Monday, November 01, 2010

2010 California Election Predictions – Final Answer

Posted By CotoBlogzz 11-01-2010

Rancho Santa Margarita – while over the last two years we have been 100% spot on predicting election results, including passage of ObamaCare and Whitman/Fiorina/Hutchens – the latter prediction was weeks before the polls closed and at a time when pundits called the race too close to call – this time, we are unable to predict how the Whitman/Brown and or Fiorina/Boxer contest will turn out.  What we do know is that the results will be in large measure of how  the electorate view not only the political climate, but also how it views itself.

 A Facebook friend wrote this weekend “ For those people who continue to think you can elect a conservative in a state-wide race here are the latest stats:17.3 million Californians registered to vote. D=44% R=31% Decline to state=3.5% What would make the DTS plus the 9.5% needed from the D's vote for a conservative? Nobody has answered this yet? How does 31% stretch to 45%.”  Our partial response:   “The numbers do not lie, they just do not tell the whole story.

For the people who are proud to say they are voting on principle make an excellent Mac Beth impersonation: "A tale told by an idiot full of sound and fury, signifying nothing" - Briefly: What is the principle? Value of Human Life? Guns? Constitution? Size of Government

That is, how we as the electorate see the issues and how  we see ourselves will determine how we vote.  Take for instance the war in Afghansitan:  What is the best strategy:  Targeted counterterrorism operations or  comprehensive counterinsurgency?  The selected strategy carries an inherent risk, as well as troop requirements, budget, and so on.  Likewise in this case:

Do we as Californians believe that a lifelong politician  is the right  governor for a morally and financially bankrupt state?  Or is an accomplished business person with strong threshold of belief a better choice?

We continue to make the argument that there ARE clear choices in combating what we refer to as the Evil Twins:
1.  California’s Triple Threat and  2.  The US Economic Freedom’s Triple Constraints.  Now, whether the rest of the electorate sees the same threats or not, will determine  how it will  vote:

Now, what about the electorate – how does it see itself?  The aforementioned statistics are typically political marketeeze:  How do we segment the electorate so we can customize the message?  Do we tell Latinos to punish the enemy and reward their friends?  Do we tell African Americans that the best course is to continue with the Hopey-Changey message largely based on Liberation Theology?   I submit that how the electorate views itself will in large measure determine this election’s results:

Do we identify ourselves as Hype-Americans first and foremost, to borrow a phrase from Juan Williams, or do we vie ourselves as Americans first and Hype-Americans as a distant second?

Those who identify themselves as Americans first and foremost should not have difficulty seeing the Evil Twins.  In such case, it will not be a stretch to conclude that  Carly Fiorina will take on The US Economic Freedom’s Triple Constraints: 1) Card Check 2) Cap &Trade 3) Health Care Reform, while  the Madame (Boxer) IS the US Economic Freedom's constraint.

And Meg Whitman will take on California’s Triple Threat: 1) Unions 2) Lobbyists 3) Parasitic Bureaucracies. Jerry Brown IS the Threat – Final answer.

And our usual caveat:  Keep in mind that after all, like it or not, California and the country, have and will have the government it deserves - Not unlike the Israelis and President Obama's belief that their respective countries were not exceptional. In the case of Israel, it denied God and instead asked for a King so it would cease to be exceptional and be like any other country. Israel got King Saul, the US got King Obama and Prince Harry.

No comments: