Post-election thoughts.
Nov. 6th, 2008 03:13 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
katsarisPost election thoughts:
- The relief and joy for Obama's victory is diminished by the defeat of gay rights via Proposition 8 in California. Sigh... Steps forward accompanied by steps backward, always, always. So very frustrating.
- Barack Obama's comment some months back about bitter people clinging to their guns and religion was probably the one he was most bashed for throughout the campaign. Of course, now, after his victory, one can visit conservative forums and see the two main things urged by bitter Republicans: "Pray" and "Hold tight onto your guns".
Yeah, no correlation there.
- This map is both amusing and significant:
Other than the very minor expected gains by the Republicans in Arizona and Alaska (the Republican candidates' home states) -- the gains for the Republicans this election have pretty much only been in Appalachia. And the most concentrated ones have been in Arkansas (homestate of the Clintons).
That Clinton's homestate shifted more towards the Republicans than McCain's homestate did... Um, I don't know what this means, but it's amusing nonetheless.
- Either way, the Republicans have now diminished themselves to the party that caters solely to Straight Christian White Males (SCWMs?). Even their attempt to attract woman voters with Palin backfired since she has absurdly anti-female policies (e.g. so anti-abortionist as to want raped women to carry their rapists' children to term).
Where do Republicans go from here? They've so far been the alliance of four separate forces:
A) Fiscal libertarians
B) Hawks
C) Social conservatives/religious nutjobs/anti-intellectual.
D) Racists. Their power and significance is decreasing with each passing generation, but they remain strong.
One thing to keep in mind is that there's nothing that made this alliance inevitable -- and there's lots of things that make it contradictory (fiscal libertarians ought hate the way tax money is used in distant wars, for example). It was only some decades ago that the *Democrats* were the party preferred by racists, for example.
But there's not yet motivation enough for these forces to split. McCain who was mainly known for B appeased the Cs with the anti-feminist pro-moron candidacy of Palin, and raised Joe "the Plumber" Wurzelbachel as his flagbearer to satisfy the As.
Both the "rising stars" of the Republican Party, Sarah Palin and Bobby Jindal, come from faction C. Both are choices that would completely fail to appeal to anyone except the Republicans very narrow base. (And Jindal wouldn't satisfy the Ds either)
The Republicans would have their best shot with Schwarzenneger in 2012, but their D faction again would never agree to an amendment permitting non-natural born citizens. Unless they decide to break with said D faction, which I don't see likely.
Much depends from how Obama's presidency will go. If he's a halfway decent president, and assuming no nuclear attacks happen anywhere in the world, he ought easily win a reelection in 2012.
- Lastly, this also amused me:
- The relief and joy for Obama's victory is diminished by the defeat of gay rights via Proposition 8 in California. Sigh... Steps forward accompanied by steps backward, always, always. So very frustrating.
- Barack Obama's comment some months back about bitter people clinging to their guns and religion was probably the one he was most bashed for throughout the campaign. Of course, now, after his victory, one can visit conservative forums and see the two main things urged by bitter Republicans: "Pray" and "Hold tight onto your guns".
Yeah, no correlation there.
- This map is both amusing and significant:
Other than the very minor expected gains by the Republicans in Arizona and Alaska (the Republican candidates' home states) -- the gains for the Republicans this election have pretty much only been in Appalachia. And the most concentrated ones have been in Arkansas (homestate of the Clintons).
That Clinton's homestate shifted more towards the Republicans than McCain's homestate did... Um, I don't know what this means, but it's amusing nonetheless.
- Either way, the Republicans have now diminished themselves to the party that caters solely to Straight Christian White Males (SCWMs?). Even their attempt to attract woman voters with Palin backfired since she has absurdly anti-female policies (e.g. so anti-abortionist as to want raped women to carry their rapists' children to term).
Where do Republicans go from here? They've so far been the alliance of four separate forces:
A) Fiscal libertarians
B) Hawks
C) Social conservatives/religious nutjobs/anti-intellectual.
D) Racists. Their power and significance is decreasing with each passing generation, but they remain strong.
One thing to keep in mind is that there's nothing that made this alliance inevitable -- and there's lots of things that make it contradictory (fiscal libertarians ought hate the way tax money is used in distant wars, for example). It was only some decades ago that the *Democrats* were the party preferred by racists, for example.
But there's not yet motivation enough for these forces to split. McCain who was mainly known for B appeased the Cs with the anti-feminist pro-moron candidacy of Palin, and raised Joe "the Plumber" Wurzelbachel as his flagbearer to satisfy the As.
Both the "rising stars" of the Republican Party, Sarah Palin and Bobby Jindal, come from faction C. Both are choices that would completely fail to appeal to anyone except the Republicans very narrow base. (And Jindal wouldn't satisfy the Ds either)
The Republicans would have their best shot with Schwarzenneger in 2012, but their D faction again would never agree to an amendment permitting non-natural born citizens. Unless they decide to break with said D faction, which I don't see likely.
Much depends from how Obama's presidency will go. If he's a halfway decent president, and assuming no nuclear attacks happen anywhere in the world, he ought easily win a reelection in 2012.
- Lastly, this also amused me:
