Okay, We Lost Ohio. The Question Is, Why?

[robcon]

Steve Rosenthal, the CEO of ACT (the leading organization, along with the NAACP, of Democratic party voter drive efforts in Ohio) writes that terrorism, not religion or moral values, was the key variable why Kerry lost in Ohio.

I think his analysis is correct...

Okay, We Lost Ohio. The Question Is, Why?
By Steve Rosenthal
Sunday, December 5, 2004

"When it came to getting out the Democratic vote in Ohio during the presidential election, we hit our target numbers. My organization, America Coming Together, along with our 32 America Votes partner organizations, the Democratic National Committee and the Kerry-Edwards campaign not only exceeded our turnout goals for the Buckeye State, but far exceeded anything the Democrats have done in the past...

...The first myth: Many more churchgoing voters flocked to the polls this year, driven by the Bush "moral values" and the gay marriage referendum.

Reality: The 2004 election brought no increase whatsoever in the portion of the voting electorate who attend church on a weekly basis or more often than that, according to exit polls...

...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...

...Third myth: A wave of newly registered Republican voters in fast-growing rural and exurban areas carried Bush to victory.

Reality: Among Ohio's rural and exurban voters, Bush beat Kerry by just five points among newly registered voters and by a mere two points among infrequent voters (those who did not vote in 2000)...

...Still, Kerry lost in Ohio, if narrowly, and that tipped the Electoral College in Bush's favor. If this wasn't a flood of "moral values" voters or a GOP juggernaut, what was it?

The reason Kerry lost the election had much more to do with the war in Iraq and terrorism than the political ground war in Ohio. Terrorism trumped other issues at the polls -- including moral values -- and anxious voters tended to side with Bush..."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34157-2004Dec3_2.html

[Laelth]

1. Um ... just puke.

I don't think we did lose Ohio, but that's just me.

:hi:

-Laelth

[jamboi]

16. We don't know yet. We'll find out. Election process not over. n/t

[brainshrub]

2. We didn't lose Ohio.

[drostie]

10. Agreed.

While it sounds like denial, it seems to me like my former conservative compatriots have been doing some very unpatriotic things in two states.

[leftyandproud]

12. We lost, and it IS denial.

because the truth is too painful/scary for you to face. There are more of "them" than us at this point...

[bemildred]

14. Oh, good, a denial contest. nt

[Cheswick2.0]

27. maybe you are the one in denial

because the truth is just too painful/scary for you to face... it's going to take a fight to prove there are NOT more of them than us.

[Califooyah Operative]

3. hmm,

some of the "myths" hold some truth. You cant point the finger at one thing. But im sure terrorism helped bush more than iraq hurt him. All of the said factors played roles in it though. I wouldnt call it a myth though that republicans held down democratic turnout. Thats just fact.

[HeeBGBz]

4. I've not given up on Ohio yet.

Holding the fat lady hostage.

[Merlot]

5. Myth #1: We lost Ohio

[acmavm]

6. I do believe that the terrorism issue got more repubs out to vote for

bush*. I just don't happen that there were enough of them to beat Kerry. Ohio is one of the hardest hit states by way of job loss and a poor economy. That's what I think the voters came out for, and again, I think they came out for Kerry.

[bemildred]

7. Not LBN, editorial. nt

[Moderator]

8. What she said

[BattyDem]

9. Okay, They Stole Ohio. The Question Is, How?

A more appropriate title, don't you think? :evilgrin:

[gordianot]

11. They have stolen two presidential elections and are stealing more.

I do not think there will be much outcry while the grocery stores are full. We also have enough gas to go to work, and for many of us there is a job to go to. Our kids are going far away and are getting killed and maimed but is not that common to concern enough of us. Our rights are being threatened, yet I can still write what I think on DU.

Don't take me wrong I am mad as hell. We just haven't yet reached that level of desperation where we will turn out in numbers to reclaim our country as is occurring in the Ukraine.

So far we are not our Nations greatest generation, if we were Bush would be gone or exiting the Whitehouse. (I include myself in that appraisal)

[meti57b]

13. plan A: recount and research fraud in Ohio. Plan B: figure out if this guy

is correct on that and start thinking 2006 congressional election strategy along with 2008.

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

15. Reread the Last Paragraph

"The GOP put on a strong mobilization effort, but that's not what tipped the Ohio election. They did not turn Gore voters into Bush voters by offering a ride to the polls. Instead, it was skillful exploitation of public concern over terrorism by the Bush team -- coupled with Democrats' inability to draw clear, powerful contrasts on the economy and health care -- that pushed Bush over the finish line."

Read it over and over until your eyeballs explode. That's the key to winning -- all of the GOTV in the world won't matter unless we can clearly articulate a message. Right now we have the moderate and progressive wings of the Democratic Party saying two different things. Some of that is the problem of being a "big tent" party, but it also reflects a lack of discipline and our lack of access to the media. We need to get On Message right now on the subjects of national security, the economy, education, and health care -- and stay On Message until 2008.

[mistertrickster]

20. Yup, absolutely, on-message, and that message has to be

different and BETTER than what the repubs are dishing up.

