Obama Election Termed "Landslide" by most pundits = Mandate or no?

[SaltandPepper98]

It would be a mistake to read too much into Obama's win - it was a very abnormal election in many ways.

Absolutely agree there Will. I believe there was a sizable protest vote against Bush in particular and the Repubs in general as well as bad timing on the economy and a not so well run campaign by McCain. Yet 3% voting the other way and McCain would have won. So no, nobody can read too much into Obama's win.

Norm

uh oh (Norm sees Ro coming)

 

[SaltandPepper98]

Oh and BTW Will, the leftward movement is faster than you think. Ten years ago New Hampshire was like a breath of fresh air and I always thought of retiring there. Now, so many MassHoles have moved up there and voted in the same kind of idiots that drove them out of Mass that NH voted about 55% for Obama! A larger margin then the National average! This from a state that use to be "Live Free or Die".

And its the women selling them out Will. They want those God Damned government programs. For the most part its the women there that want NH to institute an income tax and a sales tax thinking wrongly that it will lower their property taxes. What will happen is that they will just have three taxes to pay.

As Manchester goes so goes NH. The capital, Concord is unimportant. Manchester is the main city and has the immigrants, welfare and the Democratic majority of the state. Control Manchester and you control NH. And I believe that Manchester is heavily Democratic.

Norm

Oh shit (Ro coming back with her strap-on with extensions on it)

 

[RoSquirts]

Actually Norm, I agree with both Will and you in a way. It's really 3.5%, but I'll let you slide,lol.

I think this election could be an anomaly in determining conservative/liberal voting patterns. Only time will tell if that's true though. My gut instinct tells me that the electorate is swinging mildly to the left but I think we'll have to see what the next 2 elections bring as the economy improves(as I assume it will over time) and wild cards like Iranian aggression, terrorist attacks and other unknowns enter the picture.

I don't see gun control, abortion, gay marriage, etc having much affect on voting patterns other than core partisan membership in the 2 major parties and local level elections. I expect both parties to avoid the more divisive social issues over the next several years on the national level. I think the country over the next 5-10 years will have far more important issues nationallyto contend with. On the local and state level, Republicans should build their base constituency with those issues but embrace a more center right posture nationally to attract a wider segment of the population.

The conundrum the Republicans face long term is the so-called minority vote as Will said. I believe that the Palin choice ulitmately was viewed by women as a callous attempt to win women votes without true female inclusion. Unless they truly embrace the black community, choosing Steele as party chairman can result in the same. I expect to see a further swing towards illegal immigrant amnesty(using different nomenclature of course) by both parties in the ongoing battle for the Latino vote.

The next few years will be interesting politically and I think the electorate can swing mildly off center in either direction. Only time will tell

 

[SaltandPepper98]

Actually Norm, I agree with both Will and you in a way. It's really 3.5%, but I'll let you slide,lol.

Whew, that wasn't so bad.

I expect both parties to avoid the more divisive social issues over the next several years on the national level.

At first glance perhaps. Two reasons why they won't be able to avoid divisive social issues. 1. The arrogance of politicians with control of the White House and Congress and 2. the demands of Democratic stalwarts such as NOW who want another shot at passing the ERA, gays, who want legal marriage, and a host of others who have waited eight years for this chance at power. All will demand their pet projects now. Divisive or otherwise.

The next few years will be interesting politically and I think the electorate can swing mildly off center in either direction. Only time will tell

It should be interesting indeed. I think the Republican leaders over the next ten years or so will be new faces, many of them not at all well known yet.

Norm

 

[IndyHubby]

Freedom

That's a microcosm, actually, for the whole country. Rural counties, except for a few "minority majority" areas like the MS Delta, are overwhelmingly "red" - and there are many more of them.

BUT urban counties are even more overwhelmingly blue, and there are way more people in those counties. I remember when Obama pounded Alan Keyes in the Senate race - I checked the county by county results and IIRC, Keyes actually won more counties, doing very well down state - But Obama won like 85% or something in Chicago and that was enough to crush Keyes in the popular vote overall.

