Autopsy Report - The Career of Bradley Byrne

Truthfully? This one was over when Baldwin County reported its results, and favorite son Bradley Byrne had only 51.9% of the vote there. (Only a nominal improvement over his 46.9% there in the primary.) When neighboring Mobile only gave him 51.3%, the champagne corks started popping at the Bentley victory party at Bryant-Denny Stadium.

The final chapter in one of the most implausible nomination stories in recent decades may take awhile to sort out, but the unofficial returns offer enough information to make some early conclusions. Let's go to the map to look at how the GOP gubernatorial runoff played out geographically, with the map of the June 1 primary below it for comparison purposes. The first thing that sticks out is that Bentley's strongest vote in the runoff came from those counties where he led the ticket in the first primary, including a whopping 86.1% in Tuscaloosa. Byrne's support, likewise, was strongest in those areas where he led the ticket in the first round. As I noted in analyzing those results before, the fingerprints of the GOP establishment are visible even on this simple a graphic rendition. Byrne's largest area of support, geographically, came from the establishment's base along I-85, including the home turf of Boss Mike Hubbard in Auburn. Byrne's support in the more historically Republican I-65 corridor faded a bit in the runoff, as he made only slight gains in Mobile and Baldwin Counties, and saw Bentley pass him in the critical GOP bastions of Autauga and Shelby Counties. Byrne's weak increases in his share of the total were also reflected in those counties carried by James and Moore in the first primary, most of which went to Bentley in the runoff.

There are two principal models for how Bentley won out there in the chattering classes and on the coffee circuit. The first posits that Bentley has greater appeal to moderates and independents, and that their greater role in the runoff electorate was decisive. The second posits that Bentley primarily won by getting James and Moore voters to switch to him in the runoff. The comparison of the two maps makes this look plausible, but there are more precise ways to test from currently available data.

First, let's compare turnout (expressed as a percentage of all registered voters casting votes) in the GOP runoff, with the percentage of the county vote obtained by Bentley:

This is almost a perfect shotgun-spread pattern, reflecting virtually no correlation. This is reflected by the computer-generated trendline, which is not quite parallel to the X axis, but close. The received wisdom in this race was that GOP insiders and regulars favored Byrne, and that larger turnout, which made them a smaller share of the voting pool, would benefit Bentley. To test this a little further, let's look at the correlation of the increase/decrease in turnout, with the increase in Bentley's share of the vote. (As expected, Bentley did not lose vote share in any county.)

As the descending trendline indicates, there was actually a tendency for Bentley's increase in vote share to be less in those counties where the turnout increased. What this all seems to indicate is that increasing the universe of voters in the runoff, at the county level, clearly gave Bentley no advantage, and arguably hurt him. This seems to weigh heavily against the idea that Bentley's showing came from reaching out to independents (or Democrats) whose presence would have pushed turnout upward in a given county.

One near-corollary of the "larger voter universe" theory was that Democrats, particularly those inspired by AEA, would skew the race in Bentley's favor, and any number of pundits and blog commentors, on both sides of the AEA fence, have stated this as a self-evident decisive fact. Do the numbers bear this out? Not really. Let's take a look at Bentley's take in a few select counties.

County	Bentley	Bentley %	Byrne	Byrne %
Statewide	260,887	56.1%	204,394	43.9%
Macon	221	55.0%	181	45.0%
Dallas	1,102	53.5%	958	46.5%
Lowndes	337	47.6%	371	52.4%
Russell	550	47.5%	608	52.5%
Barbour	338	46.3%	392	53.7%

Some of these counties have heavily black populations. All share, in common, a strong Democratic voting history. If a Democratic/AEA "sneak attack" were going to show up anywhere, it would be in those counties where organized GOTV mechanisms of the ADC and New South Coalition are in place, especially in light of the interlocking leadership of AEA and the ADC. But we simply don't see that in the above table. Neither, though this would be less probative due to other variables, do we see it in the more racially balanced counties in the table. Note also the extremely low overall vote in Macon County, which would not be that low if the invasion had materialized.

