?

Log in

No account? Create an account
[politics] The election results - Lakeshore — LiveJournal
An author of no particular popularity

Jay Lake
Date: 2012-11-07 05:48
Subject: [politics] The election results
Security: Public
Tags:gay, guns, politics, radiantlisa
Hey, Senator McConnell. Pssst. How'd that whole making Obama a one-term president thing work out as the GOP's top priority? You could have made jobs the top priority, or the economy, or the deficit, or national defense. You could have stood for something that benefited the country. You could have done something for the country. Oh, well.

As for the election, color me amazed. I went to be early last night (thanks, chemo), right after Pennsylvania had been called for Obama, and so really didn't know anything until I woke up this morning. The polling trends notwithstanding, I was not optimistic.

I have a few small observations.

First, thankfully Obama scored a large enough victory in the popular vote that we won't be treated to four years of Republican pundits and politicians tying themselves in rhetorical knots explaining why Obama elected with a minority of the popular vote in 2012 is a terrible political evil, while Bush elected with a minority of the popular vote in 2000 was a political mandate and good for the country. Or perhaps being conservatives, and thus blissfully free of any requirement for intellectual consistency or factual accuracy, they would have simply ignored that question and gone on the assault anyway.

Second, the GOP forgot that generating angry white guys also generates angry brown people and angry women of every color. They also can't read a census. White men, angry or otherwise, are not a majority of voters.

Third, I'm beyond boggled that Mitt conceded gracefully. The lesson Republicans learned from Bush v. Gore1 was that if conservatives can cloud the popular vote sufficiently, a partisan judiciary will hand them the presidency regardless of legal merit. The Supreme Court's own shame-faced disclaimer that their ruling in Bush v. Gore could not be considered as future precedent2 confirms this right on the plain face of the facts. I have been assuming all along that the voter ID laws and early voting shenanigans in GOP-controlled states nationwide were efforts to provide enough smokescreen for a legal challenge, should Romney not emerge with a clear electoral victory.

Apparently last night somebody did an emergency character transplant into the profoundly mendacious and opportunistic Romney, because he didn't go down the Bush road. I'd like to say good for him, but I flat don't believe this was for any moral or patriotic sensibility. Not given Romney's extremely well documented track record. Someone was cutting their losses.

Finally, as I said to Lisa Costello last night, leftists and liberal-progressives are afraid of a Romney presidency precisely because of what Romney himself said he would do as president. Conservatives are afraid of an Obama presidency precisely because of what they themselves imagine he will do. That difference right there pretty much sums up the difference in political worldviews.

Meanwhile, as a good liberal-progressive, I'm confident that Obama's black helicopters will be at my house shortly to seize my guns, enforce Agenda 21, and make me gay marry my neighbor. That's why we re-elected him, right?




1. If you don't know who John Ellis is and the role he played, then you really don't understand what happened in the 2000 election, nor are you fully aware of the breathtaking depth of the Bush campaign's political scam.

2. See the Bush v. Gore article on Wikipedia. I can't link directly to the relevant subsection, but search for the word 'precedent'.

Post A Comment | 15 Comments | | Link






Rafe: Get Off My Lawn!
User: etcet
Date: 2012-11-07 13:52 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Keyword:Get Off My Lawn!
McConnell has *already* doubled down on being an obstructionist douchebasket, in his speech yesterday evening. The man is an unbelievable, unrepentant assbag, and I really hope his constituents throw him out when it's his next turn on the ballot. The man embodies everything that is wrong with partisan politics.
Reply | Thread | Link



Danny Adams
User: madwriter
Date: 2012-11-07 20:55 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I'm; trying to remember now if it was McConnell or someone else in the Beltway who said that if Obama was reelected, they'd do everything they could to get him impeached as immediately as possible.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



(no subject) - (Anonymous)
Jay Lake
User: jaylake
Date: 2012-11-07 15:10 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Well, yes, that goes without saying. Blah people are takers, yadda yadda.

This might be a distinction without a difference given the nature of the conservative movement, but I'd rather argue over cultural critiques (and I realize that calling the American right's view of the world a "cultural critique" is a kindness on my part bordering on the pathological) than argue legalism over electoral legitimacy.