Thus, Illinois is never in play in the presidential election unless you can do well in Chicago....NYC moves NY state, Baltimore move maryland, LA and SF moves California, Seattle move Washington state.

if the Republicans have a #1 problem, it's how to appeal to urban voters.

I really enjoy your posts Will and as I read, frequently think, "I wish I'd written that". They are reasonable, thought provoking, and well written. In fact, cudos to you for being one of the few here who actually know the difference between "your" and "you're.".

I am one of the many libertarians who end of having to vote republican. My great challenge is trying to understand how people can look to government as a benefactor instead of a necessary evil.

When you look at how the nation votes, you can't help but look for answers as to why the cities vote so differently from the country. I don't have any scientific evidence, but imagine that people in large cities are more reliant on government services and more accustomed to depending on others for their well being. Rural people are more self-reliant and less willing to sacrifice freedom for services. Certainly, there's a strong correlation between a person's sense of personal responsibility for his own successes and failures and a desire for less government.

I grew up in a rural farming community and now live in a city. The difference I've observed can be represented by "We need to." in rural areas and "They ought to." in the city.

The area that you addressed that bears reinforcement is why Obama really won this election. Yes the was a lot of misrepresentation, and yes there was a lot of Bush bashing. But the real reason McCain lost was because he was no different from Obama. Obama offered a few more freebes. The republicans did not fight for McCain because he is not a conservative. I was planning to vote for Bob Barr until McCain chose Palin. Most of the people I know who voted republican were voting for her. She represents the spirit freedom that the right cherishes.

PS. I found the references to Massachusetts poignant. My wife and I walked the freedom trail in October. We were both sad because we believe that many of the symbols and locations in our cradle of freedom are hostage to people who do not treasure and are unwilling to defend those freedoms and fulfill their responsibilities.

I'm sure that last statement will inflame some Bostonians, but just understand, that's how many, if not most, conservatives and libertarians see them.

 

[RoSquirts]

At first glance perhaps. Two reasons why they won't be able to avoid divisive social issues. 1. The arrogance of politicians with control of the White House and Congress and 2. the demands of Democratic stalwarts such as NOW who want another shot at passing the ERA, gays, who want legal marriage, and a host of others who have waited eight years for this chance at power. All will demand their pet projects now. Divisive or otherwise.



It should be interesting indeed. I think the Republican leaders over the next ten years or so will be new faces, many of them not at all well known yet.

Norm

Reason#3 - Republican penchant to use divisive social issues to distract from the real issues facing us. This has been the more prevalent reason these issues have been distracting us for the past 14 years.

 

[RoSquirts]

Regarding cities voting for Obama and rural areas for McCain. There's another interesting exit poll statistic that may have some bearing on the reason for this. Or not, I don't know if there's a correlation between college education in rural vs. urban areas.

As we all know, whites voted in the majority for McCain, although with less of a margin than for past democrats. When you look at the breakdown by education though it's quite interesting -

White college graduates voted 47% Obama 51% McCain
White no college voted 40% Obama 58% McCain

Obviously whites with a college education voted only marginally for McCain, while whites without any college overwhelmingly voted for McCain.

Draw your own conclusions.

Simplifying the election to urban vs rural is ignoring gender, minority, and education background margins that swung enough white voters towards Obama to ensure victory. With 80% of the population living in urban areas, elections are fought in the battleground of the cites regardless. Until Republicans find a way to appeal more to women, minorities and the better educated, they will remain the minority party.

 

[Dom4subwf]

I didn't vote

I have lost all confidence in both parties to provide positive, etheical and honest leadership. The number of our politicians that are in jail, under indictment or under investigation is alarming. This dishonesty crosses racial and party lines its everyone for themselves. Voting for one is just like voting for the other and anyone who still believes is deluding themselves.

O'bama is a democrat and those who put him in office expect pay back and if he does not come through he will lose his base such is politics. What we need, really need, is a viable third party.

