By  Mowahid Shah

November 18, 2004

Election 2004: Decisive but Divisive
By Mowahid Hussain Shah


The 2004 US Presidential elections centered around three key issues: (1) the traditional campaign issue of economy and employment; (2) the festering issue of Iraq and “terrorism”; and finally, (3) the upholding of traditional American family values and faith, intersecting with the much underestimated social issue of the placement of gays, especially gay marriages, in mainstream American culture and society.

As expected, Kerry did well on the economy issue. On the issue of Iraq, where the more likeable Bush was most vulnerable, Kerry let him off the hook by only raising it near the tail-end of the campaign. This is where Kerry faltered in not vividly presenting an alternative vision to the Iraq conflict, which had disturbed a majority of Americans into thinking that the US is on the wrong track. Belatedly, Kerry harped on the theme of “wrong war, wrong place, wrong time” but by then he had missed the bus. Kerry’s cautious strategy also permitted Bush to recast the Iraq issue as part of the “war on terrorism” on which Bush was able to appeal to post-9/11 fears of the average American voter. Prominently among the social issues was the wedge issue of gays, particularly so in a period where the Christian right was viewing America as becoming a bastion of coarse, uncouth, and shameless behavior. This was the base constituency of Bush, which he skillfully energized by keeping the social issue on the front burner. Bush kept his core constituency intact while adding to it the undecided swing voters which Kerry could not carry.

At a time of paranoia and fear, the Republican Party portrayed itself as more consistent and coherent in contrast to the ambiguity of the Democratic Party which was depicted as “flip-flopping” and vacillating, with no Din-Iman. On the social front, Kerry opened his flank by not taking a clear and compelling position on gay marriages which had been solemnized, among other places, in San Francisco and in his own home state of Massachusetts to liberal applause. The pro-Democratic gay lobby significantly miscalculated and overreached, opening the doors for a conservative backlash, which energized and galvanized a major pro-Bush voter turnout.

By stressing values of family and faith, Bush showed more clarity and direction than Kerry. Then, too, on a personal level, Bush came across as an everyday man who had struggled to overcome his personal demons. A reformed alcoholic - now a teetotaler - and dyslexic, Bush credited his faith as having given him the direction and strength to surmount past personal difficulties. Bush, on a personal level, was able to connect with the average American voter in a way Kerry could not. Many Americans were uncomfortable with the faint foreign aura of an effete French-speaking Presidential candidate married to a billionaire heiress of Portuguese background. In my earlier Link article in mid-September, I described Kerry as an inadequate candidate who would lose.

The Democrats lacked an overarching and consistently compelling theme, and were bereft of a moral appeal and call to arms and a rallying point, all of which are necessary to knock out an incumbent President. In short, Kerry could not craft a winning message. Here, the Democrats have to do soul-searching instead of finger-pointing.

The Bush-Kerry contest also mirrored the divide in America between the urban areas where the Democrats predominate, and the rural areas where the Republicans hold sway. It also highlighted that a majority of Democrats live in the bicoastal “blue states” as opposed to the socially conservative middle America “red” hinterland which votes Republican.

In the year 2000, America - in Lieberman - was not ready for a Jewish Vice President; in 1984, in Geraldine Ferraro, it was not ready for a woman Vice President; in 2004, it was not ready to accept gay marriages.
It was more a question of the Democrats losing the election than the Republicans winning it.
Emerging out of the 2004 elections are the following factors which may prove consequential in the near future:

n Republicans’ monopoly on issues of morality, putting the Democrats on the backfoot; n Triumphalism in the Bush administration and in the 109th Congress, where Republicans will have a robust majority, which would make both susceptible to even more mistakes,

n Backlash against liberal elitism;

n A serious blow to Hilary Clinton’s Presidential ambitions, whose own negativity and liberal stance on social issues will create even greater hurdles than Kerry in appealing to the American heartland;

n Republicans’ better grasp of strategy and identification of those issues that motivate Americans, particularly by senior Bush adviser, the brilliant Karl Rove, who was a college dropout from the University of Utah;

n Democrats’ own missteps, slowness to respond and to seize the day, which invited very effective attack ads;

n The support for Bush despite broad skepticism about his job performance and policies;

n Bush in his reelection got 59 million votes while Clinton got 47 million in 1996;

n Republican dominance in the church, wealthy think-tanks, and right-wing talk radio;

n And finally, the fact that emotional appeals can prove more potent than cold logic.
Now, what next?

In the past 30 years, the second terms of Presidents have been marred: Nixon, through Watergate; Reagan, through Iran-Contra; and Clinton, through impeachment over Monica and Paula Jones.

But Presidents in their second terms have a great opportunity to leave a statesman-like historical imprint because there is less of an electoral need to pander.

Bush’s test would be if he demonstrates the vision and values to rise above the closed circle of his pro-Israeli neo-conservative cabal and the right-wing evangelical Christians to tackle the intractable and core Palestinian question while, at the same time, showing compassion for the underclass in America.
And, then, there is the small matter of Iraq, Iraq, and Iraq.


PREVIOUSLY


Clash or Coexistence?

The Radical Behind Reconstruction

POWs & Victors’ Justice

Islam on Campus

Community of Civilizations

Rule of Law or Rule of Men?

Unpredictable Times

The Quiet One

Turkish Model & Principled Resignations

Live and Let Live

Leadership & de Gaulle

Dark Side of Power

2002: The Year of Escalation

Whither US?

Politics, God, Cricket & Sex

The Company of Friends

Missing in Action : The Kofi Case

Accountability & Anger

Casualties of War

A Simple Living

The Nexus & Muslim Nationhood

The Kith and Kin Culture

It Is Spreading

Road to Nowhere

Misrepresenting Muslims

The value of curiosity

Revenge & Riches

The Media on Iraq

The Perils of Sycophancy

Legends of Punjab

Mind & Muscle

Islam & the West: Conflict or Co-Existence?

The Challenge of Disinformation

Britain on the Backfoot


2001

 

Editor: Akhtar M. Faruqui
© 2004 pakistanlink.com . All Rights Reserved.