The silver linings of this election cycle

Oh, dear--I see we've rapidly descended into familiar territory here. Well, for anyone who wants to feel even better about our great country and the blessings of liberty today, I encourage you to go here and look at the amazing photographs from across the nation of people voting. The slide show conveys as perhaps nothing else can the amazing and beautiful and startling richness and diversity of America:

www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/04/amazing-voting-images-pho_n_141136.html

And the silver lining to the election is that BARACK OBAMA WON THE ELECTION. :)

Michele I hate to say this but you and your kind are whats wrong with America. You do not want to be a part of the solutions to our problems. You just want to "blame the other guy" and sulk in your defeat.

Can you wake up and be a part of this Democracy or are you going to continue to the whining voice in the background? Now is the time to be a true conservative compassionate and work for a better country.

If John McCain had won (and I did like him - it was Palin who I feared) I would have rejoiced for the good of our Nation. While I believe that Obama is the better leader and the more respected by the world, I would have been just as glad if McCain had won.

We all share responsibility for our problems but Bush created the environment of catalyst that allow them to happen. Obama can't correct that unless Republicans work with the Democrats to make the correct changes and unless we as Americans wake up to the fact that we willing let the crisis happen by our own failings to be responsible for our personal greed.

Be an American, Michele, and work for a better, safer and more prosperous Nation.

Do you run this blog just to be combative and sensational?

Yes. Yes she does.

And she clearly has not learned the lessons that the GOP should take away from this election. Running to the right, and to the conservative base in a general election is a losing strategy and always has been. Most Americans are moderates of some flavor. Very few exist on the far left or the far right.

This is why winning candidates run to their base in the primary in order to get the activist base on their side, then they run to the middle in the general election so they appeal to the broadest base of voters possible. Reagan mastered this, peeling off Democratic support in huge numbers, and it's something the GOP has forgotten in recent years. You don't win by running to one side or the other. You win by running to the middle and appealing to the better angels of a person's nature, and across ideological lines.

What lost this election for McCain was a fatal combination of three things:

1. The incredibly corrupt, unpopular, and hated Bush/Cheney administration. They've shamed this country over the last eight years, and most people of all political persuasions see that. The only people who don't are the dead-enders on the far right.

2. Barack Obama's phenomenal political organization and ground game. His campaign will be a model for years to come, even more than the much vaunted Clinton machine of the 90's. Not only did Obama implement Howard Dean's 50-state strategy to an impressive degree, forcing the GOP to spend time and money on states that otherwise would have been safe red states, but he was he raising money online hand over fist and he used the internet to his advantage in terms of organization.

There was also no backbiting or drama in public from his staff. Ever. That kind of discipline wins campaigns. McCain's campaign wasn't so lucky.

3. The economic collapse and the housing implosion. Both of these events collided with points 1 and 2 to finally kill McCain's chances. People looked at his erratic campaign, and at his laughable choice for VP and realized they wanted someone with more stability and with better judgment in the White House.

It will be interesting to see if the Republican party learns anything from this loss, or if they will just further isolate themselves by pretending that the problem was they weren't conservative enough. That wasn't the problem at all.

**We will have to run on our principles, not as moderates. Clearly running as a moderate loses elections as we've learned this election cycle.**

WHAT are the Republicans' principles? Be angry at everything? I don't know what they are, but they're certainly not moderate.

Thoughtful conservatives are looking at David Cameron in Great Britain for how to shift conservatism to where the electorate is in a principled way. It would not be possible, given the current demography of Great Britain, for Margaret Thatcher to become prime minister today. (In fact, even in the day, only split opposition allowed her to win.)

Likewise, demography and our increasingly "minority-majority" population will eventually destroy the Republican "base." Your advice that Republicans should become the Rush Limbaugh party is a path to irrelevance.

PS -- Yes, the media are biased. But honestly, you're going to say the election of an African-American president in the country of slavery, the 3/5th compromise, the Civil War, Jim Crow, and the civil rights revolution is NOT historic?!?!?!