 

[RoSquirts]

I have lost all confidence in both parties to provide positive, etheical and honest leadership. The number of our politicians that are in jail, under indictment or under investigation is alarming. This dishonesty crosses racial and party lines its everyone for themselves. Voting for one is just like voting for the other and anyone who still believes is deluding themselves.

O'bama is a democrat and those who put him in office expect pay back and if he does not come through he will lose his base such is politics. What we need, really need, is a viable third party.

Why? so we can have 3 corrupt parties? Do you honestly think that a third party , if put in power, wouldn't have supporters that 'expect pay back' also ?

 

[IndyHubby]

Extreme left wing teachers

As we all know, whites voted in the majority for McCain, although with less of a margin than for past democrats. When you look at the breakdown by education though it's quite interesting -

White college graduates voted 47% Obama 51% McCain
White no college voted 40% Obama 58% McCain

Obviously whites with a college education voted only marginally for McCain, while whites without any college overwhelmingly voted for McCain.

Draw your own conclusions.

Simplifying the election to urban vs rural is ignoring gender, minority, and education background margins that swung enough white voters towards Obama to ensure victory. With 80% of the population living in urban areas, elections are fought in the battleground of the cites regardless. Until Republicans find a way to appeal more to women, minorities and the better educated, they will remain the minority party.

These is no doubt that our education system has been coopted by an extreme left wing. We all know that there is a huge difference between the values those who feel fulfilled by social work and those fulfilled by producing goods and services. It's from this divergence that we get the old saying, "Those who can do and those who cannot, teach."

Many conservative students find it necessary to hide their values to protect their grades. I have one child who graduated and two children in college right now who see this daily. (three different colleges). I also have a neighbor who is a college professor and talks of having to hide his political views or face repercussions.

Most conservatives see the education system as a tool of the left. Many conservatives home school because of this. I have a grandchild in a parocial school because of the poor education and social agenda in the public schools.

Women tend to be more social because of their natural tendency to be nurturers. I see most minorities who are left wing as looking to be taken care of. It's funny because it's a bill of goods they keep buying and will never see.

 

[sexycouple2011]

Blacks? Blacks are HIGHLY socially conservative (note that 70% of blacks voted for prop 8). The GOP definitely needs to make inroads in the black community because they are a natural constituency - in some ways winning even 30-40% of the black vote would ensure they remain very competitive (and Michael Steele's candidacy for party Chair is an excellent start to addressing that) but it's not social issues, it's economic issues, that keep them voting Democrat.

You and I will win the lottery *and* sleep with Halle Barry on the same night before this happens. ;-) At its peak the Repubs have NEVER gotten more than about 5% of the black vote. It's almost zero right about now. I'd say if they hit 10% they'd be sitting in world record territory. 30-40% will never happen, no way, no how, and you already listed the reason: the Repub party is simply economically incompatible with the needs of the middle and lower classes, and since a high percentage of blacks fall into the lower ends of those categories they simply have no chance of wooing them despite their views on gay marriage. Paying the bills comes first. It sure seems that at least in this regard, blacks as a whole are a lot more intelligent than their poor white counterparts, especially the hill-billies in the south who have been convinced for over 20 years to vote against their own best economic interests because of bullshit wedge issues like flag burning, gay marriage, abortion and gun control.

No, I respectfully disagree but i DO disagree - dumping the right wingers is oblivion for the Republican party


(also, as if all that were not enough, go to the cacuses sometime, go to the canvasers out working the grass-roots, go to the poll workers and phone banks....in the Republican Party these people are 80% or more from the wing of the party you want to dump)

Barry Goldwater is spinning in his grave at the state and constitution of the Republican party. Incidentally, it is the mere presence and overall influence of the far right, (often) bible-thumping zealots who repel moderates who might otherwise consider joining the Republican party. I'm a social liberal, fiscal moderate who grew up in a small town on a ranch/farm in Eastern Washington/Oregon. This area is generally so conservative as compared to, say, the western side of the state where you have Seattle and Portland that it might as well be another planet, or at least Oklahoma.... ;-) Yet, the vote was surprisingly split favorably towards Obama in both areas this year. I lean conservative in many ways...but the far right, evangelical presence in the party makes me want to vomit. I think that accurately describes a lot of people's views who otherwise occupy the middle ground and this is why the number of people who identify themselves as "Independents" has sky-rocketed.

