CARLTON FLETCHER: Georgia election was a foregone conclusion

That’s just the way it is. Some things will never change.

— Bruce Hornsby & the Range

After a great deal of retrospection, the most surprising thing about the outcome of the last month’s general election in Georgia is that a lot of people were surprised.

As one Republican political expert pointed out — rather smugly, I might add — in the aftermath of the state primaries, “It’s all in the numbers. Even with a lot of Republican voters crossing over in the primaries to vote in races that involved only Democrats, the number of Republicans who voted in the state far outnumbered Democrats.”

By millions of votes, in fact.

If anyone thought enough of those primary voters were going to abandon their party in a state that would vote for Billy bin Laden, Frankie Hitler, Bob Noriega or, heck, most anyone so long as he had an “R” by his name on the ballot, they were in denial or pretty much delusional.

The Democrats, incidentally, took their best shot by nominating bland candidates riding the coattails of famous Georgia political relatives from the past, candidates who had done little to stir up statewide notoriety. The idea was to give Republicans as little ammunition as possible with which to attack their opponents — as if that would in any way diminish the personal attacks, sheesh — and hope that Georgians remembered Jimmy Carter and Sam Nunn and voted for their kin folks.

The No. 1 reason so many admitted to surprise at the ease with which Nathan Deal and David Perdue won their respective gubernatorial and U.S. Senate races is that a large number of media outlets kept up a steady barrage of “Polls show Nunn leading Perdue” and “Carter even with Deal in governor’s race” headlines. It didn’t matter that the poll results might have been based on a random sampling of third-graders in Mrs. Johnson’s geography class at Jackson Heights Elementary, the idea was to keep the public thinking that these races weren’t going to be the blowouts that they turned out to be.

Why, you may ask.

Money, I will answer.

As anyone who even remotely follows politics these days will attest, it’s not about where candidates stand on the issues, it’s about how much money they spend on ridiculous ad campaigns. Because if the typical Georgia voter sees a campaign ad that even hints that Candidate A is going to “go after my guns” or is “soft on immigration,” well, that’ll get ‘em out of the Barcalounger on election day.

You think some meaningless drivel about scandalous ethics violations, plundering the state’s education system and a candidate screwing other people out of money while lining his own pockets is going to rouse voters? Please. That is so 1970s.

Put the fear of guns, gays and illegal aliens in front of Georgians, and you’ll get them to vote. Hint that an election might be close, and you’ll also rouse the righteous indignation that allows access to the deep pockets of the lunatic fringe groups, who won’t think twice about making up “facts” that drive home their points. (My all-time favorite is the one about Michelle Nunn teaming with President Obama and anti-gun activist Michael Bloomberg in a concerted effort to take away Georgians’ Second Amendment rights. Who cares if this is based on … well, nothing … the idea is to plant that seed and, as Eric Clapton sang, “Let it grow, let it grow.”)

So, no, there were no surprises in the state’s general election. Some smart strategists played on what funnyman Jon Stewart pointed out is wealthy Republicans’ “sense of persecution.” In a recent Rolling Stone interview, Stewart noted that for the wealthy who have always looked on their privileged sense of entitlement as divine right: “They truly feel the loss of absolute power is the same thing as persecution.”

Besides, this one was in the bag even without the piles of outside money from extremist groups. It was all in the numbers.