When conservatives are arguing over voting process, they have a fig leaf of respectability. Who can be against fair voting, after all? When they're arguing over race, anyone outside their bubble can see them for what they are, there really is no legitimizing frame.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Danny Adams
User: madwriter
Date: 2012-11-07 21:00 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Rush Limbaugh obviously agrees with the takers part, having just said that last night was not a loss for conservatism, but it's hard to beat Santa Claus. If Republicans want to keep saying they're the party of personal responsibility, they should take their own advice.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Danny Adams
User: madwriter
Date: 2012-11-07 21:01 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Actually come to think of it, I don't think this was a loss for conservatism as it existed a few years ago, just the radical right that's saturated and dominated the party over the past decade.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



russ: quo vadis
User: goulo
Date: 2012-11-07 15:44 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Keyword:quo vadis
> Leftists and liberal-progressives are afraid of a Romney presidency precisely because of what Romney himself said he would do as president. Conservatives are afraid of an Obama presidency precisely because of what they themselves imagine he will do.

Indeed... seeing all that "Kenyan - Muslim - socialist communist Nazi - confiscate our guns - apology tour - death panels - destroying marriage - put everyone on welfare - hates white people - abolish Christianity - etc etc etc" stuff from so many Romney supporters really made it clear what, um, vivid creative imaginations they have about what Obama's stated plans (and demonstrated actions) are.
Reply | Thread | Link



Danny Adams
User: madwriter
Date: 2012-11-07 20:57 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Based on the latest I heard from the NRA, if Obama won a second term he would confiscate all our automatic weapons, shotguns, pistols, cork guns, BB rifles, pop guns, bubble makers, water guns, potato cannons, and anything colored "gunmetal".
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



ericjamesstone
User: ericjamesstone
Date: 2012-11-07 15:56 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Regarding Romney's concession speech, I posted a comment on Scalzi's blog on November 3 with a prediction that Obama was going to win (although I was off about some states.) I also included the following prediction: "And I think Romney will give a classy concession speech."

Which of us correctly anticipated what Romney would do if he lost?

For that reason (among others) I believe I have more insight into Romney's character than you do, and I think you're wrong about his motivation. I think he conceded gracefully because that's what a presidential candidate is supposed to do when beaten. Even Richard Nixon knew that.
Reply | Thread | Link



Jay Lake
User: jaylake
Date: 2012-11-07 16:01 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
I believe I have more insight into Romney's character than you do

I am certain you do, actually, without argument. My insight into Romney's character comes entirely from the conduct of his campaign. Which did not encourage me to think well of him in the slightest, given everything from his 47% remarks to the profoundly and knowingly mendacious Jeep-to-China ads. The person who said those things and approved those ads is not a person anyone could reasonably assume to be of solid character.

That campaign legacy is Romney's public character, regardless of who he might be as a private person.

Edited at 2012-11-07 04:15 pm (UTC)
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Dave O'Neill
User: daveon
Date: 2012-11-07 17:19 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
While Romney did conceed gracefully. He did it a full hour after he should have done. Flipping between the news channels, Karl Rove was having a melt down over the race being called early and nobody could figure out why the Romney camp were dragging their feet.

One rumour was he actually didn't have a concession speech ready and they were having to write one.
Reply | Thread | Link



ulfhirtha
User: ulfhirtha
Date: 2012-11-07 17:58 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
He is indeed quoted as having only drafted a victory speech. Not preparing for the 90% likely scenario does not sound like good planning.

I am less convinced that a gracious concession speech comes from any positive inner character than continuing the cynical "do anything to get power" approach he has had for the past 18 years at least. If looking a bit statesmanlike at the very end will help him, he'll do it - and as usual bet on people forgetting everything he's just done & said. Putting a polish on the turd of his public life.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Danny Adams
User: madwriter
Date: 2012-11-07 20:59 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Joe Haldeman just quoted Adlai Stevenson's 1952 concession speech over his LJ, and it makes Romney's look downright pouty.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Kari Sperring
User: la_marquise_de_
Date: 2012-11-07 19:00 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
Most of the rest of the world is very relieved, too. We hated Reagan, we hated Bush senior, we really hated Dubya, all of whom behaved as though they had been elected president of the world, not of the US. Obama is a proper statesman, and we rather love him.
Reply | Thread | Link



mevennen
User: mevennen
Date: 2012-11-07 21:58 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
What She Said. He also gives the impression of being reflective and rational, which are rare qualities in politics.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



Dave O'Neill
User: daveon
Date: 2012-11-07 22:08 (UTC)
Subject: (no subject)
To be fair, I know a lot of moderate Republicans and Democrats who get misty eyed over Bush Senior these days.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



browse
my journal
links
January 2014
2012 appearances