ambivalent imbroglio home

« Fun and Games | Main | New Spam Technique »

November 04, 2004

Post Post

Ok. Let me get this out of the way. George W. Bush was elected President of the United States for the first time two days ago. There were, um, a few problems, but the outcome appears to be undisputed. Conservatives are ecstatic and some are plotting “revolution.” Many other people think this is bad news. I spent yesterday thinking all kinds of uncharitable thoughts and trying to avoid talking to people so that they would not be infected by my rage, despair, frustration, utter bewilderment, etc. What's there to say? Some people are saying “I'm moving to Canada,” so here's a reader's guide to leaving the country from Harper's Magazine, if you're among those who feel that's the only or best option. Here's why you might want to leave (link via Actus Reus). Mark Schmitt (via Cooped Up) says the Bush administration will now be held to the “break it you buy it” rule because they'll have no one to blame for the problems they create. Let's hope so, but voters didn't seem to care about holding their leaders accountable for their mistakes in this election—why will they do so in the future? William Saletan thinks he knows why the Dems keep losing to this idiot: he's simple, and voters like simplicity.
If you're a Democrat, here's my advice. Do what the Republicans did in 1998. Get simple. Find a compelling salesman and get him ready to run for president in 2008. Put aside your quibbles about preparation, stature, expertise, nuance, and all that other hyper-sophisticated garbage that caused you to nominate Kerry. You already have legions of people with preparation, stature, expertise, and nuance ready to staff the executive branch of the federal government. You don't need one of them to be president. You just need somebody to win the White House and appoint them to his administration. And that will require all the simplicity, salesmanship, and easygoing humanity they don't have.
Saletan thinks that simple leader is John Edwards. Maybe, but if he's right about the simplicity message (which has a lot going for it), it seems less important to find that simple leader today than to figure out what the simple message is going to be. How about this: “Democrats: People who care about each other, our neighbors, and the future of the planet and human life on it.” Damn, is that too complicated? Hollywood Phil has a great postmortem roundup of what actually happened in the voting and possibl resons why. In contrast, Atrios isn't interested in thinking or talking about what went wrong with this election. “What matters isn't what was done wrong, but what needs to be done right for the '06 elections.” Well, maybe, but there are lessons to be learned from the Democrats' losing streak, and one way to figure out what needs to be done right for the future is to figure out what you did wrong in the past. In my opinion, the biggest lesson is that pandering to the “center” is a plan for failure. I'm sure there are many more lessons to be learned, but that covers a lot of them. Finally for now, Howard Dean says look on the bright side, and he's right.
Regardless of the outcome yesterday, we have begun to revive our democracy. While we did not get the result we wanted in the presidential race, we laid the groundwork for a new generation of Democratic leaders. . . . That process does not end today. These are not short-term investments. We will only create lasting change if that sense of obligation and responsibility becomes a permanent part of our lives. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” We will not be silent. Thank you for everything you did for our cause in this election. But we are not stopping here.
We have to remember that. If all of those who have opposed Bush for the last four years continue working, there's not telling what we can do. If we can start now with the level of passion and organization and activism that we've seen in the last six months, and build on that, the Republicans don't have a chance in 2006 or 2008. But if we fall apart, become demoralized, tune out, drop out, give up . . . if we do that, then we'll lose yet again, and we'll keep losing. Come on people, take the red pill! The rabbit hole is very, very, very deep.

Posted November 4, 2004 09:36 AM | election 2004


Hey buck up young jedi. Check out this article for good advice on where we should go from here.

http://gadflyer.com/articles/print.php?ArticleID=256

Posted by: Famous P. at November 4, 2004 04:01 PM

Chin up! Chin up!

Posted by: Scoplaw at November 4, 2004 04:02 PM

I appreciate the link, thank you. I'll repay the favor as soon I see the perfect opportunity to do so.

You've been blogging a lot in the past few days. Is law school no longer pressing? What is the common attitude about this election? I imagine your colleagues at Georgetown are not as upset as you are, but what would you say is the percentage of upsets vs overjoyeds? I'm just curious.

Posted by: Phil at November 4, 2004 06:40 PM


hey,

thanks for posting the Howard Dean quote -- i may be able to use it for a little project i'm trying to get going. if it looks like it's going to work, i'll let you know . . . and probably try to enlist your help ;)

from the corn (well, the corn stubble),
j9

Posted by: j9 at November 4, 2004 11:24 PM

Great link, Famous P; thanks. Right now I'm thinking back to Prof. Parker's philosophy of always voting a straight Dem ticket even when he felt the candidates or issue positions weren't right. He did this b/c a vote for a 3rd party was a wasted vote. That's the approach I used this year (the first year I voted for Democrat for President, if I recall correctly), and a lot of good it did. Do progressives need to reform the Dem party, or leave it?

Posted by: ambimb at November 5, 2004 07:47 AM

Phil: I'm at George Washington (not Georgetown), but I'm guessing the % of disappointeds at both schools is somewhere around 80-90%. The Right's complaint that higher education is dominated by the Center and Left has some basis, after all. I only saw about five obvious overjoyeds in the last couple of days, but I'm sure there were more who just thought it best to keep their abundance of joy to themselves.

I've been blogging b/c I can't focus on school. They say the second year is easier, and in some ways that's true b/c you're not nearly as worried about how you'll do. But that's a double-edged sword b/c it also makes it easier for you to basically pay no attention. I've basically not been a law student for the last two weeks. (I mean, I've been going through the motions, but my mind has been elsewhere.) I plan to return to school for real next week; perhaps the blogging will decrease then...

Posted by: ambimb at November 5, 2004 07:53 AM

about   ∞     ∞   archives   ∞   links   ∞   rss
This template highly modified from The Style Monkey.