This is not to say that AEA did not have a tremendous, even decisive, impact. It did. But the data don't support a conclusion that it was effected by flooding the GOP polling places with members. Rather, the AEA impact came in its massive spending - at least $1,500,000.00, and probably much more when all the reports are in - on ads blasting Byrne.

Most negative paid media is primarily intended to persuade voters who are expected to vote. (Though there is some data showing it has a beneficial effect to the employer, in depressing the target's turnout, or in increasing the user's turnout.) The ads rolled out by AEA-backed PACs were certainly of the persuasive variety. Typical, and best-known of the bunch, was the famous "windvane" ad that accused Byrne of believing in evolution, and being uncertain about whether every word of the Bible is literally true:



What kind of effect did this have? Let's go back to the numbers. Specifically, let's look at Bentley's share of the vote in the runoff, as correlated with two data sets: the percentage of James's vote in the June 1 primary, and Moore's vote on the same day:

Hopefully, the computer-generated trendlines help make this data a little more clear. What we see here is a reasonably strong correlation between Moore's share of the primary vote and Bentley's share of the runoff pie. Perhaps a little surprisingly, we see a negative correlation between the James vote and the Bentley runoff tallies. In the immediate aftermath of the primary, most observers reckoned that James voters, angry about the slugfest they'd endured with Byrne in the primary, would trend toward Bentley. However, as the recount process initiated by James moved forward, reports began to emerge of friction between James and Bentley supporters as they tussled over the second runoff spot. Perhaps this bad blood spilled over into the runoff results. Another relevant factor is the diversity of the counties in which James led in the primary. A look at the June 1 map above will recall that his counties were well spread across the state. Many were in or near the Black Belt, are sparsely populated, and have GOP primaries that are even more sparsely attended. Some were more substantial, such as Lauderdale County, where Bentley did well with 56.1%. While the correlation is pretty solid, this diversity of location and size may overstate the significance of the negative correlation if one is not careful.

Yet it is with the Moore primary voters that the AEA media buy probably had its greatest effect. At the risk of oversimplifying, a Moore voter will go out of her way to tell you that evolution is rubbish, and the Bible is literally true. A James voter would say the same thing, but would probably need to be asked. The James voter would be much more likely to take a sip of his post-lawnmowing cold beer while answering your question; the Moore voter has an existential crisis on realizing there was a splash of rum in the Christmas fruitcake. The ads' focus on Byrne's Episcopalian lapses from Alabama orthodoxy would have resonated much more with Moore than with James voters. (Though there were doubtless a few of that sort in the James camp.) No one doubts the savvy of AEA's political shop, and this exact effect was probably no accident. Indeed, it was very likely the result of one of Dr. Johnson's carefully crafted message-testing polls.

This is a Democratic blog, and I have so far spent this entire post in the dismal universe of Republican swampland. Emerging, like Dante on Easter morning, to the brighter light of things Democratic, let's take a minute to think about what this all means about the prospects of our next Governor, Ron Sparks. It is not by accident that I refer to him as "next Governor" after all of these statistical meanderings. Because if I see anything from all this deconstruction of the Republican runoff tallies, it is that we do have a clear path to victory this November. The official GOP Party Line, as was emerging on the pages of The Birmingham News before Bradley Byrne's political body was cold, is that Bentley is a moderate, folksy character who can reach across party lines, dooming the Democrats to another gubernatorial defeat. What I hope you have seen, gentle reader, is that Bentley's runoff win came from a rearrangement of the same old furniture within the Republican house. It's a rearrangement that leaves many disenchanted James (and a few Byrne) supporters, especially of the less religious-fanatic variety, open to a Democratic message of regulated, taxed gaming as an alternative to higher taxes. More important, for all the GOP spin about buzz and excitement in their runoff, turnout in that non-event fell from the 19.0% of the primary, to a paltry 15.9% in the runoff. Even in Bentley's native Tuscaloosa County, with all the excitement generated by his showing in the primary, and the political viability conferred by it, turnout only rose from 16.2% in the primary to 19.0% in the runoff, and his gross vote increased by a mere 6,632 - not a lot for one's "hometown urban base" at the height of one's buzz. Thus, the Republican hard core who voted Tuesday are far outnumbered by the Democratic base and independents who didn't join that runoff. And therein lies the way to Democratic victory.

