What do I expect from the Obama administration? I expect to be frustrated and disappointed by the failings of human beings and human systems, and to see slow progress at best against the very large problems we face as a country. That's life in the real world, even a real world that seems a little brighter now than it did before Tuesday night.

I end my columnular look back at the election with a look ahead. You can read the whole thing after the jump.

Looking back at the election

By Edward Cone
News & Record
11-9-08

Kay Hagan will be North Carolina's first-ever U.S. senator from Greensboro. She joins Winston-Salem's Richard Burr in the Senate, giving the Triad an unprecedented one-two punch in national affairs. The Piedmont fared less well in the gubernatorial race, as eastern North Carolina's Bev Perdue extended Charlotte's losing streak by beating Pat McCrory.

Hagan will be North Carolina's second female senator -- she defeated the first, Elizabeth Dole -- while Perdue becomes our first female governor. Combined with the election of Barack Obama and the inclusion of Sarah Palin on the GOP ticket, it's tempting to update the old song and say the times they have a-changed.

* * *

Dole's "Godless" ad was a desperation play that backfired. It was offensive not just for impugning Hagan's faith, but for introducing a religious test of sorts into the race, and also making it seem like atheism is a hanging offense. Like the McCain campaign's attempt to smear a respected professor, Rashid Khalidi, in order to frighten Jewish voters, it showed that maybe the times they haven't a-changed all that much -- at least for some political strategists.

* * *

Guilford County, where Sarah Palin made her infamous remarks about real Americans who live in pro-America parts of the country, gave almost 59 percent of its votes to Barack Obama. I guess Obama is pretty popular with real, pro-America Americans. Obama's narrow victory in North Carolina was no landslide, but it sort of feels like one.

I've been going back and forth for some time with Thomas Schaller, the author of a book called "Whistling Past Dixie," which argues that Democrats should write off the South to focus on the Midwest and mountain West. Schaller was right that those areas are promising, and right again that the Democrats should not position themselves as GOP-lite, but I told him all along that Virginia and North Carolina are ripe for turning. That doesn't mean a permanent realignment is at hand. Obama and the Democrats will have to earn that in the years ahead.

* * *

Several North Carolina Libertarians, including gubernatorial candidate Mike Munger and U.S. Senate hopeful Christopher Cole, did what they set out to do: Get enough votes to keep the party on the ballot next time around in key races. In the past, the Libertarian Party has had to spend most of its time and money just getting to the starting line, and it will be interesting to see if a viable third party can emerge now that a more stable structure is in place. Running smart folks like Munger, who disavows the "libertopian" extremes, is probably a good way to start.

* * *

We need to rethink the way we select our judges in North Carolina. When a widely respected, highly competent incumbent like Robbie Hassell gets thumped at the polls, and a qualified candidate like Robert Enochs loses to an opponent who was disciplined this summer for failing to do her job, something is out of whack. It may be that winners Avery Crump and Angela Foster will be fine judges, but most voters just don't have enough information to make an informed choice in judicial races, and judges are rightly limited in the extent of their campaigning.

* * *

Repeat after me: Guilford County will not vote for a sales tax increase. And Greensboro won't vote for the much-needed renovation of the War Memorial Auditorium, at least as marketed to date. Maybe that project needs a privately led campaign to raise awareness and money, so that any future bond request will have momentum.

* * *

Questions about the value of field organizing have been answered decisively. As veteran campaign strategist Gary Pearce wrote last week at his blog, Talking About Politics, "I've been skeptical about the vaunted Obama ground game. But now I believe it's real." Evidence that high turnout involved more than enthusiasm for the candidates came in the early-voting totals; getting people to the polls early was an explicit goal of the Obama campaign, and the numbers were impressive. As one local Republican candidate told me, many races were over before Election Day.

Obama's Internet-enabled machine was just one aspect of what turned out to be the first real Internet campaign. Looking for a single, Nixon-Kennedy debate moment to define that shift misses the fundamental nature of the medium. Instead, this was the year that the net absorbed all forms of media, creating an always-on source of Jon Stewart clips, newspaper articles, YouTube videos and polling data that people could view, edit or create, and share at will.