That said, I think you're right that the party simply can't survive in the short term without the passionate (i.e., zealot) presence of the far right as the base in terms of participation or money donation.

My prediction is that the Repub party will spawn a true off-shoot at some point and we could very well have a 3 party system. The question is: will it be the moderate wing that splits off on its own...or the evangelical wing?

The party can't survive for now without the far right base...but elections can't be won without the middle.

 

[blowme23]

Those Americans who are earning more than $250,000, should be proud to pay a little more tax if it will help the American economy get off its knees from bankruptcy - and it is bankrupt, you had better believe it, it has been for quite some time - and George Bush funded Iraq war on credit as there were no funds in the bank.

Clearly you don't pay taxes or you don't make that much money. No one who pays taxes or makes any kind of money wants to pay more taxes.

If you think its such a great idea why don't you give more money to the government?

Hell this country was built on people not wanting to pay taxes.

There are 6,000 companies "pushing credit cards on the poor", tricking them into signing up for money the companies know the lower income classes can't afford. Obama needs to immediately penalise these companies by putting a morotorium on the loans and mortgages; and sacking the bosses for their greed in siezing commissions any man with a shred of decency would not have sought. It is revolting stupid to foreclose on mortgages the banks knew the low income earners would never be able to sustain.

I guess you don't know anything about Joe Biden then.

Joe Biden comes from Deleware Home of the credit card companies. Joe Biden has pushed many bills through to help the credit card companies. Joe Biden recives all of his campaign money from credit card companies. You just elected a vice president who is owned by the credit card companies. If you think the credit card companies are going to be ****** to change you are sadely mistaken.

Let go of War, start putting your hands out to LET PEACE COME TO THE WHOLE WORLD.

OBAMA has a FULL MANDATE. Get in the line to help him walk the Path to world peace. America only has guns because there is too much hate for the various cultures. Extend the hand of friendship to those you meet every day, and the hatred of the world can disappear in a few short year.

McCain and Palin are both nice people, but Obama WILL LISTEN to what young people want. This is their country, THEY ARE THE FUTURE, this is their time, they don't want all the corruption any more.

Extend the hand of friendship??? Please put the bong down. You don't seem to understand other countries hate us. They will always hate us no matter what we do. There are people and leaders out there who are just vicious bastards and all they want is to hurt other people.

The problem with listening to young people is they don't know what they want. Young people are freaking stupid. It's not until you get older and wiser that you start to really see the world.

I used to be a Democrat however after joining the military and seeing how volatile the world and especially the middle east is, I wanted a party that is strong and will defend the country.

Now let me ask you this. Should we be the worlds Police?

after you answered that let me ask you Should we help the people of Darfur?

Oh and one more thing are you willing to spend 2 years in service of your government?

 

[blkoralslaveboy]

I expect to see a further swing towards illegal immigrant amnesty(using different nomenclature of course) by both parties in the ongoing battle for the Latino vote.

It stands to reason that they have to grant amnesty. The numbers are staggering, 12 - 20NMILLION!! How's that for needle in a haystack? Legalizing them will bring in some amount of relief for the uncertain state of social security for el baby boomerro and more than likely push the middle a bit further to the right at the same time because these new voters will likely not want to be taxed as much as the rest of us. But, then they'll figure out that they can retire some day, go to a cheap country and live on US dollar based social security income. This will move them back to the left lol. What i'm getting at is who the hell knows which way the feather will blow! Just another bridge to cross someday.

Either way legalizing that many people in a short amount of time will bring division, AS USUAL, among the rest of us. Still, this will end up being the only likely course of action because as history tells us the alternative usually turns out very very very veeeery sloppy, if not really really reeally vicious!

