People should be accountable for what they write.
As a graduate student, I spent far too many hours in a dank and darkened room with a TV set and a VCR recording evening news broadcasts.
It struck me that much of what was “predicted” in those broadcasts — a military offensive here, a peace offensive there, passage of legislation— never actually materialized. And no one bothered to mention the failures.
So I’ve resolved to examine all of my columns each year to see what I got right and where I was wrong.
I began the year citing a series of studies showing rising income inequality in the United States and its deleterious effects, arguing that such inequality was neither necessary to produce growth nor an inevitable consequence of the free market.
But I also concluded that, as profoundly important as the problem was, inequality was not a great message for Democrats. Creating jobs, increasing opportunity, making the economy work for everyone and rebuilding the middle class were all more effective rallying cries than reducing inequality.
While my conclusion has been subject to vigorous debate, it’s clear lots of other pollsters reached the same conclusion, as the rhetoric I recommended soon took the place of that which I deemed less compelling.
Later, I explored one of the key policies in this arena — increasing the minimum wage — and found overwhelming support and a paucity of opposition.
Passage of minimum wage increases in ruby-red states like Alaska, Arkansas and South Dakota put an exclamation point on those findings.
In the spring, I used several columns to attack a meme increasingly being heard in Democratic circles: The midterm elections were all about turnout, not persuasion.
Both get-out-the-vote and persuasion efforts, I wrote, “have a limited impact. Circumstances beyond anyone’s direct control — incumbency, partisanship, the economy and candidate quality, among others — usually do far more to determine electoral outcomes than anything campaigns and their consultants do.”
I think the midterm results bear out that assessment. We did both turnout and persuasion, as we should have, and neither was sufficient to stem the crimson tide.
In June, I argued that “Isolationism was extending its grip on public opinion.” It was true when I wrote it, but, by September, I was explaining why the public had shifted from isolationism to engagement — at least when it came to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
Note to self: “things change,” especially when Americans go from feeling complacent to feeling threatened and when presidents commit to military action.
In fairness to me, I maintained “the ambit for presidential action is wide and that public opinion would follow presidential leadership in this arena.” True.
I also predicted that the president’s approval rating would rise once strikes against ISIS began in earnest. Wrong.
In September, I examined the basics that I thought would determine the midterm outcome. I ticked down a list including presidential approval, seat exposure and economic performance (as measured by changes in real disposable income). All these indicia looked bad for Democrats.
I noted the GOP’s horrific image was a wild card and hoped it might limit Democratic losses. It didn’t. By Election Day, the Democrats sported an image nearly as bad as the Republicans.
As part of D.C. left for summer vacation, I explored research showing happiness was not a function of money (except among the poor, who aren’t happy) but rather of factors like employment, trust in fellow citizens and institutions, the freedom to choose one’s own course in life, religion, values like altruism and the absence of materialism, along with the presence of marriage.
Based on this list, I boldly predicted those able to take a vacation would not return happier than when they left. I was right.
I can only hope that the winter holidays bring us all more joy and contentment.
Mellman is president of The Mellman Group and has worked for Democratic candidates and causes since 1982. Current clients include the majority leader of the Senate and the Democratic whip in the House.