Random Thoughts Before the Runoff

There's less than a week to go before the July 13 runoff, and a few recent developments in the news have caught my eye. Normally, I prefer providing perspective to reporting developments, but these new facts do have places in analyses I have previously made. The fact that they all bear on runoff races mean they won't be timely after next Tuesday, so here goes.

The GOP Gubernatorial Runoff. As I predicted - and ironically suggested - Byrne has pulled out the stops, hitting Bentley with attack ads based on Bentley's alleged links to AEA. There are two such ads up, and both seem to be getting a pretty decent GRP buy:

It is amusing the way the Byrne ads gratuitously toss in Dr. Reed's photo to make sure Bubba knows that Bentley is in cahoots with "them." This is straight out of the Guy Hunt 1990 playbook, where GOP ads also liberally showed Dr. Reed. I wonder how Republican admakers will telegraph race when Dr. Reed retires at AEA? In any event, Bentley is now feeling the sting of negative for the first time, and that will have to have some impact. AEA doesn't get a strong reaction from mainstream voters, but it is loathed by party activists, who will constitute a larger portion of the runoff electorate. The Riley quote, in case you hadn't yet heard it, underscores how heavily the GOP establishment is rallying behind Byrne. Bentley also suffered a minor self-inflicted wound from his own ad, which arguably exaggerated his Vietnam-era war record.

[SEE CORRECTION AT END OF POST] On the other hand, there has been an interesting development out of Tuscaloosa County, as reported this week by The Tuscaloosa News. It seems that, since the June 1 primary, the voter rolls in Tuscaloosa County have been fattened by over 10,000 new names, an increase of roughly 10% in just a few weeks. This is an astronomical registration surge in such a short time. The most logical explanation is that Bentley's strong primary showing created a sensation of viability, that has awakened favorite-son interest in his candidacy. If there is that kind of excitement on the ground in the Druid City, Bentley can only benefit, as the GOP primary turnout in Tuscaloosa was an anemic 16.2%. While there is some conflicting data and analysis in the literature, it seems to be the better view that recent registrants turn out at higher levels than typical voters, particularly when their registration is keyed to a particular event or current election. This, of course, would be the case with any new voters drawn to Bentley as Tuscaloosa's favorite son. One key question, not addressed in the News article, is whether this is the result of a spontaneous groundswell of Bentley support, or of a concerted GOTV field operation. If the former, it's a truly remarkable phenomenon. If the latter, less so, but still significant. It's not that difficult to register voters; all you need is some basic information on a postcard. Even if this is the result of a field operation, it's still a good sign for Bentley. The low turnout in Tuscaloosa in the primary indicates that Bentley did not have a good GOTV op there in the first round. Just the outreach necessary to get 10,000 postcards filled out is going to create a buzz, and that can boost turnout Tuesday. Maybe the Doc got something more for his money (paid to Huckabee's son in law) than just the endorsement.

Just how important is a bloc of votes that size? Well, considering that Byrne's margin over Bentley in the primary was only 13,772 votes, and overall turnout is usually lower in runoffs, it's potentially significant. From another perspective, extrapolating the most recent GOP gubernatorial runoff turnout (15.4% from 1998) to current active registration figures, produces a potential turnout of about 388,000. Since you would only need half of that to win, or about 194,000, that could be a big block. In any event, the polarity of the break, and the turnout, of the former James and Moore vote, will probably have a more decisive impact than the Tuscaloosa surge. But if the race becomes close, everyone will be waiting on the AP report from Greensboro Avenue.

Considering the potential impact of the Moore and James votes, the two runoff candidates seem to be focusing most of their face time in the closing weeks in counties in which they led in the primary, apparently placing a premium on turnout over persuasion.

