Today is a historic day

posted by Jeff | Tuesday, November 4, 2008, 1:09 PM | comments: 21

For my entire legal voting life, there has been a Bush or Clinton in the White House. That's what made the prospect of Hillary Clinton running so strange, that we'd have at least 24 years split between two dynasties.

But today, I've never seen anything like this. To arrive at Kidder Elementary to vote and see a line out the door. And not just because the median age of poll workers was 90 (brought down from 100 by some early 20-something cutie). People are actually fired up and involved this time around, and that's awesome. Frankly it shouldn't come as a surprise, as the last two elections were between incredibly uninspiring people, which is reflected in how close the popular vote was. It really suggested indifference and apathy.

This time around, we've got two relatively inspirational leaders that people are willing to get behind. In terms of policy, they're not nearly as different as they'd like you to think, and both have largely neglected to talk about non-sexy but vitally important issues like the national debt. To that end, what I believe the president does the most is set the tone for discussion about how government should work, what our agenda should be and how we are perceived in the global marketplace in the social and political sense.

A lot has been said about what a president can do, and this one will have some of the highest expectations we've seen for as long as I've been alive. Maybe the expectations are impossibly high. But four years from now, I won't be as concerned with what he managed to do as much as what the mood and tone of the nation is. If we're financially on better footing, on better terms with the rest of the world and generally a country that is doing innovative things, then that to me is success.

I remember having a conversation with a guy I worked with who is Pakistani by birth, and a citizen for something like 20 years now. He couldn't understand voter apathy in the face of the meltdown his birth nation has been in for years. He was also very in tune with the cowboy image of Bush as seen from most of the world, and the harm it did to our image. It's antagonistic to say the least.

And so he is hopeful that Obama wins, because as an ex-pat he sees the value in a non-white president (with, gasp!, Hussein as his middle name), but also sees the value as a citizen in the uniting influence he could exact. As much as one might be willing to argue that race shouldn't matter, it does in a nation that has been ruled by old white men for 200 years, governing a populace that is anything but dominated by old white men.

If he does win, he's going to have an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress to work with. It's hard to say how much they'll agree with him, but time will tell. Truth be told, I'm not sure if this is the greatest thing, since things haven't been great with the opposite extreme in place. The pressure on the Democratic party is enormous to do the right thing, or we'll see it swing right back the other way.

It's fun to see how we got here. I remember in 2000 thinking that McCain would be a sure thing for the nomination when he surprised everyone and won some state (I forget which), and yet we got Bush. Gore had name recognition, but Bradley was the more interesting candidate. I figured we'd never hear from McCain again, but here he was. In primaries he seemed mostly willing to stick to issues, but his campaign degenerated over time to nonsense about stupid things that rational people weren't having (like the Ayers nonsense). Then he picked a totally unqualified running mate with a resume of beauty queen and hockey mom. I'm sure she has potential in the long run, but with her current knowledge and experience (and hotness), it's scary to think of her next to the red phone. I ultimately think that it was this choice that could be his undoing.

I first heard of Obama in 2004, when he spoke at the DNC. Aside from thinking he had a funny name, I remember being impressed with his delivery. It was like something out of an old news reel from one of the Kennedy's. Even then the pundits were making those kinds of comparisons and considering him the future of the party. When this race came along, I figured it was a forgone conclusion that Clinton would get the nomination, and I was OK with that given her record of hard work as a senator, even if I didn't always agree with her. But the more I heard Obama speak, the more I saw that there was an intangible quality in his personality that would make him the better choice, especially given that his policy stance isn't fundamentally different from Clinton's. He went on to mostly stick to issues, though he had some dumb ads as well, and I applaud him for not taking the fed cash for campaigning.

And here we are now, ten hours away or so of having a pretty good idea of who #44 will be. It's pretty exciting. There's actually reason to be excited for a change. I think the brand/cult of Obama is a powerful thing, but if the dude moves to DC, he's sure got his work cut out for him.

On the local level, we had two obvious state issues to deal with, and I think for a change that Ohio voters will do the right thing. Local elected folk in my county generally do a pretty good job, and I voted for most of the incumbents, except for one. I've known these guys for years from working in local government. It's strange, by the way, how all of the local Republicans here have been generally sufficient leaders, yet at the state and national levels, epic failures. All the more reason why getting tied up in dogmatic party ideology is a weak-minded cop-out from actually considering the issues.

Exciting, if a little scary, times indeed.


Comments

Gonch

November 4, 2008, 6:44 PM #

"...the brand/cult of Obama is a powerful thing..."

I hope that was a deliberate choice of words, because they were perfect. :)

Jeff

November 4, 2008, 6:52 PM #

It absolutely was, but I'm not suggesting that there's something negative about it the way many would.

Fed up

November 4, 2008, 7:40 PM #

Ayers "nonsense"????!!!! WTF! Obama sits on a board with this guy, agrees to go to a fundraiser at his house, etc... Then Obama gives a glowing testimonial to this terrorist to help him sell his book. Then, we discover that computer models show Obama likely used Ayers to write at least part of his book "Dreams". WTF! How is anyone not outraged by this? To even have ANY association with this radical is something no normal person would do. Would you give a testimonial to a terrorist to put on the back of his book? Would you put your good name on the line? Of course not. But Obama did.

Then, we have Obama sitting in the same church under a radical preacher for 20 YEARS without objection, until, of course, it wasn't politically popular. A pastor who believes 9/11 was a government conspiracy and that Jesus is a black man. Even Oprah had enough political savvy and common sense to leave this biased, biggoted church years ago. WTF!?

And on top of this, Obama is associated with the radical Rev. Phleger, Convicted Felon Tony Rezko, and his communist mentor, "Frank" from Hawaii. And it doesn't stop there. Obama himself admits he carefully chose his friends to include "Radical Marxist Professors and Structural Feminists".

Beyond this, the guy has NEVER won an election on his own. He won in 1996 by getting all of his opponents removed from the ballot for technicalities. Real fucking nice dirty politics. Guess all the talk about "change" flew out the window, huh? Then, in 2004, he wins by default when a scandal forces his primary opponent to reveal divorce secrets and then he wins the general election against a late comer who didn't have the money or time to develop an effective campaign. He wins the primary race in Iowa by illegally bussing in voters from Nebraska and Illinois, a fact even Joe Biden atested to in media interviews.

This is fucked up. I don't give a shit if this guy can give a good speech and inspire people. He's a fucking radical leftist, dirty politician. Screw all this talk about "change we can believe in" and "yes, we can". That doesn't mean shit when the country is going to hell in a handbasket. There are two wars going on, and a national debt that is going to suffocate us to death. You've got one guy with 26 years of national political experience and another guy with 3. One guy who fought for his country and has the military experience we need to win these wars and another who never served a day in the military. One guy with 20+ years of dealing with foreign leaders, and another with almost zero foreign policy experience. And you people want to talk about fucking Palin!!!!????

Obama WILL win today and he will do it because his opponent McCain didn't have the balls to reveal Obama for who he really is. More than that, he will win by default, because he had the good fortune of running against President Bush. Because, let's face it, this race was never about McCain, it was a referendum on Bush, the biggest idiot President the world has ever seen.

Gonch

November 4, 2008, 8:03 PM #

"Because, let's face it, this race was never about McCain, it was a referendum on Bush, the biggest idiot President the world has ever seen."

Regardless of the rest of that semi-maniacal tirade, this is something I tend to agree with.

A dirty napkin could've won with a campaign based on voting against Bush. :)

Carrie

November 4, 2008, 9:33 PM #

"I ultimately think that it was this choice that could be his undoing."

I tend to agree with this. I think the selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate, changed the course of McCain's campaign dramatically. For those who see/saw this election as a choice between two "not great" candidates, the nonsense and noise that surrounded Palin in many of her public appearances stood to tip the scales against his ticket.

Jeff

November 5, 2008, 12:11 AM #

All that anger, based on anecdotes and passion, but absolutely no issues. That's exactly the kind of thing people are tired of. It's divisive and not at all productive.

Being a Republican running for a national office this year is not a great place to be, that's for sure. I don't think that the Bush factor was as much of a factor as some would like to think, at least not for McCain. The polls have been too close for me to subscribe to that theory.

November 5, 2008, 1:07 AM #

Funny, Jeff. Your answer back sounds exactly like Obama to the media. He doesn't have to give any answers to any questions about his past. Why? Because "it's devisive and not productive". BULLSHIT! He has literally built himself a shelter where he never has to answer any questions with acceptable and logical responses. Anytime an important issue is raised, he just answers with:

1.) Change we can believe in
2.) Hope
3.) I won't engage in the old politics of Washington

Must be nice to be able to completely ignore any issues. And because Obama usually doesn't vote and instead votes "present", we have absolutely no record to go on.

Doesn't matter. I don't know why I waste time ranting and raving. You think you are different, but truthfully, you are just another one of the Democratic voters who is caught up in "hope" and "change". Reminds me of 2004 where the Republicans got sucked in by a message of "safety" and "patriotism". I'm sorry, but I can't go through my life with blinders on.

Carrie

November 5, 2008, 1:23 AM #

Uh, you're posting anonymously to a person's blog about the bullshit of creating shelters from accountability for one's decisions and opinions.

Does that really make sense to you?

Jeff

November 5, 2008, 1:45 AM #

Both candidates have a pretty solid amount of detail on where they stand on issues. Check their Web sites. If you think they're ignoring them, well, you obviously won't be convinced otherwise. The guy has explained his "relationships" with all of these naughty people over and over, in live debates, and I'm satisfied with his answers.

And I too love the irony of some anonymous person calling anyone out for honesty and accountability. Ha!

Gonch

November 5, 2008, 2:56 AM #

You really don't think the guy who ran a campaign based almost 100% around the idea of "change" didn't benefit from the general dislike of George Bush?

