Getting It Right

Did anyone accurately predict L.A. Mayor-elect Antonio Villaraigosa’s 18 point landslide he achieved Tuesday night?

Most pre-election analysts were giving Antonio no more than a 3-7 point edge.

Yet, veteran Republican consultant Allan Hoffenblum (publisher of the non-partisan California Target Book) nailed it perfectly a week before election day.

Back on May 9, Hoffenblum heard that Villaraigosa campaign strategist Parke Skelton had told someone that he (Hoffenblum) was predicting a victory by incumbent Mayor Hahn.

Hoffenblum sent Skelton an email denying it and, instead,  rather precisely predicting an 18 point win for Villaraigosa.

The email:

From: TargetBook@aol.com
Full-name: TargetBook
Date: Mon, 9 May 2005 12:32:04 EDT
Subject: Re: Hey Allan
To: [Parke Skelton]

What's your source?  I have a bet with Kerman Maddox that Antonio wins by a margin of 18 points or more.  Can I win?

I’ve long appreciated Allan as one of the sharpest of all California political analyst, absolutely spin-free.

I have to say that over the duration of this past mayoral campaign, I checked in with him three or four times – and was never disappointed.

In retrospect, the most impressive call by Allan was made back in December in a conversation I had with him. The different campaigns had barely emerged publicly and we were still three months out from a crowded primary. Allan traced out for me the entire topography of the coming race, as he then saw it.

After double-checking my notes from that chat, Allan called it just about perfect way back then. Both the primary and the general shook out as he predicted. Pat yourself on the back, Allan. You deserve it. Great work.

P.S. Parke Skelton, another among the brightest of So Cal political operatives, is a regular reader of this blog. Kudos to him for the thunderous Villaraigosa landslide he helped engineer. Parke, maybe we can coax you into posting your post-election thoughts, letting us know how this thing played out against your own expectations. No fee attached. Only fame.

Comments

[Irak'd]

Marc's La Weekly piece on Iraq goes into the 1st person, a good thing in journalism. He doesn't take the opportunity though, to say whether or not he supported the invasion, which I wish he would. He comes close to taking the position Kerry did, namely that he's mad that the Bush administration "openly disdained any political process in dealing with pre-invasion Iraq and rushed everyone into the perfectly disastrous war now before us." Something along the lines of "I thought the resolution would have put pressure on the U.N." -- the number one "we wuz robbed" excuse from congressional Democrats compromised by their vote on Iraq.

Why not this?

Be a man and apologize. You were wrong on Iraq, partly emotionally caught up with having a Real Response to 9/11.

But Marc is man enough at the end of his piece to say that he doesn't know what to do now. And at least that's a lesson learned to apply the next time they talk of war.