One poll released late this week, and being touted by the Bentley camp, shows him with a 20% lead over Byrne. I have frequently cautioned about the reliability of primary polls, and this one has more problems than most. It doesn't specify the contact method (robocall vs. live caller), and they are using data from recent primaries in 2008 and 2006 to adjust for turnout. This is not a sound practice, as neither of those primaries was a runoff, and neither featured a contested gubernatorial race. Finally, the poll admits that it outsources its sample list. This is the polling equivalent of buying a car from a maker that admits it buys its engines from an outside supplier. I still think it comes down to turnout. If turnout is low, party insiders deliver it to Byrne. If enough non-insiders show up, it breaks to Bentley. For what it is worth in that department, Tuesday's forecast for Birmingham, which seems to be typical for the state:

Tuesday
July 13

Scattered T-Storms

High 90°
Low 74°

Precipitation 40%

7th Congressional District Runoff. One of the rules of being a candidate is, that when an organization has endorsed you, and set up a debate between you and your opponent, it's not a good idea to stand up the event, and let it be turned into a rally for your opponent, in front of your endorsers. As Terri Sewell did last week at a Birmingham New South debate. For a campaign that dropped a money bomb on the district for a first place finish in the primary, the Sewell team is doing some strange things this close to the runoff. For one thing, the candidate was working the canapé circuit in Mountain Brook as recently as Tuesday night of this week. Normally, a slower finance event like this, this close to D-Day, would indicate a campaign with an empty piggy bank. If not that, one with a strange sense of candidate time utilization. With so little time left to connect to voters, a candidate's time is normally better spent working a Piggly Wiggly parking lot or a Little League crowd. Sewell strikes me as the sort of candidate who would much prefer canapés in Mountain Brook to pressing the flesh (think John Kerry), and it may be that her staff simply didn't get its druthers. Look for some second guessing if Smoot's frenzied crowd-working pays off and she edges Sewell.

Attorney General Democratic Runoff. This has been a relatively quiet campaign, with both candidates making interesting and progressive statements about the death penalty. Perkins's more forceful call for a moratorium hasn't gotten a lot of play in the mainstream media, but there are rumblings that it's been noted - and appreciated - in the black community. Anderson, for his part, has not gone full throttle for the runoff, apparently wanting to save cash on hand and untapped donors for a fall contest with "Big Oil" Luther Strange. Given that the Business Council will finance Strange handsomely, this is not an irrational strategy. Perkins will doubtless close the substantial gap between himself and Anderson, but Anderson should emerge the winner, with his campaign treasury undepleted by runoff expenses.

The deadlines for registration and non-emergency absentee voting are past, so all that remains to remember is 7A to 7 P, and show up and vote.

CORRECTION: Just a few minutes ago, I got an email response to an inquiry I made about the extent of the Brantley ground effort in Tuscaloosa County. It seems The Tuscaloosa News printed a correction this morning, acknowledging that the report of 10,000 new voters there since the primary was an error. I can't find the correction on their website, but I did snag a visual from their front page at newseum.org:

Now, I don't want to make accusations while the facts are out, but that's a pretty big "error." More importantly, the original story, linked above, quoted this Viselli person responding to why there was such a huge increase. Now, even if the reporter made an honest mistake (as the correction claims), surely Ms. Viselli knew the 10,000 figure was wrong. I think I'd notice the difference in processing one application every other day, and about 330 every working day. This report generated a lot of political buzz across Alabama, favorable to Bentley, and the retraction isn't even online. Either Ms. Viselli, the News, or both, need to come forth with a better explanation. As for Bentley's chances, my earlier analysis premised on a better Tuscaloosa turnout is obviously invalid. And if only 24 new voters appeared in Tuscaloosa since Bentley's campaign gained the appearance of viability in the primary, there's no reason to think turnout will be any better in Tuscaloosa than it was in the first round. I don't know if Paul the World Cup Octopus is making a prediction in the GOP runoff, but I think he just swam a few inches further from the Bentley flag.

