Parsing Polls
After the presidential votes were counted, it was clear there were many more red than blue states.
But it was far from clear why this was so.
Some polls showed that Iraq, terrorism and national security were at the top of many voters’ minds. But if this were the case, why was it that voters on the East and West coasts,clearly the two places in the country most likely to experience terrorism,tended to vote for Sen. John Kerry?
Some analysts suggest it was President Bush’s focus on moral values that explained his victory.
Yet in the Edison/Mitofsky nationwide survey of voters leaving the polls, only 22% said moral values,a presumed Republican issue,was the issue that mattered most to them.
And only 20% listed the economy and jobs,a presumed Democratic issue,as the issue that mattered most to them.
But when the electorate is broken down along party lines, the differences come into sharper focus.
In Edison/Mitofsky survey, Republicans were concerned about terrorism (cited by 86% of those polled), but not very much about Iraq (26%).
Democrats were concerned about the war in Iraq (73%) but not terrorism (14%).
Terrorism was the most-often cited concern of Republicans, followed by moral values (80%) and taxes (57%). Democrats were most concerned about the economy and jobs (80%), with healthcare (77%), education (73%) and Iraq (73%) close behind.
Eighty-five percent of Republicans approved of the decision to go to war, while 87% of Democrats disapproved.
Ninety percent of Republicans feel the war with Iraq has improved long-term U.S. security, compared with 80% of Democrats who feel the war with Iraq has not improved long-term security.
What does this all mean?
It’s clear Bush knew his base constituency and spoke of moral values, terrorism and taxes during the campaign.
While Kerry talked about the concerns of his base constituency on economy and jobs, healthcare and education, he missed the boat when it came to his position on Iraq.
Kerry repeated his support of the war (while stipulating his disapproval of the way it began and is being conducted).
But what is as surprising as Kerry’s ongoing support of the war in Iraq has been President Bush’s post-election comments that he would focus on changes in Social Security, making tax cuts permanent and addressing issues of medical malpractice and education.
These are not issues that his Republican base listed as primary concerns.
This suggests that speculation over how the president can or should spend his political capital will quickly replace discussions about why he won the election.
Rosener is a professor in the Graduate School of Management at University of California, Irvine, and a noted author and speaker.
Too-Safe Seats
The elections produced no change in the makeup of either the state Assembly or the state Senate. The Assembly will remain 48 to 32 in favor of Democrats, while the Senate holds a 25 to 15 Democrat majority.
In spite of the fact that the public’s approval rating of the Legislature is near an all-time low, not a single incumbent was defeated and not a single seat changed from one party to the other.
This is because of the “safe” Democratic and Republican seats that were drawn up in the last redistricting.
A Bay area friend of mine surmised that it was easier to defeat a member of the Soviet Politburo than it is to change a California legislative seat.
An example of this is the 21st Assembly district in the Bay area. It’s a gerrymandered district for the Democrats.
But the seat had no incumbent this year and a Republican challenger by the name of Steve Poizner emerged.
Steve is a technology entrepreneur and cofounder of SnapTrack Inc., a wireless technology company he sold to Qualcomm Inc. in 2000 for $1 billion.
Steve is a moderate, well known in the area. He has served as a volunteer teacher at a local high school since selling his company. In other words, he is a perfect match to the district.
He spent $6 million of his own money in the campaign for the seat. While the race was close and not all votes had been counted as of last week, Steve finally conceded. He was trailing by 5,500 votes, 52% to 48%.
If an “Arnold Republican” entrepreneur spending that kind of money can’t win an open Democratic seat in Silicon Valley, can anybody ever do it?
Or for that matter, can a Democrat beat a Republican in a safe Republican seat?
The answer is to have districts drawn under fair guidelines by court-appointed impartial masters. I think you will be hearing more about this in the coming months.
Campbell is the Assemblyman and State Senator-Elect from Irvine.
What If
The predictable finger-pointing is well under way: How could the Democrats have blown it again?
That John Kerry didn’t take it speaks to his all-too-obvious flaws as a candidate and to the Democratic Party’s inability to marshal a disciplined campaign machine that can deliver a focused message.
But there’s something else, whether or not Democrats want to admit it.
Monica.
That woman.
Just consider how different the nation would be today had Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton not hooked up.
For openers, Bill Clinton would not have been impeached and the president’s conservative opponents would not have had the fuel to stoke their cause. In fact, with the nation in the midst of a spectacular economic boom in the late 1990s, scholars would begin looking at Clinton as among the century’s exceptional leaders.
All of which would have provided an enormous advantage for heir apparent Al Gore.
And with President Gore in the White House? Well, there’s the obvious: the U.S. would not have invaded Iraq, at a cost of more than 1,000 soldiers and countless thousands of Iraqis.
The Justice Department would not have responded to the 2001 attacks by secretly implementing policies that allow anyone suspected of terrorist activities to be jailed indefinitely and without due process.
The economic downturn would not have led President Gore to slash taxes on
billionaires and help turn a massive
budget surplus into a massive budget deficit.
And all things being equal, the 2004 election would have provided Gore with a relatively clear path to a second term, with George W. Bush relegated to a U.S. Senate seat or perhaps chief executive of the Nascar circuit.
Lacter is editor of the Los Angeles Business Journal, where this Comment appeared in a longer version in the Nov. 8 issue. n
