« How not to win hearts and minds | Home | Closet Bush voters in the world community »
November 07, 2004
More morning after musings
Maps showing the Democratic/Republican split by population rather than area. States and counties are resized to show population density, which makes the maps look weird, but give a vividly visual understanding of what the electorate did on Tuesday. A good corrective to the overwhelmingly red county map, with more information than this also good map.More stats:
Of the states that Bush carried only Alaska, Colorado, Nevada, Virginia, and Wyoming had per capita incomes over $31,500. Of the states that Kerry carried only Hawaii, Michigan, Vermont, and Wisconsin had per capita incomes under $31,000. There may be something to this Red State/Blue State thing after all. But it's Poor State/Rich State.Clearly, the Dems are no longer the party of the little guy.
More stats on the Jewish vote: Serious Bush gains in Beverly Hills, which cannot all be accounted for by the large Iranian Jewish population there.
The "moral values" preference on the exit polls is being digested and spun by both sides. It's interesting that many jumped to the conclusion that "moral values" meant opposition to abortion and gay rights, fueled by fundamentalist fervor. William Sjostrom and Armed Liberal remind us that religious conviction and liberal "social action" are not contradictory.
Andrew Sullivan reminds us that he is still a hawk, taking down Noam Chomsky on Bill Maher's show, and swiping at Maher for soft-balling Chomsky. Go, Andrew! I predict once we pacify Fallujah, the Iraqi elections happen, and Bush speaks out again in favor of gay civil unions (which I am willing to bet he will) Andrew is going to settle back into harness as the fierce advocate of democracy promotion that he is.
Post-mortem on Teresa. Ann is right, this would make a great movie. Please make casting suggestions in the comments.
Which reminds me of a good point no one else is making yet, in their giddy relief that we dodged a bullet. I know the media was in the tank for Kerry, the economy was still recovering, and the Iraq occupation wasn't going perfectly, but Bush should still have won in a landslide.
In seemingly every conceivable way, John Kerry was the wrong man to lead this nation in the war we're in right now. His 1971 testimony, his defense-cutting record, his obsession with a "global test," his disturbing pride in the endorsements from unnamed foreign leaders, his na�ve belief that the leaders of France and Germany are concerned with American security, his contradictory statements, suggesting he didn't grasp the stakes in Iraq...Let us add Kerry's disturbing fabulating, thin resume, zero charisma, eccentric wife with foot-in-mouth disease, and sleazy running mate with an even thinner resume. He was politically of the same mold as previous landslide victims McGovern, Carter, and Dukakis, in addition to having serious Vietnam baggage as a primary instigator of that humiliating capitulation and a questionable war record which included secretly negotiating with the enemy. It is unprecedented that over 250 highly decorated officers, some former POWs, who served with and above a presidential candidate would take great personal risks to publically challenge his fitness to command.... and that damnable Monday Morning Quarterbacking that he dared call a vision! All he ever had to say about the war on terror was that Bush had messed up, and that he would fix it with a plan (details to come at a later date). Serious mainstream media would have demanded those details, and laughed him off the stage when he refused to divulge them.
Bill Maher had it right when he called Kerry a Frankenstein's monster of the worst Democratic candidates in recent memory: the I-know-better-than-you arrogance of Al Gore; the toxic inability to relate to human beings of Michael Dukakis; the dippy never-lost-faith-in-liberalism outlook of Walter Mondale. And, one might add, the decisiveness of Bill Clinton.
Why did Bush get only 52% of the popular vote? Why did his electoral college win hang by provisional ballots in one state?
Speaking of in the tank media: Bwahahahahaha.
Remember that the European reaction is not monolithic:
It is a frequent misperception among many in the United States, I have found, that the whole of Europe (apart from Blair) hates Bush. In fact, the Iraq war split Europe deeply. True, polls have shown that most people in most European countries opposed the war. But 12 of the 25 governments backed Bush and sent troops at some point, even if just a few dozen in some cases. Six of those countries, headed by Poland, were from the former communist countries of Eastern Europe that joined the European Union in May. They have shown an instinctive liking for the United States, springing from their antipathy to Moscow, that counterbalances the suspicion of "Old Europe." These leaders who backed Bush -- and, of course, Blair above all -- now find themselves vulnerable due to a surge of anti-American feeling that has become a real political force, as recent polls show.Read more for how each European nation is responding to Bush's re-election.
I would take SMCCDI with a grain of salt, but no more than a grain.
UPDATE: More on what a squeaker this really was.
Judith | 11/07/04 at 11:41 PM | Categories: - GOTV '04
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.keshertalk.com/cgi-bin/mtb.cgi/3458
Comments
Good stuff. http://www.anti-semitic.info
Anonymous | November 9, 2004 07:40 AM


![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.keshertalk.com/nav-commenters.gif)











