Words of the Yak (my friend, Nick):
Lets look at this administration from an existential (non-aristolean) view-point.
What would this administration be able to do that would be politically radical?
Overturn Roe v. Wade? Nope.
Confirm Satan Incarnate as the next National Security Advisor? Nope.
Strip you of all of your possessions and place you in an internment camp? Nope. Only Democrats and Socialists do that.
(after all, it WAS FDR that put people into internment camps)
So, existentially, there is just not enough evidence to warrant such a great depression about Bush being re-elected. You cannot go by the word of fat people with cameras, nor can you go by the word of Religious Fundementalists with political capital.
You want to blame someone for this war? Blame everyone that voted “yea” and has a little D next to their name.
If someone walks up to you and says “I’m going to shoot you. Would you prefer I shoot you in the head, or in the foot?” Getting shot in the foot is a whole lot better than in the head, but that doesn’t mean you should be happy about it. Similarly, saying that we could be worse off, having say, Hitler as president is no way of justifying Bush. I’d much prefer to not get shot at all, thanks.
I don’t understand why an existential viewpoint would only regard “radical” changes, and why other changes that are more possible aren’t considered radical as well. For instance:
1000+ Americans have died and 7000+ have been injured during the War on Iraq. Fine, I’ll blame all the “yea-sayers” with a D by their name; they shouldn’t have, but in my opinion this is still Bush’s war.
What about the $422 billion defecit. Is that not radical? The national debt is at a record high, that’s pretty radical too.
Spending $270 million on abistinence-only programs, while slashing funding for any other programs (non-abstinence-based) to help avoid STDs?
How about 200 million acres of protected land opened to development, and blatant favoritism allowing plants to skip around clean air standards (among the other things he’s done to kill our air)?
I mean, c’mon, some of these things are pretty in-your-face effecting. Bush may not overturn Roe v. Wade, nor confirm Satan Incarnate in any position in the White House; but he could easily create another list like this in the next four years … and that would just be 200 things too many to be able to put up with.
I agree that the Democrats made plenty of mistakes in this race. Personally, I would have preferred Dean or Kucinich, though I’m not sure either would have won. Like Rome, the mob is America; and they relate to Bush, somehow.
Personally, I agree with the editors of the New Yorker:
Pollsters like to ask voters which candidate they’d most like to have a beer with, and on that metric Bush always wins. We prefer to ask which candidate is better suited to the governance of our nation.
Am I going to whine about it to the point of not moving on with my life or saying “Well, we’ll just have to do better next time.”? No, but nor will I bother to hide my disappointment or feeling of disenfranchisement with American politics.