I dunno. I think George Bush should get the first thank-you card when Barack starts filling them out.

Jeff

November 5, 2008, 3:38 AM #

McCain used the term change just as much. I think McCain did a pretty good job of distancing himself from Bush. Speaking for myself, I think McCain would be different, but I wouldn't go as far as to say he'd be better.

Gonch

November 5, 2008, 4:18 AM #

I know you guys like to say that, but there was a huge difference in the way both candidates presented a message of change.

McCain said he'd change things onceina while when he was accused of being 4 more years of Bush. Obama's campaign slogan was 'Change We Can Believe In' - you couldn't find him speaking without "Change" signs stuck to everything but his forehead.

Regardless, it's moot at this point.

I'm now eagerly awaiting all this change for the better. :)

Catherine

November 5, 2008, 4:39 AM #

Jeff, anonymous guy is right. Caught up in this radical idea of "Hope". That's just disgusting. I cannot believe you have HOPE. You obviously are just some silly liberal with the wool pulled over your eyes.

Jeff

November 5, 2008, 4:40 AM #

OK, so that's a message, but it wasn't the message. Do you just ignore everything else the guy said?

ANON

November 5, 2008, 4:47 AM #

As if including my name, rank and serial number would make my points any more or less valid. I don't think so.

Congratulations to Barack. I sure hope that he proves me wrong. As much as I would like to be right about him, there is just too much as stake. We MUST get it right this time. America's future is on the line.

And I certainly won't spend the next four years spewing hatred the way the Dems have for the last four. I plan to get behind this President and hope for the best. That's why I got the anger and disgust out of my system earlier today. :-) The lack of character shown by the left in the past four years has been disgusting and embarrasing for our country and their hatred of Bush hurt our image in the world far more than any of Bush's misguided policies ever could.

Gonch

November 5, 2008, 5:11 AM #

Come on, Jeff. He won, you can put the defense down.

He ran on and won on a one word message - Change.

One has to look no further than his website. Or any photo of him speaking. Or the people in his audiences. Or listen to him speak.

The core of his campaign, the soundbite that won, the brand/cult of Obama is 'change'

No, this isn't about change at all ;)

Jeff

November 5, 2008, 5:30 AM #

You see what you wanna see, and if you didn't care enough to vote, you understand why I have a really hard time seeing your point of view. Change was going to be a mandate regardless of who won. At the end of the day, people had to decide what that change would entail, and I made a choice.

Gonch

November 5, 2008, 5:57 AM #

I'm not questioning your choice or why you made it. That's all you, man. You're entitled to do whatever you like - even if you choose to support a 'muslin' candidate.

And my not voting is every bit as strong a decision and statement than anyone who went out there today and participated. Call it apathy or being jaded or lazy or uncaring, but I'm fine about my decsion to abstain.

"You see what you wanna see"

You have a knack for saying exactly what I'm about to say to you.

You're not seeing my POV because you already drank the Kool-Aid. The guy just needs an Apple logo on his ass. ;)

You see inspriation and change and good ideas. I see another puppet head going 'yap yap yap' at me.

I guess my bottom line is that even after this is all over with, I'm still not impressed. Just like I wasn't impressed with Bush or Clinton. We'll see if the change comes. I'm expecting to be cruising along just like I have for the past 17 years come 2012.

But it has been fun the last few weeks playing with something that we disagree on so completely and passionately. I live for this kind of stuff. The back-and-forth with someone who I respect and find interesting is priceless.

Jeff

November 5, 2008, 2:34 PM #

If he had an Apple logo on his ass, he'd be a robot, and even I have to draw the line somewhere.

So why is it that when you align yourself with something or someone, it's drinking Kool-Aid? That implies that I'm some kind of a non-thinking drone, and you know me better than that.

I think your issue might be that you see shiny chrome and underlying substance as being two things that are mutually exclusive. I cautiously believe that Obama is both.

And if you think about it, that's the issue that I've had with most of Obama's detractors here and on Facebook and where ever. This incessant need for everything to be one or the other and not both or something in the middle drives me crazy. It's the thing that got Bush re-elected, frankly, the you're with us or against us and the terrorists wins nonsense.

I like shiny things, but whether it's my MacBoom Pro or Obama, ultimately it's the value inside that makes me a fan.

Gonch

November 5, 2008, 5:44 PM #

Now, I might have been inclined to get behind a robot candidate.

eightdotthree

November 6, 2008, 4:21 PM #

McCain voted for Bush's outrageous budgets and wanted to remain in Iraq. I have a hard time believing anyone with that kind record is going to "shake up Washington."

Say what you will about Obama's lack of experience, but he is brilliant, strong and hasn't been corrupted by big govt. yet. I think he is going to be a great leader. He's brilliant, confidant, calm and inspiring. I think he will listen, learn and act in our best interest. That's my hope anyways.

Gonch, there were other candidates running for office, McCain and Obama weren't the only two choices. If your tired and fed up don't let your vote be ignored or else the real change will never come. Vote third party next time, I did.


Post your comment: