2008 Woodie Awards
As elections show, moderation is important in American politics
Justin Heinze '09
Issue date: 12/1/06 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 2 next >
The results of the recent midterm Congressional elections, won very decidedly by Democrats, have of course brought up the inevitable questions of what happened and why the country turned so harshly and abruptly away from the Republican conservative majority which had reigned for 12 years. Reasons seldom explored are the politics of the individual candidates themselves and how these personal viewpoints won the election for the Democrats and, simultaneously, lost it for the Republicans. Far too often, the only thing political pundits see is liberal or conservative, donkey or elephant, tree-hugging hippie or psychotic Christian fundamentalist. They do not take into account the fact that not every voter in the country is as informed about politics as they are, nor are they as decidedly left or right wing. Thus, much of our media fails to portray or consider the moderate angles which many candidates take.
These moderate views, in fact played a major part in winning the election for the Democrats. All across the country, centrist Democrats were elected over Republicans who leaned farther to the extreme right. Pennsylvania was a perfect example of that trend: Bob Casey, one of the most moderate Democrats running, ousted the extreme Rick Santorum. Not all of this can be blamed on the individual politician, for it was a party-wide strategy implemented by Karl Rove, who called for Republicans to strengthen their conservative beliefs to widen their voter base. However, the strategy did little more than polarize the issue and attract key undecided voters to the more centrist views espoused by the Democrats.
The call to be unified has been declared many times by our President. The day after the midterm elections, Bush spoke somberly: "I intend to work with the new Congress in a bipartisan way to address issues confronting this country." Yet in an attempt to garner support for his war on terror earlier in his term in office, he was much more divisive: "Either you're with us, or you're with the terrorists." This outrageous claim was not only a very bad campaign strategy, but also exposed something that is truly tearing apart our country today. During the Vietnam War, President Nixon famously said: "Opposition to the war in this country is the greatest single weapon working against the U.S." Nixon and Bush are similar not only in their support of needless wars, but also in their tremendously polarizing statements. Nixon used, just as Bush does today, a sort of guilt trip, where any criticism is seen as unpatriotic and any dissent seen as something against America's best interests even though much of the "dissent" that they complain about is against that particular politician's best interest, and often is in the best interest of the country.
These moderate views, in fact played a major part in winning the election for the Democrats. All across the country, centrist Democrats were elected over Republicans who leaned farther to the extreme right. Pennsylvania was a perfect example of that trend: Bob Casey, one of the most moderate Democrats running, ousted the extreme Rick Santorum. Not all of this can be blamed on the individual politician, for it was a party-wide strategy implemented by Karl Rove, who called for Republicans to strengthen their conservative beliefs to widen their voter base. However, the strategy did little more than polarize the issue and attract key undecided voters to the more centrist views espoused by the Democrats.
The call to be unified has been declared many times by our President. The day after the midterm elections, Bush spoke somberly: "I intend to work with the new Congress in a bipartisan way to address issues confronting this country." Yet in an attempt to garner support for his war on terror earlier in his term in office, he was much more divisive: "Either you're with us, or you're with the terrorists." This outrageous claim was not only a very bad campaign strategy, but also exposed something that is truly tearing apart our country today. During the Vietnam War, President Nixon famously said: "Opposition to the war in this country is the greatest single weapon working against the U.S." Nixon and Bush are similar not only in their support of needless wars, but also in their tremendously polarizing statements. Nixon used, just as Bush does today, a sort of guilt trip, where any criticism is seen as unpatriotic and any dissent seen as something against America's best interests even though much of the "dissent" that they complain about is against that particular politician's best interest, and often is in the best interest of the country.
Be the first to comment on this story