I am convinced that although Barak Obama won the Presidential election his ascension to the oval office was not a "mandate" for expanding the democratic parties definition of change via the pretext of the current financial crisis and election results.
History buffs will be familiar with the circumstances surrounding FDR's rise to power in the 30's, but many forget that along with the positives there were many negatives enacted like the National Recovery Administration. Emily Shoals of the New York Post does an eloquent job of putting this into perspective and I encourage you to read her column here. I believe the democrat party of today will overstep what the majority of Americans expect and force their old ideas onto the public costing them dearly with a majority shift in both houses of congress in 2010 and 2012, even though Obama wins reelection.
I think a solid argument can be made that a mandate requires a significant uptick in votes for the incoming party, but when analyzing the 2008 election we find that Obama defeated McCain by only 1% more than Bush defeated Kerry in 2000. I wouldn't call that a mandate. I would call it the people looking for change in leadership and given the financial crisis I think the vote count was less about Obama and McCain as a change in what we as Americans expect from the party in power and their satisfaction with the current economic environment.
Additionally it is interesting to point out that according to a recent article from the Pittsburgh-Tribune Review by Ralph Reiland the massive turnout of voters predicted by the media driven by get out the vote drives by Democrats never materialized, " despite the pictures of four-hour lines at the polls, American University's Center for the Study of the American Electorate reports that voter turnout in this year's election was the same in percentage terms as it was four years ago --- or at most had risen by less than 1 percent."
In closing, Democrats beware. You do not have a mandate, you have a license to correct what is wrong and for many independent voters like myself I simply suspect that you are going to over reach and further mortgage our countries future with debt strapping each of us with a burden worse than we are strapped with today by implementing your policies from the past and misinterpreting a standard election margin as a mandate to change more than is needed.
History buffs will be familiar with the circumstances surrounding FDR's rise to power in the 30's, but many forget that along with the positives there were many negatives enacted like the National Recovery Administration. Emily Shoals of the New York Post does an eloquent job of putting this into perspective and I encourage you to read her column here. I believe the democrat party of today will overstep what the majority of Americans expect and force their old ideas onto the public costing them dearly with a majority shift in both houses of congress in 2010 and 2012, even though Obama wins reelection.
I think a solid argument can be made that a mandate requires a significant uptick in votes for the incoming party, but when analyzing the 2008 election we find that Obama defeated McCain by only 1% more than Bush defeated Kerry in 2000. I wouldn't call that a mandate. I would call it the people looking for change in leadership and given the financial crisis I think the vote count was less about Obama and McCain as a change in what we as Americans expect from the party in power and their satisfaction with the current economic environment.
Additionally it is interesting to point out that according to a recent article from the Pittsburgh-Tribune Review by Ralph Reiland the massive turnout of voters predicted by the media driven by get out the vote drives by Democrats never materialized, " despite the pictures of four-hour lines at the polls, American University's Center for the Study of the American Electorate reports that voter turnout in this year's election was the same in percentage terms as it was four years ago --- or at most had risen by less than 1 percent."
In closing, Democrats beware. You do not have a mandate, you have a license to correct what is wrong and for many independent voters like myself I simply suspect that you are going to over reach and further mortgage our countries future with debt strapping each of us with a burden worse than we are strapped with today by implementing your policies from the past and misinterpreting a standard election margin as a mandate to change more than is needed.
No comments:
Post a Comment