How did Bush win? Organization, smarts and strategy?

This article talks about how the $546,000 ad by the Swift Boat Liars and the Bush campaign's 3.25 million contract with the firm TargetPoint Consulting as stellar investments in the presidential race. The article says that the spending for Democratic and Republican candidates were about the same, it's just that the Republicans were better at strategy.

I think this article is disengenuous in saying the stakes were even. The biggest factor in the election was having a captive media in the United States. Fox is a Republican station with Roger Ailes as chairman. The other big networks are trying to copy Fox to regain market share. This means that some huge percentage of households in America got Republican propaganda all of the time without being counted as being paid from campaign funds.

The second largest factor is that Bush used taxpayer funds to campaign. He did this by doing a legitimate side-trip during a campaign trip so that the transportation expense of Air Force 1 would be accounted for as an official duty instead of a campaign stop. Other incumbents have done this, but Bush took it to a new low. Does anyone else recall the brou-ha-ha when he laid a wreath at MLK's grave in a 15-second appearance before heading off for his two-city fundraising dinner marathon?

The third big factor is that Bush planned his re-election campaign from his inauguration, whereas the Democratic contender has to be chosen first in a primary. This is also part of the incumbent advantage.

Still the article does have some good points. The Democrats need to get better at market targeting. There is no question there. I think Kerry's campaign also relied too much on the 527's to get out the vote. That process should have been more targeted.

Notice that the article also alludes to Republicans coordinating efforts with 527's -- or is it "used them more effectively?" Democrats follow the rules, Republicans don't.