 

[RoSquirts]

It's interesting , Will, that in one post you manage to assert that the religious right influencing the Republican party is a media created perception. And then proceed to demonstrate that Bush, Reagan and by implication, Carter won because of religious right support ? And that McCain, Bush41 and Dole lost because of their lack of support from them.
The fact is that the religious right exerts a great deal of influence on the Republican party and in the past could win or lose elections for them as you stated. Changing demographics are reducing that capacity now. The policies proposed by the fundamentalist faction are, for the most part, not addressable by legislation but by judicial and constitutional action.

You can argue all day that they do or do not have control of Republican policy but it doesn't matter. Perception IS what matters in the end. It's not the media that creates this perception but the Republican party itself by design and with campaign tactics designed to exploit and split the electorate with fundamentalist issues. For the very reason you stated and demonstrated so ably in your listing of Republican victors and losers. To win elections.

Stem cell policy, Guantanomo, tax cuts for the wealthy, runaway spending, preemptive war, global warming policy, financial and environmental deregulation, executive branch power abuse, minimum wage policy, unilateral foreign policy - Republicans, thanks to Dubya, became synonymous with these policies over the last 8 years. Blame the media, blame them acting like Democrats, blame everyone but the Republican leadership itself. Really , doesn't matter. It's what the public perceives that matters in the end. It's a testament to the strength of McCain's appeal to the middle that the election was even as close as it was, and it wasn't even close,lol.

The fact remains that Republicans face a changing demographic and the white uneducated male, the core of Republican constituency is shrinking in proportion to the rest of the populace. You can argue all day that blacks should support Republican policy, that people shouldn't fear the religious right influence, that they've really implemented Democrat principles, etc etc. At the end of the day blacks and latinos DON'T support the Republican party, people DO fear religious right influence, and it WAS Republicans that implemented the policies of the last 8 years.

Dwelling on the victories achieved by Republican candidates in past elections will not provide the fuel for future wins. It's a changing world and a changing country and some concessions have to be made to reality; fiscal responsibility, recognition of failed past policies, demographic awareness, and repudiation of Roveian divisive campaign tactics will determine the future of the party. Nostalgic wistful dwelling on Ronald Reagan or placing blame on LBJ and Carter for the current economic mess won't carry the vote.

 

[blkoralslaveboy]

I think aahhhh she just sank your battle ship guys.
=p

It's interesting , Will, that in one post you manage to assert that the religious right influencing the Republican party is a media created perception. And then proceed to demonstrate that Bush, Reagan and by implication, Carter won because of religious right support ? And that McCain, Bush41 and Dole lost because of their lack of support from them.
The fact is that the religious right exerts a great deal of influence on the Republican party and in the past could win or lose elections for them as you stated. Changing demographics are reducing that capacity now. The policies proposed by the fundamentalist faction are, for the most part, not addressable by legislation but by judicial and constitutional action.

You can argue all day that they do or do not have control of Republican policy but it doesn't matter. Perception IS what matters in the end. It's not the media that creates this perception but the Republican party itself by design and with campaign tactics designed to exploit and split the electorate with fundamentalist issues. For the very reason you stated and demonstrated so ably in your listing of Republican victors and losers. To win elections.

Stem cell policy, Guantanomo, tax cuts for the wealthy, runaway spending, preemptive war, global warming policy, financial and environmental deregulation, executive branch power abuse, minimum wage policy, unilateral foreign policy - Republicans, thanks to Dubya, became synonymous with these policies over the last 8 years. Blame the media, blame them acting like Democrats, blame everyone but the Republican leadership itself. Really , doesn't matter. It's what the public perceives that matters in the end. It's a testament to the strength of McCain's appeal to the middle that the election was even as close as it was, and it wasn't even close,lol.

The fact remains that Republicans face a changing demographic and the white uneducated male, the core of Republican constituency is shrinking in proportion to the rest of the populace. You can argue all day that blacks should support Republican policy, that people shouldn't fear the religious right influence, that they've really implemented Democrat principles, etc etc. At the end of the day blacks and latinos DON'T support the Republican party, people DO fear religious right influence, and it WAS Republicans that implemented the policies of the last 8 years.

