Some say Barack Obama was elected with a mandate.
Both TIME and the Los Angeles Times say he was swept into office on a mandate for change.
Campaigns divide, and this one has been no exception. But if campaigns present choices, elections are the occasion for reunification. On Tuesday night, the struggle ended with a convincing victory that altered the contours of the electoral map and movingly reminded us of the greatness in our history.
With victories in Democratic strongholds and historic Republican redoubts -- Virginia, of all places -- Barack Obama can rightfully assert a national mandate, one he will need to confront the difficulties ahead. As our president, he must re-energize a troubled nation, reviled in much of the world, unsteady and anxious at home. The range of issues that demand the next administration's attention is almost limitless; the yearning of the country for thoughtful, conscientious leadership is nearly palpable.
...For nearly two years, Americans have participated in a thrilling -- and sometimes contemptuous -- debate about which candidate and which ideas should guide this country through a dangerous, difficult present toward a more promising future. On Tuesday, we chose the president to lead that journey. Today, we embark, united again.
United?
I'm not sure about that.
Robert Novak, writing in the Chicago Sun-Times offers a different perspective. He claims that Obama received no mandate from the American people.
The national election Tuesday was not only historic for the election of the first African-American president in the nation's history but also for how little the avalanche of Democratic votes changed the political alignment in Congress.
...[Obama] may have opened the door to enactment of the long-deferred liberal agenda, but he neither received a broad mandate from the public nor the needed large congressional majorities.
The Democrats fell several votes short of the 60-vote filibuster-proof Senate that they were seeking and also failed to get rid of a key Senate target: Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.
Republicans, though discouraged by the election's outcome, believe Obama will be hard-pressed not so much to enact his agenda but to keep his popular majority, which he considers centrist, as he moves to enact ultra-liberal legislation, particularly the demands of organized labor.
There are those who will make the case that Obama has a mandate and those who will call his victory short of a mandate.
Really, what difference does it make?
It's all spin. Obama won.
Define a mandate. In the 2008 election, I think the majority of the lib media outlets would declare a mandate for Obama if he won by a lone hanging chad.
And that's why I'm having some problems with the election of Obama.
The media coverage of this election was an absolute joke. Hard news was presented in an extremely soft fashion. McCain was forced to do battle with Obama as well as the lib media. It's amazing that John McCain managed to do as well as he did considering all the free advertising Obama received from the allegedly unbiased media.
The New York Times literally served as campaign literature for Obama. Could it have been more anti-McCain?
The coverage was so lop-sided that it really does bother me. Obama was given a pass on so many issues. Had the candidates been treated even remotely fairly by the lib media, we might be talking about a different president-elect right now.
And then there was the matter of money. Obama did not keep his word about public financing. He lied to McCain. He amassed enormous amounts of cash, sometimes from shady and illegal sources. So many of Obama's donors are impossible to trace. So much for campaign finance reform.
McCain simply couldn't compete against the power of $600+ million. Obama was still flooding the air with radio commercials at 5:00 PM on Election Day. Obama had money to burn. Combine the advertising he was able to buy with all the free advertising he received from the lib media outlets and it was insurmountable for McCain. He was at such a disadvantage.
Obama's failure to live up to his commitment in regard to public financing coupled with his powerful media propagandists made for a machine that McCain couldn't overcome.
No comments:
Post a Comment