Typical. McCain lost because he didn't offer solutions, just more kindergarten ethics and total lies. He tried to contradict his own party's sitting president. If he had picked a VP with economic experience, Obama would have lost. McCain never stayed on message, and the media may have turned on McCain because McCain repeatedly attacked them. Palin couldn't even name 1 single supreme court case besides roe vs wade. Ontop of all of this his clown act of a campaign staff were constantly infighting.

Give it up sour grapes, just hold your breath and throw a tantrum on the kitchen floor and hope for the worst so you can do more finger pointing. Sadly that's exactly what is expected from the "compassionate conservative" that live in some alternate reality.

I copied this from Steven Waldman's blog. Perhaps some folks here (Michele, mainly) might benefit from considering it.
---

Stark Lessons from the Loss for Evangelicals (Guest Post By Mark DeMoss)
Wednesday November 5, 2008

By Mark DeMoss

I am an evangelical Southern Baptist who worked for a Mormon candidate in the primaries and voted yesterday for John McCain. According to exit polls some 72 percent of white evangelicals joined me in a losing effort. While there is much we can learn from this historic election--I'll propose just four lessons.

First, a positive, inspiring, uplifting campaign can actually lead directly to the White House. I have frankly been waiting since 1984 ("Morning in America") for a presidential candidate to run the kind of positive campaign Barack Obama did--I only wish the party I'm more closely aligned with politically (I'm a conservative first, Republican second) could have been the one to furnish such a candidate.

I have two problems with the negative campaigning that is now the rule rather than the exception in American politics. Political candidates are the only product or service in this country which we market by tearing down the competition. Then, the candidate whose primary rationale for support is "the other guy's a bum," says more about himself than the other guy.

I have an idea for a new project for evangelicals: we could lead the charge to get rid of negative political advertising, irritating "push" calling, and generally mean-spirited, petty campaign behavior--such as the so-called robo-calls that intruded into Cuban-American homes in south Florida in the final hours of the campaign, telling those who answered the phone that Fidel Castro had endorsed Barack Obama.

Whether or not we had anything to do with such low tactics we should reject, denounce, repudiate and condemn them and those who employ them. We simply should not tolerate it and should begin demanding better of those who seek our support.

Too many conservatives, religious and otherwise, increasingly equate civility with compromise or weakness. I would argue that incivility will generally characterize the weaker candidate or party. We can be respectful and kind and civil without compromising any of our core convictions.

I thought John McCain gave the most effective, graceful and sincere speech of his life last night in conceding the race to his opponent. Sadly, it was marred by the repeated booing from some of his rude partisans who sounded as if they wanted no part of a unified and civil country. I hope I didn't know any of those people.

Second, no candidate or party is always right, and none is always wrong. We lose credibility and legitimacy when we claim perfection in our candidate and denounce every characteristic and statement of our opponent. I have some news for my fellow believers: John McCain was not our savior and Barack Obama is not the antichrist. I always try to learn something from everyone I can, and believe everyone has qualities and ideas I can respect, even admire.

Incidentally, Fox News is not infallible and MSNBC is not heretical. I'm amazed at the number of evangelicals who only watch one network or news show, or listen to one talk show host or commentator. I watch and listen to all of them. Why would I want to deliberately limit my sources of information, particularly about something as important and complex as the future of our country and those who would lead it? Let's broaden our learning base. I read authors I don't necessarily agree with (I read both of Barack Obama's books), and always learn something as a result. Intellectual curiosity is not a bad thing.

Then, evangelicals must accept and embrace the reality that money is the fuel which drives campaign machines. One year ago I challenged evangelicals, some of whom were supporting woefully under-funded primary candidates that the Republican nominee would likely be competing against a $500 million Hillary Clinton campaign.

