term. In addition, since polling began some 70 years ago, this is the first Republican President to go into a mid-term election with a 90% or higher job approval among Republicans. Bush's job approval among Republicans on election day was 96% and among all voters it was 67%.

As mentioned in the previous memo, despite Democrats best efforts, the American public ended up trusting Republicans more than Democrats to handle the economy. Since Democrats do not have the voters' overwhelming trust on the economy and have no real solutions from their leaders, the Republicans were in a great position to win the debate on the economy in this election and did. While some pundits suggested that terrorism/security overwhelmed other issues, the economy was a top issue on election day and Republicans won it. Internal RNC polling over the weekend showed Republicans moving from even with Democrats on the issue of the economy (itself an unprecedented good position during a slow economy) to an advantage of eight points.

On election day, the American public fundamentally trusted President Bush and Republican leaders more on the key issues of importance than Democratic candidates. The contrast between President Bush and Republicans laying out a positive agenda to deal with American's concerns in a bi-partisan way and Democrats negative attacks and lack of any agenda was dramatic and it showed up in voters behavior on election day.

It was also the specific content of the message. In both RNC and public polls, voters choose by generally 2-1 the GOP's message (tax cuts, less government, fiscal restraint, focus on job creation and growth) over the Democrats message (delay or repeal the Bush tax cut and spend more on social programs).

Also, as the 2000 election showed, Democratic negative scare tactics on social security reform did not work. In race after close race, this was Democrats closing message, and voters, in a best-case scenario for Democrats, ignored it. Republican candidates including Lindsey Graham, Elizabeth Dole, Pat Toomey, Ann Northrup, Norm Coleman and Jim Talent all met Democrats scare tactics head on and were successful.

And finally this election was not determined, as some pundits and democratic partisans have suggested in the aftermath of the election, that Republicans outspent Democrats overwhelmingly. Democrats and their allies equaled or outspent Republicans in a large number of races that Republicans won. For example, the Democratic candidate in Texas outspent the Republican by a three to one margin, and lost overwhelmingly. The incumbent Democrat Governor of Georgia outspent his GOP opponent nearly 7 to 1 and yet lost.

the REASON that all of the Democrats, as well as all of the press, missed the call on the elections this year is because NONE of them are listening to the man on the street.

There is something else, though. Not all of these people are idiots. As others have pointed out, polling is becoming something of a crap shoot, because of all the ways people have now of ducking out on incoming phone calls. And when all else fails, people are just plain hanging up. This behavior is self-selected, which means that a self-selected group is taking itself out of the group being polled. That leaves a self-selected sample of people who are willing to take calls from pollsters. There is no guarantee that what the pollsters are left with is a representative sample.

The good pollsters try to correct for this by making sure they get, say, as large a percentage of Republicans as exist in the voting population, but there is still no guarantee that the ones they finally collect are representative of that area's Republicans as a whole.

The consequence of this is that polls are becoming ever-more inaccurate, due to sampling deficiencies. I'm not talking here about the media's push polls that they publish as part of their cheerleading for the Democrats; I mean the paid-for private polls that the parties are relying on to allocate resources. Those are bad, and they are getting worse.

The vaunted Zogby had the Minnesota Senate race upside-down. Either 10% of the electorate blatantly lied when his pollsters called, or these are people that his sampling technique totally missed. They are in that self-selected group of people who do not take calls from pollsters, or who hang up when a pollster calls. And there are enough of them to swing races from D to R and vice versa. (I suspect that these "won't be polled" types are mostly Republicans, though, because that's where the surprises came.)

Sure, the polling is becoming less reliable for the reasons that you stated above, but I'm talking about something else.

The Democrats don't know what the man on the street is thinking. They don't know what is truly important, and they can't discern the priorities of mainstream America - because the Democrats and the media elites aren't listening to the common man.

On the other hand, the more accurate technical gauge, (polling, media, and Democratic spinsters aside), was the level of contributions.

While the press was claiming that "this election is below the radar", that "turnout was key", and that "no one knew" what the turnout would be, the numbers of contributions and the sum of the amounts of contributions pointed to dramatic interest in this mid-term election. Those contributions also accurately predicted the final national turnout as well as the Republican sweep.

NEWSFLASH TO ALL MEDIA TYPES AND POLLSTERS: people who contribute money to a campaign are MORE likely to go vote in that campaign.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.


Hadn't seen the press release, will go find it now. See this thread, if you haven't already: WSB Exclusive: Democratic Defectors? (GA State Senate may turn Republican!)