What Obama does with this new kind of political power could be a defining element of his administration.

* * *

What went wrong for McCain? Lots of things. He was yoked from the start to a grossly unpopular administration and identified in particular with two Bush albatrosses, the Iraq war and the bum economy; he was an older man running against an exciting younger man, the past against the future; he was out-organized by a mile; and his vice presidential pick fired up parts of the GOP base but turned off the rest of the country.

* * *

I walked outside on Wednesday morning and felt for a moment like I was entering a new world. There was a sense that a grim era in our country's history was behind us and excitement that my children live in a country that has jettisoned a portion of its historical baggage. So what do I expect from the Obama administration? I expect to be frustrated and disappointed by the failings of human beings and human systems, and to see slow progress at best against the very large problems we face as a country. That's life in the real world, even a real world that seems a little brighter now than it did before Tuesday night.

© News & Record 2008

Comments

[RBM]

Seems that the best this
country can do is to 'muddle through'.

I have very low expectations so will be disappointed less than supporters.

Non-supporters should learn the meaning of 'loyal opposition'.

[Duke of Denton]

I believe more in disloyal, sneaky, backstabbing, perfidious, treacherous and faithless opposition. Thats the kind of opposition that comes from Uncle Sam, disguised now as Uncle Tom. I am the Duke of Denton and I approved this message.

[Duke of Denton]

I predict that muddle cluttering will become the newest act of Congress. The Muddle Cluttering Act will surpass the Patriot Act and Financial Stability Act. It will make it more difficult to discern where th* chickenchit ends and the chicken salad begins. I am the Duke of Denton and I approved this message.

[Spag]

"his vice presidential pick fired up parts of the GOP base but turned off the rest of the country. "

Right on the first part, absolutely wrong on the second. Read the exit polls the next time Ed, before you buy into spin like this.

A lot of people thought Palin lacked the experience to be VP, but that isn't the same as "turning off the rest of the country". In fact of those people who said that McCain's selection of Palin as VP was a factor in their decision- the majority voted for McCain.

She's not going away so you and others can stop the spin. Get used to it.

[Ed Cone]

Palin not going away is the fondest hope of many Democrats.

[Kirk Ross]

Ed, which country did she turn off?
USA? Africa?

[Ged]

How well did Sarah Palin do in election day exit polls? From CNN:

"GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin didn't do well in exit polls. Sixty percent of those polled said the Alaska governor is not qualified to be president, if necessary; 38 percent said she is. That compares with the two-thirds of those polled who said Democratic vice presidential nominee Joe Biden is qualified to be president and the 31 percent who said he isn't."

Yeah, she did *great*.

[Anthony]

"Palin not going away is the fondest hope of many Democrats."

I hope she either goes away, or cultivates a genuine interest and knowledge about national policy. We can't afford governance-by-talking-point, and she certainly has a non-negligible chance of winning office in the future if she does stick around - you never know how random events are going to influence an election. I'd like to see both sides put forward knowledgeable, qualified candidates so that no matter who wins we end up with rational, thoughtful leadership. Palin is not qualified at this point. Of course, I'm not a Democrat, so others mileage may vary.

[Tony Wilkins]

EC on WMA: "Maybe that project needs a privately led campaign to raise awareness and money, so that any future bond request will have momentum."
That's similar to an idea I presented at the WM Commission meeting Thursday.
I suggested corporate involvement or sponsorship. Matt stated when this idea had been brought up before a "War Memorial" name change backlash had ensued and the amount of money needed would exceed an amount that a corporate sponsorship could raise. TDBS seemed to agree with my suggestion later in the meeting.
I'm wondering what kind of backlash the public will provide when the DH Griffin demolition crew arrives on the premises.

[Ed Cone]

Anthony the WSJ opinion piece I linked earlier in the week makes a similar point to yours: "Palin's grasp of energy policy suggests she's capable of mastering subjects when she wants to, and if she wants a national future she's going to have to do the same on national issues."

I don't take Palin lightly, but I do think she's got a lot of work ahead if she wants to broaden her appeal. If she merely rallies the social-con base, she won't get far.

KR, I wasn't there, but I don't find the Africa story to be plausible.