I was wrong on two counts: Barack Obama raised $649 million (not counting last month's receipts), nearly twice John McCain's total. We evangelicals raise billions for missionary endeavors, new church facilities, television ministries and other worthy outreach efforts; but then hope to elect a president on the cheap. I was amazed at the number of prominent religious leaders serving on "Faith & Values Steering Committees" of various campaigns who had not contributed a nickel to the one they were trying to put in the White House. What would a pastor think of one of his deacons who gave nothing to his church?

Finally, I'd like to see evangelicals look for competent, qualified candidates who share our values, whether or not they share our faith or theology. I believe it's wrong to oppose a candidate because of his faith (Mitt Romney), and equally wrong to support a candidate primarily based on common faith (Mike Huckabee, Sarah Palin).

Along the campaign trail I met so many people, including pastors and religious leaders, who could tell me only that their choice for president was a "good Christian," or "one of us." This, in my view, is a dangerously inadequate approach to choosing our highest leaders. We don't choose people for any other positions using this test; why would we apply it to one of the most important positions on the planet?

Now, we must pray for president-elect Obama whether we voted for him or not. Scripture demands no less. He faces terrific challenges of a complex and delicate world and will soon lead the country we call home. Who knows, maybe we'll all learn something.

Mark DeMoss is president of The DeMoss Group, an Atlanta-based public relations firm working primarily with faith-based organizations and causes. He is author of The Little Red Book of Wisdom (Thomas Nelson, 2007).

We will have to run on our principles, not as moderates.

I'm already hearing this strategy ... "RINOs can't win," etc.

Yeah, well, good luck wi' diggin' yer heels i' farther.

"Race is not longer an issue in this country, this election has taken it off the table. Blacks can no longer be treated as a victim class and if anyone attempts to do so, you just point to this election and say, "How racist can the nation be? We have a black president." The racial divide is ended but the glass ceiling is still intact (especially with a sexist president)."

you still don't get it. regarding race, even black conservative leaders disagree with you. in congratulating barack obama on his election, condolezza rice said this:

"This is a country that’s been through a long journey in terms of overcoming wounds and making race not the factor in our lives. That work is not done, but yesterday was obviously an extraordinary step forward."

as for your claim that obama is sexist, you point to an old article from a conservative, anti-obama column, with no data to back it up. where's the evidence that shows that the women performed the same jobs that the men did? obama supports "equal pay for equal work."

while i would normally hope to arrive at some middle ground with you, i understand that such an event is impossible considering your extremist views. in light of that, i very much hope that you continue down your path with this line of thinking. by doing so, you will continue to minimize the influence of the religious right in the realm of politics.

She was even more unqualified for VP than I thought.

I'm glad now that I didn't go for the "Palin high-fashion look."

I loved to hear Rice talking about Obama; there's was such genuine regard in her voice.

"So, you'd think that I'd be pretty bummed and if I actually liked McCain I might have been but since I was really voting for Sarah Palin, I'm not too upset..."

Wow. Really? Really? You truly wanted Sarah Palin to define your party?

Look, I used to like McCain myself a few years back. I can even understand what people saw in him this year, even after he sold out (well, sort of), but... PALIN?! Have you learned absolutely nothing from the last 3 months?

Sheesh. Some of McCain's campaign staff came out today (to FOX NEWS, no less) to let everyone know just how deep Palin's ignorance ran. We're talking stunning levels of cluelessness. Things kindergarteners should know. The staff even admitted that virtually no vetting took place, and that they chose her on a whim, almost exclusively as a puppet, just to manipulate the base and "change the game".

That anyone is still propping her up as viable presidential material just... scares me.

Even Rod Dreher thinks Palin is as dumb as a fence post.

Palin's political career? Over.

If the Repubs want to be represented by Palin, who didn't even know that Africa is a continent and not a country (source-Fox news) - I say, fine, she represents you perfectly.

And Michele is going to have fun sniping- as though the Repubs did such a great job that anybody thinks they have an answer to any actual problems. That's why the voters rejected them.

The rest of the world is relieved that we have elected a new President who speaks English, and actually paid attention in school.

Palin really does represent the Republican right .
The rest of the country, and the world, is tired of the 'ignorant and proud of it' routine.