Ray Malone's Commentary

I know lots of us have read much of the reporting on the 50th Congressional district race in California where Republican Bilbray defeated Democrat Busby by about 49.5 to 45.5 percent of the votes.

There was a lot of media talk that Bilbray was running against George W. Bush with his main issue being the anti-illegal immigration position. The media seems to think there is bad blood there, yet the President sent his final 72 hour team, into that district to get out the vote. It was the same team that got out the vote in critical states like Ohio in 2004.

I would ask you to consider the following.

Do you remember early in the spring when Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats said the issue in both the California district and in the 2006 general election would be the Republican Culture of Corruption.

That seemed like a natural issue for the 50th District. The former Republican congressman from that district was in prison for corruption. Secondly the Republican candidate to replace the convicted Cunningham was a Washington Lobbyist named Bilbray. I am sure Democrats thought they could paint Bilbray in the corrupt and confessed criminal tradition of convicted Republican Lobbyist Abramoff.

If you were handling the Bilbray race how would you get the media off the subject of "Republican Culture of Corruption" and on to something else? Democrat corruption will not do it. The media will overlook the Democrat corruption and still harp on the Republican corruption.

This election was being held in a district that is gerrymandered 54 to 46 Republican. Yes registrations are 44 percent Democrat to 30 percent Republican, but the independents in this district tend to vote 2 to 1 for Democrats. The District tends to vote 54 percent Democrat to 46 percent Republican.

What would you as a strategist do?

Would your first thought would be to change the subject? But to do that one would need an issue that both the media and Democrats would believe was more harmful to Republican chances of victory than corruption. But it would have to be an issue that was less harmful to the Republican candidate than the Culture of Corruption.

To win this district the Democrat has to reduce the Republican turn out or divert Republican votes into third parties so the Republican candidate fewer votes than the 45 percent normally earned by the Democrat candidate. The media and Democrats know that the Republican base.. about a third of the voters.. are very loyal to the president.

Would it not be logical for the media and Democrats to believe that a Republican candidate that opposed the president on a major issue would suffer at the polls at the hands of the base? There is a lot of talk about the president losing the support of moderates. But he still has the support of the base, and they might not take kindly to a Republican candidate that openly opposed the president. If the Republican candidate chose such an issue would not the media cover it full bore 24/7? Would they not make other issues of secondary importance?

So what would you ask Bilbray to do ... if you were calling the shots?

Would you want to know what issue upon which a candidate could oppose the president, and yet not cost himself very many votes from the Republican base

Several times in recent days Karl Rove has implied that the immigration issue is not a major factor in how people vote. I think the 50th District campaign of Bilbray supports that belief. I think it also supports the view that Republican candidates can oppose the party line and still get elected.

Would it not make sense to have Bilbray make immigration his main issue? If he challenges the president's position on immigration every day, would not the media lead with that story and drop corruption?

At most it would cost the Republican candidate votes from the right wing fringe. That is 5 percent max. And a 49 to 46 win is a win. So on election day the fringers got nearly 5 percent of the votes. But it did not cost enough Republican votes to cost Bilbray the election.

It has been my experience that Republicans will not tolerate corruption .. They will not even tolerate the appearance of corruption. I would give you . Tom Delay as a recent example. .But on other subjects the Republican base will allow members of the party to hold differing views with out losing major amounts of base support. Especially if that view is not on a subject that will determine how the Republican votes.

But Democrats tend to react quite the opposite way. Democrats tolerate corruption and severely punish those that go off the ideological reservation. I would ask you to note the Democratic party position on Joe Lieberman.

I think that Rove may very well have wanted to take the CULTURE OF CORRUPTION off the table and replace it with an issue the Democrats would think was better for them but was not.

The immigration issue did not split the Republican party enough to cost the election. And the returns show the corruption issue did not hurt the Republican turn out at all. It didn't help the Democratic turn out either.

I think Karl Rove or someone advising the Bilbray campaign knew what they were doing. From Rove's comments on immigration in recent days, I think it was him.

There are many issues that make a big splash in the media. That does not mean that such an issue is the deciding issue in an election. The converse is also true. Just because an issue is not covered by the media at all does not mean it is not a deciding issue in elections.

History tells us that for an issue to be a major factor in elections it must directly effect our lives. The price of gasoline is a big factor. The fact there have been no more 9/11s is a factor. The good economy is a factor. For most of us the War in Iraq is not a major factor in our lives. No one is facing the draft and forced service in the military. People do not see the money being spent. What voters do see is lots of people getting killed over there, and no one getting killed over here.

Few Americans are facing any negative effects of the influx of Mexicans in the USA. It will not decide how the vast majority of Americans vote. The media is covering a very vocal but small fringe.

Karl Rove is right. We have had 4 years of safety and George Bush has accomplished that. Bring the troops home and the terrorists just might come here to fight is a natural fear.

I don't really think immigration is an issue that will decide elections. I think corruption has been taken off the table. That leaves our personal security as an issue. The Democrats can't win on cut and run.

Once again I think the media and Democrats are playing Checkers in a game of Chess. Never ever bet against the team of Karl Rove and George Bush.

I would note that George W. Bush is all about getting done what he thinks needs to be done. If having someone trash his positions helps in that endeavor, he will allow it. Can you imagine Bill or Hillary Clinton doing what George W. Bush just did? After being attacked by his parties candidate for for weeks, he sent in his best team to help elect that candidate.

I think George W. Bush fully understands that history judges what a man has accomplished in his time in power.. not what people said about him at the time he was in office. It is the common mark of greatness.