Obama's Mandate

I was happy and relieved to see that Barack Obama won in fairly convincing fashion last night, if only to prevent charges of disenfranchisement and another "stolen" election. Here are a few scattershot thoughts, in no apparent order, but I wanted to get them out there:

Obama won a relatively close popular vote by about six percentage points over McCain, but was able to collect a sizable lead in the electoral college by winning key battleground states of Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Virginia.

Almost 119 Million Americans turned out to vote, which is decent until you consider we are now a nation of over 300 Million. In very rough terms, that's still less than 40% of Americans casting a ballot for the next President.

**Edited on 11/6/08** The numbers I can find online still add up to only about 120 Million Americans having cast a ballot on Tuesday. But on The Newshour on PBS last night, they said the total number of votes cast was over 132 Million, and that the percentage of eligible voters who cast a ballot was something like 60%. Obviously, not all Americans being counted in the 300+ Million number are eligible to vote. The other discrepancy (between 120 and 132 Million) could be explained by news sites' refusal to update their electoral maps with the results from NC and Missouri.

Despite the anecdotal evidence (stories) of young Americans being energized by Obama and turning out to vote, NPR last night said the rate of first-time voters in this election (~10%) basically equalled the rate of first-time voters in the last election (~11%).

Missouri failed to vote for the next President for only the second time (ever? or just in the past 100 years?).

The Redskins once again correctly predicted the next President. Any time they lose their last home game before the election, the incumbent party loses the White House. That was true this year, as the Redskins lost to Pittsburgh 23-6 on Monday night, but was not true in 2004.

It appears that Senators from Arizona, no matter how popular and well-respected they may be in their home state, cannot get elected to our nation's highest office. The sample size is small, though.

My three-year-old son was watching the Today show with my wife this morning, as we tried to educate him about Obama being the next President. He cried out, "No Obama! No Obama!" But really, he just wanted us to change the channel from the news over to Curious George on PBS Kids.

We also enjoyed eating "Bumblebee Pie" yesterday, courtesy of my son. It was nothing more than cornbread to go with our chili-style meal, but it kinda looked like a pie before it was cut, and since we put honey on the cornbread, it suddenly had an association with bumblebees. So be it! I love how kids come up with different names for things!

It also made me think of when my parents renamed an apple turnover-style dessert in honor of Barry Goldwater after his defeat to LBJ in 1964. To this day, I think of that dessert come election time. My mom, as a Democrat, has refused to make it for decades.

A classic fearless prediction I saw in James Taranto's Best of the Web column last week: Obama will not be the first President to appoint an African-American to the post of Secretary of State.

Here is sincerely hoping that Obama's election will turn out to be a real game-changer on the topic of race relations in America. We are not far removed from Jim Crow, segregation, and disenfranchisement, as Obama pointed out in his victory speech last night. Things have changed a lot just since the Civil Rights Act was signed by LBJ in 1964. Let's hope we continue making progress and that this election marks real hope for healing and racial togetherness (unity is too strong a word) in the future. I really don't want a return to the Sixties.

I sincerely hope that Obama will practice what he preached on the campaign trail. That he will be a uniter, not a divider. That he will actually follow steps he himself set forth when he became the President of the Harvard Law Review, and appoint more conservative members to editorial positions than he did his liberal friends. They were upset with him then, but it showed that Obama had principles and wanted to make sure the best people were appointed to the right positions. Too much of politics today has become this: I funded your campaign, so what cherry position do I get in your Cabinet? More simply: What type of access to power can I buy? If Obama truly wants to govern the country according to principle, then he will appoint one or more Republicans (can anyone say Colin Powell?) to his Cabinet.

As a follow-on to that note, it could be that Obama very well understands the age-old principle of, "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer."

Obama will also need to rein in members of his own party, members that see the large gains made by House and Senate Democrats, and who will want to drive a very left-leaning agenda simply because they have the votes to do so. Nancy Pelosi, I'm thinking of you!

If Obama wants to be a uniter, and to get away from the partisan politics that have both poisoned the atmosphere in Washington and caused everyday Americans to lose faith in their government as a whole. Let's not forget that the approval ratings for Congress is at all time lows, in the single digits. Something different needs to be done there.

To quote Forrest Gump: "That's about all I have to say about that."