[Jeff in Cincinnati]

25. Given the "F*ck the Poor" message from the Republicans

I should hope that ours would be both different and better!

[Raster]

17. BULLSHIT!!! It's crap like this that helps the dark side steal elections.

"Waaaa, we just aren't repuklican enough to win elections, waaaaaa!""

Get real. The election was stolen. Jesus Christ himself/herself could not have won in that partisan pile-up. Why did they *win*? Well, it doesn't hurt if the Secretary of State--that's right, the one that plans for, administers and then is responsible for determining the results--is also your state campaign chairman. Anyone remember florida? It also doesn't hurt THAT ALL of the manufacturers of electronic voting equipment, vote counting software, etc. are RABIDLY partisan. Oh, and finally, it doesn't hurt if your side controls every MAJOR media outlet. You know, control the media, control the message.

All this bullshit pontificating. Guess what, in the real world, devoid of the election illegalities, Kerry/Edwards won. The message was effective. The strategy was correct. We just witnessed Coup 2004. This was the biggie. 2000 and 2002 were just dress rehearsals. So please, shut the fuck up about what we have to do to win elections. We did. What we have to focus on now is proving to the American people just how democracy is being raped right before our eyes. Don't mend, don't heal and don't get over it. Open your fucking eyes and ears. There are HORRIBLY ILLEGAL AND IMMORAL THINGS taking place in our country. Unfortunately the 2004 election is one of them.

[Ms_Mary]

18. I really want to scream from the rooftops

that anyone who thinks Bush has made us safer is a completely idiot. We are not safer. We have not made great stride against terrorism. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and they did not have WMD. We did not accomplish any kind of anti-terrorist objective by going there! I get so frustrated I think my head will pop.

[mistertrickster]

19. He's saying Kerry was too vague and not bold enough . . .

And frankly, I tend to agree.

"The other major factor was our side's failure to win the economic debate. Despite an economy that was not delivering for many working people in Ohio, the exit poll results show that voters in Ohio did not see Kerry providing a clear alternative. Just 45 percent expressed confidence that Kerry could handle the economy, compared with Bush's 49 percent.

"The GOP put on a strong mobilization effort, but that's not what tipped the Ohio election. They did not turn Gore voters into Bush voters by offering a ride to the polls. Instead, it was skillful exploitation of public concern over terrorism by the Bush team -- coupled with Democrats' inability to draw clear, powerful contrasts on the economy and health care -- that pushed Bush over the finish line."

*****************

I think we DUers are not spending enough time with people who don't post to websites like this one.

The fact is that Kerry just didn't hammer home what he was going to do to improve the economy. He didn't say what he was going to do in Iraq much either, except bring in the int'l community.

He needed some bold ideas that would get a lot of media attention and air play. "I would declare a moritorium of outsourcing American jobs for a year." It's impossible, but it'd get people talking about what you want to talk about instead of Swift Boat Veterans, for one thing.

[Starlight]

21. So you think DUers spend all their time reading DU??

Speak for yourself, please. Don't assume that you know what the rest of us do in the real world. It's very insulting & short sighted.

[mistertrickster]

22. No, I don't think that. Relax. What I meant was that we need to think

about how a Kerry type candidate comes off to people who aren't in the groove like we are here.

Quick--name three things Kerry would do differently in Iraq (other than bring in the int'l community).

If you have to stop and think about it, then Kerry failed to get his message across. If we DUers have to rack our brains, then how are the Reader's Digest subscribers going to know? Or worse yet, the Fox News viewers?

That's all I meant, that Kerry wasn't connecting with a lot of people in the way that he needed to, and it is hard for us fire-breathers here at DU to see that because we're so aware of how bad Bush is.

I brought up these same concerns before the election and people just jumped down my throat (READ HIS WEBSITE! etc.) which sort of misses the point, doesn't it? Voters shouldn't have to seek out a candidate's position.

That's what prompted the "see ourselves as others see us" comment . . .

[No Mandate Here.]

23. The interesting thing, to me, is that...

... The rethugs and their lapdog press and the pundits were "predicting", well in advance of the election, that the election would hinge on Ohio.

Am I the only one who equates this with the big setup, which used these predictions to cover the demagoguery that we fear has gone on there?

Am I remembering correctly that the same gambit was used before the 2000 election, with the predictions that Florida would carry the same role?

Until the toothless DLC begins to insist on election rules that forbid the State Secretary of State from acting as campaign chair for either party we are doomed to repeat this. This is the biggest travesty of democracy I have ever heard of. It truly is like having the entire officiating team wearing the same jerseys as the "home" team. If you don't know who is calling fouls, and you don't know what the rules are, you're never going to win.

[mutius]

24. We lost Ohio

Its because they stole the election. And you know what, they are getting away with it. We are helpless, under this administration. Our country as we know it, is dying.

[clem_c_rock]

26. YEAH - GREAT SOURCE ON THIS ONE

If you're getting your information on the 2004 election on major media such as the WA Post, why should we waste our time discussing this?

They aren't going to talk about reality when it comes to the 2004 elections.

Specifically Fraud.