As you would expect last week’s election results have led to
an enormous amount of opining from both sides on what it all means. There is
debate on whether a margin of 2.5% in the popular vote constitutes a mandate or
not, and in my view you can argue either way – “mandate” is not a fact, the
truth of which can be argued and proven, but an interpretation of the data and
no interpretation is ever right or provable.
So let’s let the facts speak for themselves:
·
As of
Noon on Friday, with nearly all votes in, Obama led Romney in the popular vote by
a count of 61,173,739 or 50.5% to 58,167,260 or 48.0%.
·
Obama
won the electoral vote by a greater margin than Kennedy, Nixon, Carter, or
Bush.
·
Obama
is the fourth president to win two terms by 50% or more, joining Roosevelt,
Eisenhower, and Reagan.
·
The
Democrats gained two seats in the (already Democrat-controlled) Senate, and
while they did not gain a majority in the House, narrowed the margin of
difference.
·
Far-right
Republicans lost races they were expected to win (e.g.,Mourdock, Akins, McMahon)
lost or won by much closer margins than expected (Bachman, Heller).
·
Tax
reforms, particularly increasing the tax share of the wealthy was an explicit
platform difference between the two parties, and the voters elected the guy who
favored that increase.
·
Marriage
rights, a hot-button issues for the right wing, was approved in four states by
margins of 3 to 6%.
I’m not going to argue whether these results constitute a
mandate for President Obama and the Democrats or not. I am suggesting that
they, along with a great deal of post-election polling, reflect a trend among
centrist and undecided voters away from the Tea Party/Evangelical Right’s
positions and a growing disgust with the obstructionism by the Republicans in
Congress that was fueled by their pandering to the extreme Right. The results
for Mourdock, Akins, and McMahon in particular, along with the defeat of Scott Brown
by Elizabeth Warren in Massachusetts and George Allen by Tim Kaine in Virginia
should cause Mssrs. McConnell and Boehner to step back and reevaluate their
tactics. McConnell proclaimed four years ago that the main task before the GOP
was to make sure Obama was a one-term president – the main task – not the economy,
not the endless wars, not poverty or health care. And they failed decisively at
that task. Einstein said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over
expecting different results, so we could see the change of tactics (or not) as
a test of the GOP’s sanity.
A decisive majority of the voters have shown how they felt
about all the issues the GOP bet their campaign on – tax reform, and Obamacare
in particular. Post-election polling indicates that a vast majority of the
electorate were disgusted by the campaign – its length, and particularly its mendacity.
There was lying on both sides, but fact checkers across the spectrum agree that
the dishonesty on the Romney/Ryan side was greater than on the Obama/Biden side
by a large multiple. Personally, as I’ve said in this space, I have no use for
lying on either side, and that includes lies of omission and lies by telling
half-truths, and the American people seem to be showing that they feel the
same.
It’s time now for both parties to get back to the business of
governing. Liberal/Progressive as I am, I like the two-party system. It should
serve to keep all parties honest and to ensure that the best aspects of both
the liberal and conservative views are incorporated into policy. I like the
parliamentary system of multiple parties better for the same reason, but third
parties have never gained much traction here and when it operates effectively
the two-party system should accomplish the same thing. It can’t, however, when
either party decides that its survival and reelection is more important than
what it was elected for and is willing to effectively stop the process of
governing for four years in order to unseat a duly elected President.
Boehner has expressed some willingness to collaborate; McConnell
still sounds intransigent. The future of the country may very well depend on
their willingness to lead their party rather in cooperating to govern rather
than maintaining their “my way or the highway” approach. Let’s hope that
underneath the bombast, the results of the election are speaking to them and
their colleagues and that the next four years are more productive than the
last.
-->
1 comment:
McConnell has begun to soften - that he would accept a $1 tax increase for $1 spending cut... whether he soft pedals or not is unclear.
but I do believe that while the Dems won (and I'm not sure that means the Liberal/Progressives really did), the margin shows a divided country... It's nice to be on the winning side, but it's not by that much...
Post a Comment