Handicapping the Republican Gubernatorial Runoff

You know what's fun? Watching Republicans form a circular, inward-facing firing squad, and hearing someone order, "Fire!" Why, they're almost acting like Democrats! Almost nothing could better describe the ongoing gubernatorial runoff struggle between Republicans Bradley Byrne and Robert Bentley. The only safe prediction that can be made about this runoff is that it's going to leave scars on the winner that will last well into the fall campaign against Ron Sparks. Before venturing into the general election campaign, let's take a look at what happened in the primary, and what we can expect to happen in the runoff.

Developing a four-color map to illustrate the primary results was interesting, especially as I wanted to avoid using either red or blue, lest some connotation be inferred that the candidate thus signified was the most - or least - Republican of the lot. What I came up with can be seen to the right. While the geographical and political spread of the four contenders' strong points looks haphazard, a little deconstruction will go a long way toward detecting some causes and effects of these results.

One recurring shorthand of Alabama political journalists is to refer to the "I-65 Corridor" as shorthand for the state's four major population centers: Madison, Jefferson-Shelby, Montgomery, and Mobile-Baldwin Counties. At first blush, this looks to be a key to Byrne's first place finish, as he took all four. But if there's a "Corridor" accounting for Byrne's finish, it's the I-85 Corridor. In addition to Montgomery, Byrne did well the rest of the way up that Interstate, including Lee County. In this, we see the ill-hidden hand of GOP state chair Mike Hubbard and the Republican establishment. (For those who missed coverage of the GOP Reagan dinner last weekend, Byrne was all but explicitly endorsed by both Bob Riley and keynote speaker Dick Morris.) This cluster of counties is their geographical and political base. And that leads us to a truer understanding of Byrne's strength than thinking in terms of "metropolitan" vs. "rural" counties. A look at the Byrne counties on this map shows that most have one thing in common: an early history of strong Republican voting. By this, I mean "early" to denote places where Republicans were being elected before the 1986 Hunt-Baxley contest fractured longstanding Democratic loyalties. In places like Baldwin and Shelby Counties, if you like, the Republican Party is more mature, and has what it sees internally as an establishment. And Republicans are congenitally incapable of seeing an establishment without following its lead. Nearly every county in which Byrne led has this history in common. I strongly suspect that if you took a deeper look into the remaining counties, the anecdotal wisdom that the GOP establishment was the base of Byrne's support there would be borne out, too.

If Byrne took the I-85 Corridor, Bentley seems to have triumphed on the I-59/20 Corridor. (With the exception of Jefferson, which is strictly limited to membership in one corridor only.) With Bentley, to the extent there is a geographical explanation, I suspect it is the old "Friends and Neighbors" phenomenon. Obviously, this explains Bentley's strong showing in Tuscaloosa and neighboring counties. It may also help explain Bentley's showing in those counties in the state's northeastern quadrant, along the I-59 and I-20 forks of that "corridor." While Bentley is not exactly their "neighbor," he is closer than Byrne (Baldwin County) or James (Butler). (As Moore becomes less of a factor in each succeeding losing effort, he fares less well in his home region around Etowah County. In fact, in the 2006 primary with Riley, he lost even Etowah.) These northeastern counties have divergent political histories and current political structures, so Friends and Neighbors is as helpful a working hypothesis as any. Or, it may simply be that the absence of any other determinative factor - most of these counties have competitive, but not dominant, local Republican parties - may have left fertile ground for Bentley's "positive" message. One county that would have been an historical natural for Byrne, to the extent it has long been Republican, is Houston County. However, Bentley's leading position in Houston County is readily explained by Byrne's close association with Riley, and Riley's ongoing war on the Dothan economy by raiding, and closing, the huge Country Crossing bingo/entertainment complex, which reportedly employed over 2,000.

