Interesting article in the Sunday WaPo. Steve Rosenthal, the CEO of America Coming Together (ACT), and former political director of the AFL-CIO, wrote a piece analyzing Bush's victory in Ohio. The paragraph that caught my eye was this little nugget:
Second myth: The Bush campaign won by mobilizing GOP strongholds and suppressing turnout in Democratic areas.
Reality: Turnout in Democratic-leaning counties in Ohio was up 8.7 percent while turnout in Republican-leaning counties was up slightly less, at 6.3 percent. John Kerry bested Bush in Cuyahoga County (home of Cleveland) by 218,000 votes -- an increase of 42,497 over Gore's 2000 effort. In Stark County (Canton) -- a bellwether lost by Gore -- Kerry won by 4,354.
The rest of the article looks at various suppositions why Bush won and does a fairly credible job of debunking. The article is here.
Regardless of what credence you give to Mr. Rosenthal's analysis of the data, the biggest question for me is why now? Why, given all the recent publicity of possible irregularities in the Ohio vote, the pending 'forum' by Rep Conyers and other leading House Democrats to explore some of these irregularities, the pending recount and all the other issues, why did he feel so compelled to write an article analyzing Kerry's loss at this time?
Is this a case of a party insider trying to disassociate his organization from involvement with the 'fraud faction'. Using the word
myth in the same sentence as voter suppression almost seems designed to cut the legs out from anybody trying to publicize the Ohio problems. Is it a signal by the party regulars to try to downplay the recount and other investigations?
Or, could it simply be that time honored Washington tradition of CYA? It wasn't turnout (ACT's responsibility) it was the message and the messenger (Kerry's fault).
Either explanation is possible. But what is beyond dispute is Steve Rosenthal is just one more symptom of the party insiders having a tin ear to the concerns of the rank and file. His timing sucks.