Now that we've had a couple of weeks separation from the election, I think it's interesting to note a couple of statistics:
The most impressive stat is that for the first time since FDR a Democrat has won a second term with a majority of the popular vote. This is interesting because it shows that Mr. Obama clearly appears to be doing some things - many things, really - correctly. In what amounts to the world's biggest popularity contest, Mr. Obama appealed to the most people.Still, the popular vote was much closer than the electoral college would make it appear to be.
Another aspect of the turnout, and related to the above, is the fact that Mr. Obama was able to win such incredible percentages of young (18-29 years old), black, Hispanic, and female votes. This seems to be an indication of two things: first, that Mr. Obama appealed to these folks for real and substantive reasons; and second, that the Grand Old Party has singularly failed to represent these folks. The Republican party has come to be known as the party of the old, rich, male, white vote. And that's unfortunate. Because when one party fails to represent significant numbers of minorities, and when demographics are changing across the nation to reflect increasing numbers of these folks, that party has a real problem. It will be interesting to see if the Republican party can divest itself from the evangelical, Tea party extremist and reach out to the more moderate folks. Because there is much that is good about the Republican platform.
Two years ago, the Republicans were able to shepherd their Tea party folks into winning the House, and they held on to that lead this time around, too. The Republican party is not dead, but if they ever want to win the White House, they're going to have to figure out a way to appeal to people outside their base.
More women voted in this election than ever before. That's a miracle in and of itself.
I am interested (greatly) in the extreme reactions of some of my friends and relatives. Their guy lost, but rather than look for ways to improve, they bemoan the tragic way our country is headed. It would be funnier if it wasn't so sad.
Also quite sad were Mr. Romney's comments about giving free stuff to people. In essence reiterating his unfortunate comments about the 47% of Americans who take no responsibility for their lives, Mr. Romney's remarks were quite disappointing. But his comments are being accepted as true by a number of folks who are looking for scapegoat reasons for their loss. In reality, the 7 million Americans who voted for Mr. Obama who made less than $30,000/year did so for a number of complex reasons. There were also 3.5 million Americans who make less than $30,000/year who did NOT vote for Mr. Obama, and there were tens of millions who make MORE than $30,000/year who voted for Mr. Obama. To single out one demographic like that and point to it as the reason for losing is at once disingenuous and divisive, and only highlights the class issues that exist in our country.
We need dissent in our country. We need active, thoughtful, and robust exchange if we're going to be able to make sure the public debate stays open and valid. Good people must do something other than wring their hands. We are not divided, even if we do not agree. We are all Americans, and we all want the best for our country. Our country will remain strong and good as long as we do.
The most impressive stat is that for the first time since FDR a Democrat has won a second term with a majority of the popular vote. This is interesting because it shows that Mr. Obama clearly appears to be doing some things - many things, really - correctly. In what amounts to the world's biggest popularity contest, Mr. Obama appealed to the most people.Still, the popular vote was much closer than the electoral college would make it appear to be.
Another aspect of the turnout, and related to the above, is the fact that Mr. Obama was able to win such incredible percentages of young (18-29 years old), black, Hispanic, and female votes. This seems to be an indication of two things: first, that Mr. Obama appealed to these folks for real and substantive reasons; and second, that the Grand Old Party has singularly failed to represent these folks. The Republican party has come to be known as the party of the old, rich, male, white vote. And that's unfortunate. Because when one party fails to represent significant numbers of minorities, and when demographics are changing across the nation to reflect increasing numbers of these folks, that party has a real problem. It will be interesting to see if the Republican party can divest itself from the evangelical, Tea party extremist and reach out to the more moderate folks. Because there is much that is good about the Republican platform.
Two years ago, the Republicans were able to shepherd their Tea party folks into winning the House, and they held on to that lead this time around, too. The Republican party is not dead, but if they ever want to win the White House, they're going to have to figure out a way to appeal to people outside their base.
More women voted in this election than ever before. That's a miracle in and of itself.
I am interested (greatly) in the extreme reactions of some of my friends and relatives. Their guy lost, but rather than look for ways to improve, they bemoan the tragic way our country is headed. It would be funnier if it wasn't so sad.
Also quite sad were Mr. Romney's comments about giving free stuff to people. In essence reiterating his unfortunate comments about the 47% of Americans who take no responsibility for their lives, Mr. Romney's remarks were quite disappointing. But his comments are being accepted as true by a number of folks who are looking for scapegoat reasons for their loss. In reality, the 7 million Americans who voted for Mr. Obama who made less than $30,000/year did so for a number of complex reasons. There were also 3.5 million Americans who make less than $30,000/year who did NOT vote for Mr. Obama, and there were tens of millions who make MORE than $30,000/year who voted for Mr. Obama. To single out one demographic like that and point to it as the reason for losing is at once disingenuous and divisive, and only highlights the class issues that exist in our country.
We need dissent in our country. We need active, thoughtful, and robust exchange if we're going to be able to make sure the public debate stays open and valid. Good people must do something other than wring their hands. We are not divided, even if we do not agree. We are all Americans, and we all want the best for our country. Our country will remain strong and good as long as we do.
Comments