Poor Tim James doesn't get a corridor. In fact, most of the counties he carried don't even have an Interstate. Which may not be a coincidence. One factor the James counties have in common is that they are outside the major urban centers. A more subtle factor is that most of them, whether in the Black Belt or Tennessee Valley, are considered Democratic strongholds in a general election, and this may be more important than simple geography. If voting Republican in Colbert County is an exercise in futility, in Greene County it is an exercise in despair. To be a Republican in these counties is to spend every waking moment feeling as a black man felt the day after the 1901 Constitution went into effect: powerless, at least at the local level. It can't be a coincidence that James's message - essentially one of protest about such "outrages" as multilingual drivers' license exams - found its strongest resonance among voters who find themselves excluded from the local establishment.

So where are all of these diverse voters going to land on July 13? Well, if history is any guide, they will land at home. Republican runoff turnout in the post-1986 age has never been enthusiastic, and there seems to be a limited number of local races to draw voters out. The last time there was a Republican gubernatorial runoff, in 1998, only 15.4% of registered voters showed up to participate (as opposed to the 19.0% who did in this year's June 1 primary). To the extent turnout falls, this would seem to benefit Byrne, as party apparatchiks, his most supportive cohort, are generally the most reliable voters. Another factor that seems to benefit Byrne as the runoff approaches is the relative posture and appeal of the four main primary candidates, and what this tells us about their voters' likely destinations on July 13.

As I noted above, the typical James voter is angry. While angry people do like to turn out to vote, getting those angry voters to break decisively in either direction is going to be problematic. An establishment, status quo candidate like Byrne doesn't appeal to them, and neither does the kindly Marcus Welby figure Bentley tries to project. Roy Moore's remaining voters tend to be one-issue voters, and neither Byrne nor Bentley is ideally postured to pitch himself to those voters as their one-issue guy. (This despite Byrne's frantic efforts to run from his patrician Episcopalian past, as captured by Bill Maher. Even if Maher missed the source of the real attack ad.) The problem is, to overcome Byrne's head start, and likely favorable turnout differential, Bentley needs to get both groups of voters to decisively break his way.

One arithmetical hurdle facing Bentley is his home base of Tuscaloosa County. Bentley got 63.5% of the vote in the Druid City and its environs, the highest county share of any Republican candidate in any county. But there, the good news for Bentley stops. Only 16.2% of Tuscaloosa County's registered voters participated in the GOP primary (compared, say, to the 26.3% who did in more heavily Republican Elmore County). While Tuscaloosa County saved Bentley from an early trip to Buck's Pocket, that does not represent the hometown boost most observers were expecting him to get. The last time Tuscaloosa County had a favorite son this close to the top of the ticket, Ryan deGraffenreid got 61.9% of a 36.1% turnout in the Democratic primary for Lieutenant Governor in 1994. To make matters worse for Bentley, a home-county boost from that size electorate is going to make a much smaller splash in a two-man field than it did in a four-way race. It is critical for Bentley to not only get those voters back out, but to find those who were staying home in Tuscaloosa on primary day. He did not make that task any easier by the awkward firing of his entire senior staff in the aftermath of the primary, including popular Tuscaloosa native and political operative Sally Albright and her husband. This was a page-one story in The Tuscaloosa News the next morning. Bentley has also got to figure out a way to improve his shares in Mobile (14.0%) and Baldwin (18.7%) Counties, or he's going to have a very hung-over Bastille Day. That task might not be as daunting as the low percentages indicate. Byrne is best known in his home turf, and someone who didn't vote for him the first time is unlikely to do so in the runoff. Some finish in the 40%'s is doable for Bentley in the coastal counties.

Having done well in most of the urban counties, Byrne has fewer red-ink items on his to-do list for the runoff. A handful of mid-sized counties where Byrne performed particularly below his statewide average probably merit some face time and local media buy. These include Marshall (17.9%), Cullman (14.8%), and St. Clair (18.9%). I haven't been tracking Byrne's itinerary, but neither have I noticed him in any of these three counties lately. Byrne has put up some negative TV on Bentley, which is probably overdue, as no one bothered to target the good Doctor in the first round.

