Europe and the American Left never bothered to consider George W. Bush as president before now. To them, he was at best a poser - the usurper of that tried-and-true tactic: litigation. Now Bush has been convincingly reelected - and they haven't the faintest idea why. They look at enormous victory margins across the vast number of "red" states, the historic new record for numbers of Americans voting "for" a president, the huge pickup of Republican seats in Congress - and the defeat of the Democrat's own party leader in his home state. The Republican victory was enormous - and so is the elite media's task in beginning the process of understanding the American Heartland. Let's see here, there's something, they say looking at their old friend, the Exit Poll - 20% of Bush voters placed "values" ahead of everything (even terrorism) as the reason they voted Republican. Try as they might, given the slant of "mainstream" journalism everywhere, they haven't a snowball's chance of figuring out what that really means.
In Europe, Christianity has been cached, relegated and derided to the point where it is considered almost completely moribund. For those media elite journalists who do write about that vast mosaic that makes up (that amorphous dynamism called) Christianiy in America, to the extent that they have any interest in it whatsoever - too often impugn elements of brainwashing or heap cynical praise in the manner one might expect in a sports rivalry - in other words, they look at it with all of their personal and competitive baggage obscuring their view.
Right now some of the most dominant, mainstream blogs of the American Left are screaming about this election - decrying the emplacement of institutionalized theocracy based on Right Wing Puritan edict (seriously - check out the Daily Kos, a site that has operated as a Democratic internet "quarterback" throughout the campaign season). What is both ludicrous and hilarious about these viewpoints is that anyone who has any degree of familiarity with Christians is that "they" could never become so unified this side of the Rapture! My recommendation to the American Left and mainstream media: check out comedian Brad Stine for insight on what it is like to be a Christian in America today. And Put A Helmet On!
Nevertheless, this article from The Scotsman is fascinating because it at least attempts to explain American political elections in some meaningful way to the readers there. But do notice "that" city in the U.S. where the writer is based!
Gathering Of Clans That Gave Bush Victory
FRASER NELSON
IN BOSTON
THE victory that George Bush won yesterday will loom large in textbooks of political warfare. How can a president so widely and vehemently hated win one of the largest majorities in American history?
The answer lies in two words: Karl Rove. Mr Bush’s chief political strategist worked out exactly where the battlegrounds would be, studied them obsessively and worked out how to merge all the local battles into one almighty war.
Like the Jacobites at Culloden, the Republicans’ strategy was to raise an army of different clans, fighting in coalition against a common (and regimented) enemy. Unlike Culloden, the clans won.
On election day, Mr Rove raised the anti-gun clan, the anti-abortion clan, the low-tax clan, the family-values clan, the pro-war clan; each cause loyal primarily to itself but coming out to fight for the Republicans on election day.
They were also marshalled into exactly the right areas. Mr Rove worked out which of the 50 states would matter, and he was right. Yesterday’s victory was won by his top three: Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania.
For the past four years, he has been obsessing about this trio: reading all their local newspapers, polling extensively, working out who was most likely to vote and what was likely to make them do it. Using the cold, dispassionate logic which defines his extraordinary career, Mr Rove simply looked at what really fires up these areas and forged policies to suit. He was hunting for clans - and had electronic help.
The Republicans have built a voter-vault, with the names, addresses and social profiles of all target voters. Such people have been precision-bombed with literature and causes, and the formula has worked to perfection. The voter vault (being mirrored in Britain by the Tories) has credit-card information, subscription information - all the facts the party needs to identify someone likely to get out and vote because they want to keep taxes down.
Such voters are sent specific party information, pertinent to their belief. It is junk mail - but tailor-made junk mail. The canvassing has been silently going on for months.
The database allows geographical pin-pointing: Cincinnati, Ohio, was correctly identified as a place which Mr Bush just had to win. This is why he broke with tradition - at some cost to his dignity - to join a ring-round personally on election day.
Rather than a Tony Blair-style "big tent" to pitch at the opposition, the Republicans chose a Thatcher-style radicalism rammed down the throats of its enemies. As the Iron Lady showed three times, this makes for bad headlines but wins elections.
There was no point being emollient to enemy clans, Mr Rove argued. The anti-war movement will always hate Mr Bush - so they should be fought and defeated. Such antagonism would also energise his own clans. Hence, plans to amend the US constitution to ban gay marriage. Senior members of the Republican leadership are not particularly incensed, but the public are. So, ding! Add it to the policy shopping basket: whatever Hicksville wants, Hicksville gets.
The war on terror? Rural America understands and appreciates the cowboy-style "for-us-or-against-us". All the better if this is deplored in New York and Los Angeles - seen as Sodom and Gomorrah in the rural western states.
Even on personality, it was a pitch to the tribes who prefer certainty to slipperiness. "You may not agree with me, but at least you know where I stand," said Mr Bush, ad nauseam. This deeply resonated with voters. He stood for an anti-bourgeoisie way of life.
Mr Kerry’s Democrats had the regular coalition of liberals primarily energised by the anti-war sentiment which is every bit as strong in America as in Europe. But there was one crucial omission: demographics.
The force that returned Mr Bush to the White House against such odds is something the Democratic Party has never quite believed in. Why should millions of America’s poor vote for a man whose policies make them poorer?
Mr Rove took a fundamentally different approach: Americans hold conservative values far dearer than economic self-interest and are more likely to vote along these lines.
The United States is arguably the most ideologically charged nation in the free world. The Democrats wish this not to be true and seem tone deaf to the conservative sound with which Mr Rove is perfectly in tune.
The rival First Ladies illustrated the cultural battle. Laura Bush was a huge campaign asset for the president, a role model for several million conservative Americans who bridle at the suggestion that being a stay-at-home mum is not considered a "job". "She’s never had a proper job in her life," sneered Teresa Heinz Kerry, the billionairess other half of John Kerry. The indignation across the US was palpable: not only is Mrs Bush mother to twins, but she is a former teacher and librarian.
"Perhaps the most important reason to put me back in is so that Laura will be First Lady for four more years," said Mr Bush. He was barely joking.
In an election where the candidate’s wife is the de facto running mate, she had become a conservative icon.
The election was a battle between conservative values and liberal ideas. Values won. This was Mr Rove’s strategy from the beginning. What has staggered the Democrats is how many young voters agreed. Unlike Britain, Christianity is surging across the US - any drive across the swing states shows the unusual sight of new churches, built to accommodate booming congregations.
The lessons of this election will take months to digest. Anyone who finds the result incredible must admit they had not properly understood political America. Mr Bush is the beneficiary - not the mastermind - of a truly historic strategy.
'Bush's Brain' is America's greatest political genius
DUBBED Bush’s Brain, Karl Rove is now credited - even by his enemies - as the greatest political genius in America. A nerdy political hack without university education, he was at large in Texas when it went through its Damascene conversion from Democrat to Republican.
He ran George Bush snr’s failed leadership campaign against Ronald Reagan in 1980, but in 1994 succeeded in taking George W Bush to being Texas governor where he masterminded Mr Bush’s transformation from boozing brat to national leader.
An expert in dirty tricks with a furious temper, he has spent the last decade perfecting how to make the best of his verbally clumsy client.
His lack of ideological fervour is credited with his skill at keeping to successful tactics - his main trick being to link Mr Bush so strongly to evangelical Christians.
No comments:
Post a Comment