Wednesday, November 03, 2004
11:12AM EST: Word’s just in that Senator Kerry has made the traditional "congrats" call to Bush, and is going to concede shortly. I am befuddled and dumbfounded. How did this happen?! The economy is not great. There was a net loss of jobs under Bush’s watch. The war in Iraq is fast looking more and more Vietnam-esque. Bush’s approval ratings are below 50% - yet he won the popular vote by a good 4 million votes. I really don’t understand how 51% of the electorate determined that Bush was the best guy to be – in this case, remain – president. This means that our foreign policy quagmire will get worse in the next four years, the cultural war gripping the U.S. will get even more fierce, and in some ways most importantly, the Supreme Court will get tipped to the right for the next 25 years, minimum. With Bush in the White Office and Republicans controlling the Senate, Dubya can push through just about anyone he wants to the nation’s highest court. Is America, by and large, really becoming increasingly conservative? Do I live in some sort of political bubble? I just don’t know.
12:20PM EST: Of course, after the "what happened?" in the post-mortem, the next stage is "what next?" And specifically, what’s next for the Dems? They failed all around, losing more seats in both the House and Senate, and losing the presidency. Bush became the first presidential candidate to get more than 50% of the popular vote since his Daddy back in ’88. So were the Dems too liberal? Not liberal enough? Too wishy-washy? And who runs in ’08 against we-don’t-know-yet? The results of this election say to me that there’s no way Senator Clinton could win as the Democratic candidate in 4 years; the implication from the exit polling is that the Dem candidate needs to be more center-right, as the "most important" issue cited by voters was "moral values." Besides the "WTF?!" factor, it’s worth recognizing that this, by and large, means conservative values: anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, et.al. So, how do liberals get a candidate in the White House? Do we have to run a social moderate-to-conservative/fiscal moderate as the Dem candidate? Shit, I’d argue that we just did, and his name was Kerry.
12:57PM EST: Ballot initiatives were a big deal across the country, the majority of them regarding gay marriage and civil unions – and ‘mos lost all 11 of those. Even in Oregon, where it appeared we’d maybe-just-maybe get a "no" vote, we lost. The country as a whole seems to definitely not be ready for gay marriage, which leaves it to the courts – which is precisely what proponents of these measures fear. I’ve said for a number of years that the Supreme Court will eventually legalize same-sex marriage, knocking down DOMA and its children, but now I’m not so sure, since Dubya will get to nominate, likely, multiple judges to become Supremes. Have we pushed too hard, too fast? Something to think about.
12:20PM EST: Of course, after the "what happened?" in the post-mortem, the next stage is "what next?" And specifically, what’s next for the Dems? They failed all around, losing more seats in both the House and Senate, and losing the presidency. Bush became the first presidential candidate to get more than 50% of the popular vote since his Daddy back in ’88. So were the Dems too liberal? Not liberal enough? Too wishy-washy? And who runs in ’08 against we-don’t-know-yet? The results of this election say to me that there’s no way Senator Clinton could win as the Democratic candidate in 4 years; the implication from the exit polling is that the Dem candidate needs to be more center-right, as the "most important" issue cited by voters was "moral values." Besides the "WTF?!" factor, it’s worth recognizing that this, by and large, means conservative values: anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, et.al. So, how do liberals get a candidate in the White House? Do we have to run a social moderate-to-conservative/fiscal moderate as the Dem candidate? Shit, I’d argue that we just did, and his name was Kerry.
12:57PM EST: Ballot initiatives were a big deal across the country, the majority of them regarding gay marriage and civil unions – and ‘mos lost all 11 of those. Even in Oregon, where it appeared we’d maybe-just-maybe get a "no" vote, we lost. The country as a whole seems to definitely not be ready for gay marriage, which leaves it to the courts – which is precisely what proponents of these measures fear. I’ve said for a number of years that the Supreme Court will eventually legalize same-sex marriage, knocking down DOMA and its children, but now I’m not so sure, since Dubya will get to nominate, likely, multiple judges to become Supremes. Have we pushed too hard, too fast? Something to think about.
# posted by Thomas : 8:28 PM