It's inconceivable that this sort of attack ad won't have some impact on Bentley's numbers. He got into second place without so much as a scratch in the primary, but this round will be different.

As Yogi Berra famously put it, the GOP contest this year gives me a sense of "deja vu all over again." Oddly enough, it reminds me of the win of the father of one of this year's GOP contestants, that of Fob James in the 1978 Democratic primary and runoff. In that race, former Governor Albert Brewer was the presumptive frontrunner and insider candidate. Lt. Gov. Jere Beasley and then-Attorney General Bill Baxley were seen as fighting for the second runoff spot, with State Senator Sid McDonald of Arab a possible spoiler. Fob James was seen as an interesting, dilettante millionaire who was playing at politics. The "3 B's," Brewer, Beasley and Baxley, spent the first round attacking each other, with Brewer the most frequent target. Brewer sat on a pile of cash on hand to administer the coup de grace in a runoff he never made. Brewer's support fell apart under the constant attacks (negative media, though disliked, works), and Fob James, running a smooth, positive ad campaign, finished first in the primary, and won the runoff over Baxley. (Beasley completely vanished into fifth place.)

Former GOP State Senator and sometime wordsmith Steve Flowers, without invoking 1978, has attemtpted to paint Bentley as the Fob James of 2010, and the inevitable nominee. It's tempting to see Bentley as the Fob James of 2010, and Byrne as a Brewer who limped into the runoff. Tim James, I suppose, would be a Bill Baxley who didn't quite make the first cut. Moore probably is the McDonald, heading off into the footnotes. I don't see Moore making the scores of millions of dollars Beasley did in the following years as Alabama's King of Torts. Confused yet? I hope so, because there are really key differences that make 2010 a lot different from 1978. Most importantly, the primary/runoff universes are vastly different today. In 1978, everybody voted in the Democratic primary, because that's where governors were selected. The result of that was a more diverse, whiter, more conservative electorate, of which Fob James was the beneficiary. Today's primary electorate is more polarized and partisan, and smaller, and Bentley will not benefit from voters whose ideology is contrary to that of party insiders, as Fob James did in 1978. (Most Democratic insiders who were not already backing Baxley shifted to him in the 1978 runoff.)

One factor in both the primary and the runoff has been, and will be, the now-overt intervention of the Alabama Education Association against Byrne. AEA is reported to have spent a million dollars so far in negative media against the former Chancellor, and is doubtless ready to spend more to assure he never resides on South Perry Street. Certainly, the pummeling Byrne took in the first round of campaigning created enough doubt in Republican voters' minds to create the opportunity for the rise of both James and Bentley. The question now is whether that intervention has a net positive or negative impact on Byrne. It hurts Byrne, if no other way, by allowing Bentley to continue his "kindly doctor" no-negative campaign pledge. On the other hand, especially since AEA's backing of such shells as the True Republican PAC has now become a matter of open media coverage, the beginnings of a reaction among GOP partisans is beginning to be heard. But since those folks broke heavily for Byrne in the first round, and tend to be reliable turnout anyhow, it's hard to see how the benefit to Byrne is that great. It's equally uncertain how many AEA members will heed Dr. Hubbert's call to jump into the GOP runoff, but in a low-turnout environment, every vote has a disproportionate impact.

At the end of the day, the story line in this runoff is probably Bentley's momentum versus Byrne's structural advantages. Be cautious of any poll you see in the media, as Southern primaries have been identified as one of the worst environments for accurate polling (remember all the "Artur Davis landslide" polls?), and Southern primary polls frequently exceed their declared margin of error. The hard voting data from the primary doesn't give any clear answers, either. But that doesn't mean I can't call a winner in the runoff. Bradley Byrne is saying bad things about Dr. Bentley. Dr. Bentley is saying bad things about Bob Riley. AEA is saying lots of bad things about Byrne. Bentley and Byrne are both spending money, and hard feelings are building in both camps. So who wins the GOP runoff? Ron Sparks.