Tony, glad to hear the idea of some private involvement is at least under discussion. Naming rights would be a contributing part of the funding, not the whole thing. I could live with a [Your Company Name Here] War Memorial Auditorium. FWIW, a reasonably bright friend of mine told me last night that he'd voted against the bond because he thought it was for WM stadium, and we already have a nice new ballpark...

[Ged]

Just curious. Which part of Palin's grasp on energy policy suggests she's capable of mastering other subjects? The part where she claimed Alaska supplied upwards of 20% of the nation's energy supplies or the part where she touted the pipeline that hasn't been built?

Just playing devil's advocate.

[G/]

This belongs near the front of your "Best of Ed Cone Columns in the N&R" volume, Ed.

Forget about anyone's political views, the concluding paragraph captures a whole lot more than the five sentences might indicate on first read. In fact, they might make the first five sentences of a book that you have in it.

Tuesday was about our and others' kids, as well as anyone in the 18 to 30 year-old demographic that may have voted for the first time, and the passing of the torch--it is soon, and rightfully so, to be their time to direct (or not) this country's future.

I woke up feeling like {I entered} the new world began the Monday after they let Lehman Brothers' fail, and there was no turning back the clock. Wednesday morning cemented this feeling. The next few years will be tough for everyone in this country and it may prove to be tiring, draining, and exciting, as all transformative times in history have proven to be.

Thanks for sharing your thoughtful column, Ed.

[Kirk Ross]

Ed, I wasn't there either — just being snarky. I know a lot of people, particularly women, who were very turned off by her. Talk of 2012 for anyone in the GOP pre-schism of '09 is premature.
Reich has a good piece at TPM on what we might see going forward.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/11/09/the_mini_depression_and_the_ma/

[Dave Dobson]

If Palin runs for president in 2012, I'd expect her candidacy to do no better than Dan Quayle's run, i.e., die in the primary. She's no smarter, no more capable, and he had the advantage of actually being the vice president already. I think a lot of the support for her was faked, or out of obligation - she was McCain's pick, and for a Republican to complain about her would be to undermine McCain's campaign. If she runs in a primary, of her own volition, where criticism of her would not damage the party, I think she'll go down in flames.

Republicans just tried an incurious, folksy, stupid, arch-conservative for eight years. You'd think they'd want to go a different route.

[Al LaCarte]

Palin was the Democrat's silver bullet. The more she runs her yap, she turns kinda goldish.

[Beelzebubba]

Looking back at the election I missed the part where Obama formed a 4th branch of government-The Office of the President Elect. I wonder where that is in the Constitution. Did any other branch vote?

[Al LaCarte]

BLZ: Cheney and the Theocrats didnt even try that. It must be in the new Charter. Obama may be impeached before he is sworn in.

[Dave Dobson]

You'd rather he sit in his basement watching Netflix for a few months, and have somebody make sure he's awake in time for the inauguration?

[Spag]

Kirk, I think Africa is somewhere far from the 57 states in the U.S. but I will have to ask Barack Obama since he is familiar with all 57.

The rest of you- there is no evidence that Palin is dumb, but I appreciate all of you doing exactly as I expected you would when I predicted that liberals would claim that Palin was dumb on the day she was announced.

Be careful what you ask for. The exit polls did not confirm any broad sentiment that she isn't smart, rather that she lacked experience. Further as I stated before, of those who said that her being on the ticket was a factor in their voting decision, the majority voted for McCain.

I also take great enjoyment reading liberal predictions about Republican primaries. The reality is the liberals were out to destroy Palin from day one because the thought of the GOP having the first female VP runs counter to all the liberal orthodoxy- you know the 22% of the people who identified themselves as liberals on Tuesday. One out of five. I always said most of you were on the fringe.

Anyway, please keep underestimating Sarah Palin. Just remember that if and when she runs the next time it will be on her own terms not someone elses. You don't get an 80% approval rating for nothing.

Liberals salivated over Ronald Reagan's candidacy too.

[Reggie Greene/TheLogistician]

The problems in our country have risen to the point where it will require a coordinated and collaborative effort on the part of all Americans, no matter the side of the aisle on which they sit.

