I woke up from an early evening nap on October 24 and turned on the radio right in the middle of Robert Siegel’s now infamous interview (at least, infamous among NPR listeners) with Republican political mastermind Karl Rove. I have deep respect for Karl Rove. I don’t like what he accomplishes, but you have to respect his knowledge and you have to respect his track record on getting people elected (that is, as long as there really is nothing illegal involved (yes, I am haunted by that Rolling Stone article by Bobby Kennedy)).

So, when he was predicting victory in this interview, I took it very seriously… much more seriously than I’d take the same kind of talk from just about any political analyst. And, his rationale was very believable for why the polls, which showed Democrats taking the house and maybe just maybe the Senate, were wrong. In response to Siegel saying “I’m looking at the same numbers you are,” Rove retorted:

No you’re not, I’m looking at 68 polls a week you may be looking at four or five public polls a week that talk about attitudes nationally, but that do not impact the outcomes of individual races… I’m looking at all these, Robert, and adding them up, and I add up to a Rebuplican Senate and a Republican House. You may end up with a different math, but you’re entitled to your math, I’m entitled to THE math.

This left Siegel momentarily speechless, very understandably to me. Could it really be that the polling numbers that NPR and every other media outlet were reporting were too general to really catch the tide of the election? Certainly for as much as I knew it could have been, but it was hard for me to believe that all of those polling experts were just being sloppy. But, who can tell?

Well, this is one case where we can tell. Mr. Rove, what you called “THE math” was clearly wrong. Sure, the Senate is still too close to call, and I won’t be a bit surprised if the Republicans maintain a majority there (which, by the way, might be a 50-50 “majority”, keeping control only because the Vice President casts the tie-breaking vote. But, I bring this up only as a curiosity, not because I question its validity… this is the way the Senate has always worked, and 50-50 really would be a legitimate majority in this case). But come on… the House was not even close. The Democrats needed to pick up 15 seats to control the House, and CNN is presently reporting that they picked up 28, with 13 still too close to call. If those “too close” elections split 50/50, that would be a gain of 34 seats for the Dems, more the double what was required!

So, was “THE math” just that wrong? Or was Rove being deliberately over-optimistic in a calculated campaign move? I don’t know, but the end result is that I lost some of my respect for the man. I suspect he knew that what he called “THE math” was wrong, but next time I’ll have to remind myself that preserving his image is not his motivation, he’s motivated by winning elections, and who knows what he’ll say to do it.

In any event, I’m glad he was wrong. :)

By the way, there are several election-related things I’d like to write about.  Hopefully I will find the time soon, but right now I have to get to work…