It Wasn't All Bad News
There was a bit of good news on what was generally a pretty bad day.
While coming close doesn't count for much, it is somewhat satisfying that Bush had one of the smallest margins for a reelected President in history. This was hardly a mandate.
Despite Republican redistricting in Texas which should have resulted in even more Democratic loses, the Democrats only lost three House seats.
Three of the 2000 red states got newly elected Democrats elected as governor--Montana, New Hampshire, and West Virginia. A Democrat was also reelected in North Carolina. Democrats also won control of both the State Senate and House in Colorado.
The medical marijuana initiative passed in Montana. Eleven western states now have medical marijuana, most likely a product of the individualist tendencies in the west. These people are not likely to feel very comfortable if the religious right attempts to push their views on others (regardless of their personal views). Of course there is some old baggage the Democrats will need to shed to pick up their support. Democrats must make it clear that they are the party of social freedom (and refute the GOP's false claims of backing economic freedom).
The talk of "moral issues" deciding the election was a wake up call. Moderate and liberal religious groups are beginning to speak up to argue that there are other moral issues beyond gay marriage and abortion. They will be valuable allies in the future as we strive to beat the far right wing propaganda.
While coming close doesn't count for much, it is somewhat satisfying that Bush had one of the smallest margins for a reelected President in history. This was hardly a mandate.
Despite Republican redistricting in Texas which should have resulted in even more Democratic loses, the Democrats only lost three House seats.
Three of the 2000 red states got newly elected Democrats elected as governor--Montana, New Hampshire, and West Virginia. A Democrat was also reelected in North Carolina. Democrats also won control of both the State Senate and House in Colorado.
The medical marijuana initiative passed in Montana. Eleven western states now have medical marijuana, most likely a product of the individualist tendencies in the west. These people are not likely to feel very comfortable if the religious right attempts to push their views on others (regardless of their personal views). Of course there is some old baggage the Democrats will need to shed to pick up their support. Democrats must make it clear that they are the party of social freedom (and refute the GOP's false claims of backing economic freedom).
The talk of "moral issues" deciding the election was a wake up call. Moderate and liberal religious groups are beginning to speak up to argue that there are other moral issues beyond gay marriage and abortion. They will be valuable allies in the future as we strive to beat the far right wing propaganda.
posted by Ron Chusid at 1:17 PM
6 Comments:
I voted for Senator John Kerry for President of the United States this election, and was disappointed in his loss, but in the event he would have won, I’m not sure his administration could have been effective in dealing with the fundamental problems that face our country, and those of this larger world we live in.
Looking at the red and blue of the electoral map I was struck by how our country is divided again. It would seem that the urban industrial and trade centers of our country seem to be seeing things differently then the predominantly rural agricultural interior. Could it be that those in the cities, on the two coasts and around the Great lakes, possibly experience much more awareness of what it is to live in our larger world? Or is it that in our rush out of the interior, toward the cities and jobs after college, that we’ve abandoned our roles in educating our childhood neighbors about what is happening in the wider world surrounding us?
In this election it seemed that the question was rural verse urban values. You could see this from Kerry hunting to Bush being, well, very rural. Being a lifelong Colorado resident, I would have to say that Bush seems more natural in that part, and to remind urbanites that this isn’t a necessarily a bad thing in itself. I will say though, that if there is another terrorist attack it will be on the coasts and urban centers, not in rural America. So it either seems that the rural interior of America is completely detached from this reality or that it emboldens them to give this mandate to the Bush administration for more cowboy diplomacy.
One thing is certain, urbanites and democrats need to understand more of this country’s rural hopes and values if they wish to win the presidency. The republicans have combined their core values with segments of the urban and rural groups this year with success, or enough success for a slim majority. They did this by speaking to the rural community’s loathing of federal controls and taxation, unfortunately the same loathing that also comes from huge corporate conglomerates. They also did this by promising increased defense spending and a military force so huge and overwhelming it will surely frighten and discourage any foe -- A policy that also happens to overwhelmingly benefit the profits of our defense industry.
The fact that urbanites don’t understand why “a liberal from Massachusetts” doesn’t sound appealing to people in rural areas demonstrates the detachment of the urban democrats, who must still be thinking that the only working people in industrial centers and members of unions. Did the Democratic Party seek to make clear that certain federal regulations are needed to protect the long-term viability of our natural resources? Did they point out that our whole agricultural industry is beginning to be outsourced, that deregulating the corporations will lead more to this? That it will become even more difficult for their children to find jobs where they live, that we are moving toward an unsustainable urban-only America? I think someone similar to Colorado’s Ken Salazar would’ve been a better choice for this past election, from this prospective.
From a historical standpoint, beyond desegregation, I don’t find it hard to understand why the South is now Republican. With Jefferson and Hamilton, from the beginning, we’ve been debating State rights verses Federal consolidation. It is more then that the parties have switched, it is that they’ve recombined in the most bizarre way. The Republicans have grabbed State rights and completely dropped Jeffersonian social progressiveness. Somehow the Democrats have embraced top down federal regulation, yet retained progressive stances on social issues. And people wonder how Clinton was able to be popular both in the South and on the coasts; beyond the simple fact he was also likeable, warm, and secure in his own skin.
How effective would Kerry have been if he’d marginally been elected? Could he have moved the programs he proposed through a Republican Congress? Could he have resolved the mess Bush got us in to in Iraq? Could he have fixed Bush’s deficit? All that he could have probably have done is put a band-aid on the problems, and most probably would have been blamed for them in four years.
The majority in this country believes Bush should be given a chance to see his War and economy through to a natural conclusion, and so now they have their chance. Many have commented that, that conclusion maybe more then the world can take. But I personally feel that with our military spread so thin, we are going to be stuck in the Middle East trying to fight a conventional war for the next four years. And during this next four years, unfortunately, sadly, we are going loose a lot of our soldiers and friends.
And as sad and wasteful as that is going to be, hopefully we can come together in the end. Hopefully we can address the global issue of rural values verse urban ones, hopefully we can work on the policies of our global trade, issues of traditionalism verses apparent secular futurism, hopefully we can embrace the stewardship of our shared environment and respect for our individual differences as free people. Hopefully, we will learn from the errors of hegemony and unilateralism.
Craig Moreschini
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
<< Home