What the Republicans failed to understand was that this was not the time to be divisive.

[Spag]

Obama and Biden just as divisive, but when you can only see things from one perspective it is easy to see how that might be overlooked.

I also find that last comment hard to take seriously considering how liberals treated Bush during a time of war.

I also wonder how many of you would be talking about the need for unity if McCain had won. I feel pretty confident in saying that I will treat Obama much better than most of you would have treated McCain or treated Bush.

[Mick]

Agreed there Spag.

It is rapidly becoming a joke at the number of Ds, Libs, et al urging cooperation and bipartisanship.

It is a great idea and I really do agree and hope it all works out but it is hard to jump on board considering the various sources.

At least Chris Matthews and the "Network of Change" now think we've had enough nasty and it is time to support our President.
Oh did you hear, the situation in Gitmo is difficult and The Washington Post was bias towards Obama. Who'd a thunk it?

[Spag]

Of course Matthews et al think it's time to end the nastiness- their guy won. We all know that if McCain had won the nastiness would continue unabated.

My hope is that conservatives actually do put forth an effort towards cooperation and treat Obama with more respect and class than the Left did to Bush. We know that most of them are knee jerk intolerant reactionaries who believe that anyone who doesn't adopt their agenda is being "divisive" and they don't care at all about the consequences because they are slaves to an ideology first and foremost.

There is nothing to gain by conservatives stooping to their low level and hoping that Obama is a failure. I want him to succeed, but that doesn't mean I support his agenda. Failed presidencies don't help America.

[Robin Leskovich]

Something occurs to me.Reducing numbers seems the way of this century. The N&R is firing its readers. Corporations are terminating employees, right and left. Obama is reading Lincoln; does this mean we are just before being terminated? The last person to act on Lincoln's thoughts was Lincoln; he terminated a bunch of us. Did Lincoln find the way of the 21st Century long before its time?

[Mick]

Once again, agreed.

I have more issues/problems with the passengers on this train than the engineer!

Loyal opposition I shall be.

[Spag]

Well said, Mick. My biggest problem with Obama is many of his supporters, not Obama himself. Sure I disagree with him on most things, but the dishonesty and nastiness of many of his supporters is the most distasteful part.

[newtogso]

"Sure I disagree with him on most things, but the dishonesty and nastiness of many of his supporters is the most distasteful part."

Many? of his supporters? I didn't hear the thousands at Grant Park slinging "boos". All parties have equally dishonest and nasty "wings".

[eric]

I'd say the most common fault among Obama supporters is fecklessness, far more than either dishonesty (unless you count self-delusion) or nastiness (if anything, too many of them seem too concerned with being nice). Perhaps the dishonest and nasty ones are more vocal and thus appear more numerous (and I'd say the same about accusations of dishonesty or nastiness aimed at McCain supporters).

Of course, in the political context, both dishonesty and nastiness are, at least to a large extent, in the eye of the beholder; partisans on any side are more inclined to attribute those faults to those on an opposing side. And I also suspect that there may be some broad differences in what "liberals" and "conservatives" mean by "dishonesty" or "nastiness". (And I hasten to say I'm not taking a position that either side's conception is more valid, but merely suggesting that they are using the terms to mean different things.)

That aside, I'm inclined to agree that calls for "bi-partisanship" and "setting aside our differences" are just as fatuous coming from Democrats now as they were coming from Republicans over the past 8 years. I'd hope we can disagree and be partisan without being dishonest or nasty. But I don't see papering over substantive disagreements as a virtue.

[eric]

"You don't get an 80% approval rating for nothing. "

You don't lose it for nothing either.

[Spag]

And it went down to an incredibly low 65% despite all the hammering from the media and liberals. By contrast, Barack Obama, who just won the White House has a significantly higher approval rating than Palin, a whopping 68% as of yesterday.

I guess 65 is in the gutter but 68 is sky high.

Spin away, facts be damned. It's all about the cause.

[eric]

I didn't spin anything Sam, I just provided a link to the most recent fact, as opposed to the 6-month old one you cited. Make of it what you will. And by all means, please continue to lecture others on dishonesty and nastiness.