Post-election thoughts

While gracious and eloquent observations made by Barack Obama’s opponents about the historic significance of his election and a nearly universal call for national unity have been the order of the day, there are numerous questions that still remain unanswered:

On the one hand, for some Obama supporters there is clearly apprehension knowing the challenges that confront the President-elect, particularly with the promises that have been made and the expectations set so high. Indeed, well in advance of election day the Obama campaign had drawn up plans to lower expectations, according to The Times of London, “amid concerns that many of his euphoric supporters are harboring unrealistic hopes of what he can achieve.”

Moreover, the Democrats will own the governance of the country in a matter of weeks. George W. Bush will quietly move back to Texas where, eventually, he will be unavailable for his daily heave under the wheels of the political bus. It may not be until next summer, perhaps not even until early in 2010, but sooner or later blaming the world’s problems on the former president won’t be quite so effective. If that day comes, and the Obama administration has been unable to sufficiently move his agenda forward, will his now giddy supporters still love him?

It may be that much of that agenda will be scrapped or set aside for a time given the plight of the economy and the commitments already made with respect to the bail-out…er…Emergency Economic Stabilization Act. If not, he will be required to come up with another $1 trillion to cover the new spending he has proposed over 4 to 5 years. Beyond things like raising taxes on the “rich” and cutting defense spending, it’s hard to see where all this money is supposed to come from. Are we going to borrow more money (assuming we can still find some country willing to take on our debt) or simply print the money to fund all the new spending? Perhaps we could raid the Smithsonian and sell all that stuff they’ve got on e-bay.

For conservatives, on the other hand, this has been has been an autumn of discontent to be sure. In the last few months they have watched in disbelief as their government became involved in the financial markets in an unprecedented fashion. They cringed at the presidential candidate the Republican party gave them to go up against a Democratic candidate whose views caused them to cringe even more. Finally, they observed a sputtering Republican campaign that unceremoneously crashed and burned on November 4^th. Dismissed as purveyors of hate and greed, they are now subjected to a final indignity: It is being suggested that their movement is dead. Is that really possible?

This suggestion is at the very least premature. Here are two reasons why:

First, by all accounts, McCain’s campaign was a disaster from top to bottom. He constantly had to distance himself from a sitting president in his own party who is receiving historically low popularity ratings. He suffered from an abysmal lack of focus on a consistent message to the voters. Because of  McCain’s commitment to federal funding of his campaign, he was limited to spending $84 million in September and October while Obama raised $150 million in September alone, and by mid-October had a campaign budget of $640 million. His running mate Sarah Palin was allegedly a drag on the Republican ticket, chasing away much needed independent voters. Perhaps most of all was the timing of the financial meltdown, as well as McCain’s response to it. “It was a daunting task to start with,” McCain’s senior aide Mark Salter said in USA Today, “And it was more daunting every day.”

In spite of all this, and scores of both young and black first time voters participating in this election, mostly Obama supporters, John McCain lost the election by a mere 6% of the popular vote. A 52-46% loss under these circumstances a political death certificate? Hardly.

Second, we need only look to the lessons of 1994 to see that euphoria is a fleeting thing. Bill Clinton’s joyous election to the presidency in 1992 gave the Democrats control of the White House, both houses of congress, and control of the agenda for the country. But in the mid-term elections of 1994 a 54 seat swing in the House of Representatives gave Republicans control of the House for the first time since 1954. So much for Fleetwood Mac singing Don’t Stop. The Democratic defeat was so stunning that it left Hillary Clinton, fresh on the heels of her failed attempt at universal health care, telling the American people “We hear you!”

The defeat was also so stunning that some speculated that it marked the end of the Democratic era, and the Democratic party itself was destined for the ash heap of history. Last Tuesday’s election demonstrated the folly of such speculation.

Euphoria is as bi-partisan as it is fleeting.

Advertisement