(I take as read that the US election, and US domestic politics, are a critical concern for anyone interested in the global progressive cause.)
The Republicans and their supporters are already reframing the narrative of this election. In every speech, every talking point, every blog post, the election is being portrayed as an overwhelming vindication of the Bush administration, and a victory that demonstrates what America really wants – and, more profoundly, who Americans really are.
This narrative must be challenged.
The Republican narrative portrays the result as a landslide for Bush.
The truth is that the result was close. It is incredible how soon we forget the long hours waiting on the Ohio results. This was not a landslide victory – the margin of decision was small. More people voted for Bush than in any previous election – but also, more people voted against Bush than against any previous candidate. The mobilization of opposition to Bush is the important factor here.
The Republican narrative portrays the result as a massive rejection of the left.
Many on the left have taken up this same line – that the US, the world’s largest democracy, has rejected the progressive project. The truth is, more people voted for the candidate of the left than in any previous US election.
The Republican narrative holds that the President has a clear mandate.
Bush has a clear majority of support in the US, but not an overwhelming majority. He also has a very large minority of entrenched opposition – the largest that any previous President has had to deal with. Claims to a clear mandate are complicated by this situation, which is as far as I know unprecedented in US politics.
The Republican narrative holds that the Democrats were naive to expect the youth vote to make a difference.
The truth is that the youth vote did make a difference, just not as large as was hoped. The youth vote was up – but so was every other demographic. The Democrats were wise in supporting and driving this effort, although it turns out that they, and I, hoped for more than was realistic.
The Republican narrative conceals the efforts they made to bring out the vote.
The story is told as if the American people of their own accord rose up to stand up for what is right. The truth is that the Republicans have used their network to get their issues and their message into every evangelical Church in the country and, crucially, to get more people voting. This isn’t the whole story, but the extent of this massive, hidden mobilisation is the biggest single revelation of the election.
So – with this in mind, what must we do?
We must recognize that this was just one clash in what will be a long struggle. In that context, there is much to be pleased with.
We must challenge any attempt to reframe the narrative of this election in the ways described above. If the above narrative takes hold, that makes the progressive movement’s task all the harder. Not impossible – not by any means – but harder. And it’s hard enough already.
6 thoughts on “[Election] The Election Night Narrative”
Comments are closed.
Good work, Morgue.
For a visual emphasis of these points, check out…
http://www.kieranhealy.org/files/misc/purple_america_2004_small.gif
…which nicely shows that the story of a divided country, and the myth of a clear vindication for the conservative Right, are not reflected in reality.
And, yes. Now that we on the left have got this irksome election out of the way, now the real work begins – in the US and Worldwide.
One thing to do, right now, is to note the promises that the Bush Administration is making in the aftermath of their win. Then in 6 months time when the Right has quietly forgotten about “uniting the country”, and “reaching out to the international community” it will be time to remind people about what was said in the post-election euphoria.
Also, keep an eye on the Cabinet appointments – that will give some good idea as to the direction of Bush II’s second term, to better enable the Left to prepare the counter-arguments.
Does anyone know what proportion of eligible voters cast votes in this election? I suspect Bush’s “clear mandate” still represents less than quarter of the adult population of the US…
The site is playing silly buggers again and blocking some people from commenting. They sent emails, though, so here’s what’s missing:
Pearce:
————
…an American friend of mine… said to me as a P.S. at the end of an email:
“I live in one scared country right now. Half are afraid of what _might_
happen, the other half are afraid of what _is_ happening.”
I thought it was a nice summary.
————
Billy (in reply to Karen):
————
About 60% of eligible voters voted. Michael Albert notes this means more
people didn’t vote than voted for either candidate, to give a sense of the
constituencies. The Albert piece is good as a breakdown of voter stuff and
as a general reaction piece.
————
I am curious Morgue; just what is the “Global Progressive” movement. What are you trying to progress too.
Progressive is a fairly bad word, in my opinion, to call anything because Progression is defined in terms of the goal. I could be a totally and extremely right wing and call myself progressive because I am moving towards a political goal.
So to say the “Global Progressive” movement simply makes me ask “What are they progrssing too?” Why don’t they say what they are progressing too in their label. Like the global “green” movement, or Marxist movement or whatever.
So – what is this global progressive movement progressing too?
cut n pasting the html ate the link i’d included above. here it is http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=41&ItemID=6571
also testing if posting works