Glenn Kessler of Wash. Post ponders the continual "Overselling" of the the importance of Independent Voters in Presidential politics, and Kessler's piece support's Rush Limbaugh's longtime contention re GOP consultants fixation on Independents to the exclusion of core voters and GOTV

Two weeks after the Obama-Romney presidential election we are finally starting to get a more-nuanced, fact-based picture of what actually took place that day and in the lead-up to it, and part of what we're seeing is that some long cherished myths and notions among the professional political class may now be gone with the wind, because they can not be proven with real voters anymore.

The Washington Post

Overselling the importance of independent voters

Posted by Glenn Kessler at 06:02 AM ET, 11/20/2012

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/overselling-the-importance-of-independent-voters/2012/11/19/1c04b598-3294-11e2-bfd5-e202b6d7b501_blog.html

In my opinion, this article goes a long way towards validating one of the central tenets of Rush Limbaugh's oft-repeated point that, in general, GOP political consultants worry far too much publicly about -and perhaps spend too much resources towards wooing- Independents and Undecideds.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/11/19/the_gop_consultant_class_blames_me

That Mitt Romney won the support of the majority of Independent Voters in the U.S. and yet still lost the election, logically, ought to be a not-insignificant fact that should matter and be taken into account, and have a ripple effect across the political world.

Yet you can pretty well expect that by the time the new year rolls around, the very army of

consultants that Limbaugh is talking about (complaining about), will conveniently try to forget

this new fact as soon as possible because it directly challenges their personal M.O., their

business plan AND their world view.

It seems that the world does not revolve around Independent voters after all, but that news might be bad for business!

I never liked Condi Rice as Sec. of State, and I like her even less now. When will she finally admit HER personal culpability for policy mistakes?

Condoleeza Rice is NOT Dwight Eisenhower.

Condi Rice: A speed bump of history that looms even smaller with every passing year.

Not that you asked, but I never liked self-serving Condoleeza Rice when she was Bush 43's Secretary of State, even though I voted for him, and I like HER even less now.
When will she finally admit HER personal culpability for policy mistakes?
Ever?

A short open letter to the one-time Secretary of State on the occasion of her new book and the absurd over-the-top kid-gloves treatment that she will get from the MSM for the next few months, as excuses are made for her by the very people who were quiet at the time.

Dwight Eisenhower is STILL dead and was an anomaly as a candidate who'd never been elected to any office before becoming President.
History is not about to repeat itself anytime soon.

Given your longstanding distaste for enduring public criticism, even constructive criticism, the fact that Beltway reporters of the caliber and reputation of the Washington Post's Glenn Kessler persist in public speculation that you may run for high public office is both alarming for him, and preposterous for you.

You have repeatedly shown your unwillingness to do the one fundamental thing required in American electoral politics: to listen to average American citizens.

In your particular case, you have avoided listening and responding with candor to Americans of either the Right or the Left -or the Right-Center like me- with an insulated, above-the-fray attitude that may serve you well when you are being paid to make speeches overseas to the comfortable elite stating the obvious, but not so much with average Americans, for whom you were and are an enigma.

But now, an enigma we no longer are curious about, despite what your publisher has told you.

It's too late for you to attempt to change the public narrative now, and you also can't change the fact that your track record comes largely from dealing with people for whom you were superior to in the organization, easily pushed-around self-important academic types at Stanford, or corporate glad-handers and apologists who paid you for being around or giving speeches, even while you were on Board of Directors for large American companies.

Simply put, you lack the 'common touch,' one that Bill Clinton, for all of his flaws, was born with and then honed for years while putting himself before the very American people that you have largely been sheltered away from in your self-selecting cocoon for YEARS.

In that regard, you share that with your predecessor, Colin Powell, for whom we personally feel similarly cold towards, having personally seen up-close in Washington that same MSM news media fawning machine when he was hawking his books and "leaving the door open."

You and Powell both seem to have been born with the same imperious, self-serving gene that so many actual South Florida politicians the community would be better off without, actually possess, like Debby Eisinger, Stacy Ritter and Joy Cooper.
It's NOT attractive.
In fact, it actually repels.

We not only DONT need you, Miss Rice, there is zero chance there will ever be a Draft Condi boomlet for any electoral office, except maybe something in Cali that is thought either largely inconsequential, or, 'for show.'

No matter how many times you subtly-yet-calculatingly insinuate to reporters and columnists that you're leaving the door open for future elective office, there will always be people like myself who are standing there, happy to shut that door on you with a simple recitation of the true facts of your chosen career and your above-it-all personality.
Nope, we are closing THAT door with you on the other side.
You can keep knocking, but we're NOT answering.

We also DON'T want you to have anything to do with the NFL, either, and are tired of THAT particular line of self-serving talk almost as much as anything else about you.
No thanks!
The NFL is doing fine without you.

------

The Washington Post
Rice meets with Obama, then defends his administration's approach
By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 15, 2010; 10:43 PM

Not many authors on a book tour manage to snag a visit with the president of the United States.

But Condoleezza Rice is no ordinary book author. The former secretary of state and onetime national security adviser met one-on-one with President Obama at the White House on Friday afternoon, after a week of television appearances promoting "Extraordinary, Ordinary People," her memoir about her parents. The White House said Obama wanted to discuss a range of foreign policy issues with her.

Read the rest of the article at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/15/AR2010101506018.html

Reader comments at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/15/AR2010101506018_Comments.html