>Michael Pollak (commenting on ACT's recent strategies):
>
>> That sounds like a huge improvement -- parachuted in out-
>> of-staters seemed to be at a big disadvantage compared to
>> Republican locals
>
>Please remember that the twin notions of (1) a surge in the evangelical
>yahoo vote and (2) a well-run Republican turnout machine based on personal
>contact are largely mythical. The election was lost for the background
>reason that was so overwhelming and so ever-present that it was "hidden in
>plain sight," so to speak. I'm referring, of course, to the post-September
>11 terrorism hysteria and jingoism (based, I need hardly add, on racism as
>always). Rosenthal did some post-election polling in Ohio and his
>analysis -- which makes perfect sense to me -- is here:
>
>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34157-2004Dec3.html
This doesn't necessarily disprove the efficacy of the Rep's GOTV operation. Standard wisdom is that higher turnout benefits Dems. There was a lot of talk going into the election that the Dems were more motivated than the Reps, and that could influence turnout. But by saying "there was no change in the yahoo vote" you could be reflecting the fact that the Reps' turnout efforts successfully offset that of the Dems. Foregrounding 9/11 jingoism is a way to evade responsibility for Kerry's weakness and the amateurishness of the Dems' GOTV operation.
Doug