Independents and the Election

I've really ceased trying to understand how the things I write may or may not resonate with editors or with a larger reading public. I'll write something that I think is good and will have an impossible time getting so much as a look. I'll publish something innocuous and it will get picked up. I'll write trying to appeal to liberals, and the Wall Street Journal will pick it up. the latest example of this comes from my post-election piece. (I really am shameless.) Did it draw the outrage of Republicans? The sympathy of Democrats? Did the left and the right brand me a squishy centrist? Nope. But for reasons I do not understand, but sure do appreciate, my piece has gotten a bit of traction among Independents, including "The hankster." This has led me to several interesting email exchanges with independents, including Linda Curtis, who has written a provocative piece on the independent insurgency and the recent Texas gubernatorial race over at Harvey Kronberg's Quorum Report. Here is an excerpt:

I think the most important story of the 2006 Texas Gubernatorial race has been missed by the Texas media. I've been an independent activist for 27 years, and founded Independent Texans in 2001. I've gotten used to our story being "missed" by the media. In a winner take all two-party system, this is lawful. However, there just wasn't anything "lawful" about the Texas Governor's race. If we independents take what has been opened up in this election -- thanks to Carole Keeton Strayhorn and Kinky Friedman-- and build with it, Texas elections will never be the same again.

It's hard to know how much media bias affected the outcome of the Governor's race. Some media outlets chose to continually reference the methodologically flawed online Zogby polls, giving (whether intended or not) Bell and Perry a boost. To the credit of Texas political analyst, Harvey Kronberg, Quorum Report was the only publication that consistently questioned the methodology of the polls and even explained why they were getting different results. Had the larger media outlets followed his lead, this could have given voters encouragement that the race would be decided by them, not the polls nor the media. KVUE in Austin and the Austin American-Statesman get the prize this year for advocacy journalism.

Perhaps I was overly sensitive, but it seemed to me that the media was unusually obsessed with polls and predicting the winner. At what point does that activity become a self-fulfilling prophecy? The original predictions of a record turnout race, fell flat. Wonder how come. That said, numbers don't lie!


The combined statewide votes of Carole and Kinky were 4,000 votes more than Chris Bell. This has been underreported and is a seismic shift in Texas voting, with two-partyism suffering a sever jolt. Carole Strayhorn won five counties and came in second in 104 counties. The combined votes of Carole and Kinky won 47 counties (including Bexar!), and placed second in an additional 74 counties. What's more, the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project released some polling (albeit perhaps methodologically flawed) numbers indicating that Hispanic voters gave Chris Bell 39% of their votes, Carole 29% and Kinky 14%. Then they promptly declared that Hispanics are Democrats!

This likely "defection" (whatever the precise number, to the extent that polling can ever be precise), from the major parties by Hispanics is a BIG story in the Texas results. I am waiting to hear exit polls in the African-American communities across the state, but we already know that Carole did well in these communities.

The Kronberg report is apparently the oldest independent political newsletter in Texas. I've never thought of myself as an Independent, but I do find it fascinating that even a hint of centrism these days comes across as anachronistic.