Dwelling on the victories achieved by Republican candidates in past elections will not provide the fuel for future wins. It's a changing world and a changing country and some concessions have to be made to reality; fiscal responsibility, recognition of failed past policies, demographic awareness, and repudiation of Roveian divisive campaign tactics will determine the future of the party. Nostalgic wistful dwelling on Ronald Reagan or placing blame on LBJ and Carter for the current economic mess won't carry the vote.

 

[blkoralslaveboy]

Well, it stands to reason that we will move closer to the center just as China will also move closer to the center. What makes this possible? Curiosity more than just liberalism. To put on your two way blinds and keep reasserting and propagating what you've always been told without question is tradition. Tradition helps us survive, get along, have a source of amusement, and so on and so forth. Then enough time passes it becomes cultural and more time passes it becomes universal and absolute, a belief (!) challenging it would be nearly blasphemous!
Then one day two groups of people of two different cultures and beliefs interact. Those that stick to their guns and say that ONLY their ways are correct they call conservatives, those that embrace each others cultures they call liberals, and those in the middle they call moderates.
Obviously, this is simplified my whole point is that curiosity is your enemy in the arena of change and not an idea. You thus far have attacked everything but the enemy because it is not something that you think is bad...hence it's constant victory over time.

 

[mocha_latte]

Mandate? Hell no!!!

No mandate, no landslide.
The only "landslide" was the electoral vote count, a relic from the eighteenth century. A candidate wins by a razor-thin margin but then gets all of the state's (except for Nebraska) electoral votes. Obama wins barely wins Ohio but still gets all the electoral votes? Sounds fair to me.

These comments come from a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat who is happy that Obama won. I just worry that the Dems will see the so-called "mandate" and lose their minds come January 20, 2009, when Obama is inaugurated.

I relish the idea of a loyal opposition. I want the Republicans around to place checks and give some prospective to the Democrats. I know that my party has crazy lefties that have to be corralled. Just as I know some Republicans realize that some of their reactionary bretheren need to be muzzled.

 

[blkoralslaveboy]

Jimmy Swaggart in '12!

 

[blkoralslaveboy]

You're both correct or at least not incorrect. The problem here is the discussion itself! We have an overinflated two party system with each party trying to represent a diverse set of constituents, where in many cases those co-party groups are in bitter disagreement. On one side you have the beast with seven heads and ten horns and a three eyed wart on the other you have the beast with four different heads and a three headed tail with ten legs! Although the beasts are natural enemies, the heads all seem to be tangled up in dispute amongst themselves.
I love to goof around.
But seriously, a two party system will have many problems and both you guys have done a good job citing some of the inherent problems on the right. This election, as Ro said earlier, is an anomaly. Mccain was dealt a very difficult hand and he did a half assed job with it. This election had little to do with the republican party constituency or core values or the religious right! It had to do with fear and distrust. I am saying to you that whatever the Republicans could have done in this past election there was NO WAY that they were going to win mainly because of of the state of the country right before the election, combined with a Bush/Cheney (rat/king cobra) eight years to blame it all on.
None of us would have guessed that a black man would become president sometime this decade. And if you say you could have guessed that before two years ago I would call you a liar! But it took this type of geopolitical fear/distrust scenario to usher in a black prez so soon, a man embodying change, youth, and an unknown form of relief; in other words a complete face lift with tummy tuck. The last time this happened, according to my history book, was Carter (Watergate, Failed Vietnam, and massive inflation combined with a horrific economy) and before that Kennedy (Peak of cold war, over armament, post McCarthyism, explosion in Race tensions).
The times always make the man, and us party members will be more and more like football fans cheering for our player. Republicans will have a come back again once the problems are fixed and people feel some type of nostalgia for something in their past, and the right face comes along. When that happens, us libs will have a snowball's chance in hell. The difference is going to lie in what our world and our wallets look like at the time...and which side looks like they can change thatl