Radio Open Source wants to know about the election: Was it good for you?

"What has changed for you (not for George Bush or Nancy Pelosi). Is your life better or worse? What will the results mean for your community? What difference will this election make in your life a year from now? Five years from now?..."

Well, yes, it was good for me, thanks for asking.

I think voters across the country held Bush to account for the botched occupation of Iraq, and maybe moreso for his unwillingness or inability to own and repair his mistakes there. And I think that's really important. I feel better about the a lot of issues today, from Social Security to healthcare, less because of my faith in the Dems than the proven weakness of the GOP Congress they replace.

I'm gratified at the libertarian trend on social issues, from the South Dakota abortion vote to the Missouri stem-cell initiative to the defeat of a gay-marriage law in Arizona and the success of openly gay candidates across the country.

In North Carolina, it was gratifying to see extremist and just plain nutty rhetoric fail at the polls. And locally, I thought voters made prudent choices on a variety of bond issues -- not the choices I would have made in every instance, but decided issue by issue. Libraries and fire stations are the stuff of everyday life in a community, so these are to me among the most important decisions of the day.

Also important to me as a journalist and blogger was how I followed the races: pretty much entirely online. Our Guilford County website did a great job of posting results, much better than the State Board of Elections -- I relied on the News & Observer and other local papers for those results.

My kids were watching "House," and the local TV coverage that came on afterwards was so lame that I couldn't watch for very long; I flipped to the cable news nets, but they didn't hold my attention. I wanted numbers, not blah blah blah from the bloviators.

I got lots of value from bloggers (including Instapundit and Talking Points Memo) who served as filters to news nets and other sites; I was disappointed that TPM was still passing along CNN projections on a big NC race long after it had been conceded -- Josh needed his team to plug into local papers and bloggers, not just refry the same old beans. But the web ruled, and I can't imagine going back to TV.

Comments

[Doug H]

I found unexpectedly good coverage on the Carolina News Network, cable channel 14, I believe it was. Hadn't run across them before.

[Danny Wright]

Ed, apparently it was good for Marcus Kindley, too. His blog post today is, well, cheerful . . . in a morbid sort of way.

[Kirk D.]

Last night was the best time I had in regard to politics in the last decade. And today it only gets better and better. The voters of this country woke up to the rapid corruption and desperate power clinging the GOP has been propagating for the last 6 years and the control of congress to the Dems is the result.

I'm sure some will be posting soon enough saying that the election went the way it did because of the Lame Stream Media, or that the left fixed votes (although the GOP was the culprit this time around with their robo-calls and signs telling voters in Georgia they needed a photo ID to vote, and Laura Ingrahm flooding Dems voter protection hotlines). But for now I'm basking in the light of change. A change that has been badly needed for this country for more than a few years.

Hearing Bush's tone change this morning from one of unilateralism to one of co-operation with the Dems was worth the price of admission. Its a good day.

[Gate]

2008 is going to be much better for the GOP now, too. We are not all that unhappy personally.

[The CA]

The reason the election went the way it did was because conservatives are upset at Bush over immigration and Social Security reform among other things and stayed home.

In short, there was no big swell of Republican's and independents voting Democrat in opposition to Bush, rather the base simply stayed home. I think when the dust settles, the statistics will bear this out.

Anyone who believes this is a mandate for a move to the left is fooling themselves. The conservatives stayed home because the GOP did not move far enough to the right for their liking. Expect a further move to the right by GOP'ers still in Congress in an effort to bring the base back home.

Democrats voted in droves over Iraq. Conservatives stayed home in droves mostly for other reasons.

[Mick]

If this is a true move to the middle, I am not TOO depressed. I cant deny a wish for a few more Rs in the mix. We shall see if this wave of moderate Dems holds true to their sales pitch. I truly hope they do.

Kirk you left out ACORN in your analysis of "culprits". Oh sorry, wrong team.

In any case, I hope both ends of the political spectrum took note of the decidely purple hew of those elected yesterday. Hey, Purple Haze ... Third party anyone!?

PS: any other Rs scrathing their heads over the timing of Rummy's resignation. Politically speaking.... Where the hell were you say 6 months ago (or more)?

T'anks for nuttin!

[sean coon]

whatever.

the biggest takeaway for me is that the balance of the senate rests in virginia; a state that once had a GOP candidate prepping for a run in '08 with a 20% lead in the polls, but was smacked back to reality after he exposed his soul for the world to see.

good people, across both parties, stepped up -- and as we'll soon see -- voted felix and the GOP into obscurity.

this election was about a lot of things, but arrogance and unethical behavior topped the list as far as i'm concerned.

[Kirk D.]

Sam, I don't disagree with your assessment. The right staying home definitely swayed the outcome. I would not discount American's desire to clean house however. Several exit polls from last night indicated that corruption, not Iraq, was the primary motivating factor of how people voted. The Republican leadership is corrupt and people are tired of it, so they voted them out.

Also, Bush's play of not announcing Rumsfield's exit until today probably was a serious strategy mistake. If he had announced it a week ago, although many on the left would have cried foul (including probably myself), the GOP most likely would have held onto the senate and cut their losses in the house. Its ironic that by saying he didn't want to influence the election by holding back the info about Rum's resignation, he in fact, did just that, to GOP's detriment.

[Mick]

"whatever"? Do you not think many of the recently elected Dems are somewhat moderate? Many appear to the be to the right of Chaffee and Snowe.

I wish I could argue your last point quite vociferously. I would think we would differ only by degree. Maybe a lot of "degree" but the point is spot on.

[sean coon]

my comment was referring to CA, not you mick. we had comment overlap ;)

[PotatoStew]

" Its ironic that by saying he didn't want to influence the election by holding back the info about Rum's resignation, he in fact, did just that, to GOP's detriment."

An "unintended consequence" of sorts? I guess that law did come into play for the election after all...

[Kirk D.]

I think that is a very "apt" description of what happened Stew. You just made my week!

[Ed Cone]

Has anyone got turnout numbers, or are we just speculating here?

[Joel Gillespie]

Ed,

That would be helpful. As you may imagine I know a lot of conservative people. They are not nearly as bummed out and depressed about this as you might imagine. Many of them feel betrayed by the Republican Party over the last few years, and embarrassed by the House and Senate leadership of the same time. Most - not all but most - conservatives I know, including a lot of religious conservatives, are not neocon idealogues, but more prgamatic older school conservatives. Yes, they are passionate on several issues, but on many of those issues they have seen the Republican Party betray their trust. I have seen much less weeping and gnashing of teeth than I thought I would. Plus there is some skepticism about the Democratic Party being able to do any better now that it is in power. It has a slew of unity issues of its own, only exacerbated by this election.

[AlphaOmega]

In reference to the election results in Guilford County, there is nothing to be perplexed about. Guilford County has a strong tradition of electing Democrats to office. After all, It is a Democrat county. Wait??? What about Coble, Blust, Wiley, Berger, etc.?? Uh, I believe that you will find that these particular Republicans reside in balkanized GOP districts where an empty soda pop bottle can win as a Republican candidate. On the flip side, Hagan, Harrison, Jeffus, Jones, Adams, etc. reside in their little ol’ balkanized Democrat districts where a discarded flashlight battery can win as a Democrat.

There should be no chest thumping from Blust, Berger, Hagan, Harrison, Jeffus, Jones, etc. about winning in their respective districts. There’s nothing to thump about. It was a done deal before the filing period opened. The villain is something called “redistricting.” The Democrat leadership in the General Assembly designed the districts. They used computer models to determine how to pile the most Democrats into house and senate districts so as to ensure the election of Democrats in those districts. Many of the Republican legislators acquiesced with this project because the computer models also created districts where Republican voters were piled as high as the sky. This balkanization of legislative districts into solid Democrat and solid GOP districts has also been called the “Incumbents’ Protection Act.” These legislative districts WERE DESIGNED PURPOSELY TO BE NON-COMPETITIVE. Hagan wins! So What! Blust wins! So What!

Congress did the same thing with congressional districts. Coble can’t lose to a Democrat in the 6th district. Miller can’t lose to a Republican in the 13th district.

You can’t blame the politicians for this sorry state of affairs. The first and primary rule of all politicians, Republican or Democrat, is SELF-PRESERVATION. They want to win; they don’t want competitive districts. We can only blame ourselves for permitting the rascals to get away with it in the first place.

Now, I return to the topic of Guilford County’s strong tradition of electing Democrats. Remember? John Kerry won Guilford County in 2004 while the state went solid for George II. Also, you can check the voting history for offices that are voted on throughout the county; at-large county commissioners (Democrats Gibson and Parks), Register of Deeds (Democrat Thigpen), the governor’s race, the Council of State races, clerk of court, and district attorney.

Wait! What about BJ Barnes? Now, that is an interesting story. Barnes ran for high sheriff in 1986 and 1990 against a Democrat named Sticky Burch. In both of those election contests, Barnes suffered landslide defeats. Barnes was a stubborn cuss and wouldn’t give up. He ran for the third time in 1994. Other Republicans were demoralized. There were no GOP candidates for clerk of court or district attorney. Lucky for Barnes, that was the year of the energized Republicans; Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America.” Republicans swept to victory all over North Carolina. The GOP tidal wave rolled over Guilford County and splashed Barnes into office…finally. Since then, Barnes has kept his nose clean and avoided the mistakes that another GOP 1994 sweep-in sheriff made down in Davidson County. Barnes has survived as a Republican officeholder because of a combination of his non-stop campaigning, weak opposition, the public’s perception that a Republican Sheriff is “tough on crime” and the voters inclination to support incumbents who haven’t navigated themselves into a train wreck.

[The CA]

BJ Barnes also reaches out to Democrats on a regular basis, which is a major secret to his success in Guilford County. He is very aware that the numbers don't favor him, but is effective at building bipartisan support.

[Bubba]

'I guess that law did come into play for the election after all..."

It sure did. Ask Ned the Cable Guy about it....