Election 2008: American Glasnost

Dick Meyer has some thoughtful analysis today. It moves beyond the incessant (and exaggerated) “Hillary wept, then she swept” narrative that has been dominating most media, and it brushes aside the pundit hysteria and cablenews “where did we go wrong” breast-beating to look a little more deeply at who American voters really are.

The sorry truth is that “change” was merely a phantom conjured by the political elite – a nano-trend, a shorthand, a figment, a wild goose chase.

In 2008, there have been four elections with four winners: Obama, Clinton, Huckabee and McCain. Go ahead: pick an uber-theme that fits all these winners. It ain’t change.
[…]
…change is just a Rorschach test, not a political diagnosis. It is nearly meaningless.
[…]
independent, swing voters never went away, they just had only highly partisan candidates to choose from. Unhappy with such choices, their votes were evenly divided between two bad options. This resulted in close elections. Analysts mistakenly said this meant America was polarized. It wasn’t. Politicians, activists and candidates were partisan and polarized. Most voters were not. They were pragmatic and open-minded.
[…]
The “change” narrative deserves an early funeral. But independent voters, the real silent minority, might commit some real political change this year.

I more than agree. Meyer makes the point that America has not been “polarized” so much as limited to choices of extremes and caricature. Who the hell wants to vote for extremes and caricatures?

I blame the media for much of this. As we have seen vividly over the past ten days, the press has invested too much emotionalism into the political process – they either looooooove someone or they haaaaate someone, and they do all they can to sway the rest of us in our feelings. And clearly – if the past 15 years are any indicator, they succeed wildly. And for that, perhaps, I blame us. We’re a nation too-ready to be told what to think or do by anyone who appears on a television screen or in a magazine. We’re like sheep, and we’ve been badly herded, but perhaps that is changing.

I can’t help but think the longer the writers stay out on strike, the better for an American electorate they cannot over-influence with satirical news shows and late night monologues. Right now, Americans can’t form their opinions with a laugh or a distortive headline. They actually have to check things out for themselves.

Perhaps there is a little revolution going on; the mini-balkanization of America is being exposed as less a balkanization than a dearth of appropriate, representative choices and too much power being too centralized.

It’s almost like the establishment political parties (and the entrenched media) are the USSR, and the voters are trying like hell to bring about glasnost. The politician who can best help deliver “openness” to the flim-flam saturated business of politics, will be our Gorbachev.

In a happy bit of synchronicity, you can take this test and see if you’re really as extreme as the press keeps telling you we all are.

Betsy Newmark has additional thoughts on Meyer’s piece

By the way, The Lives of Others is still the most compelling movie I’ve seen all year – it’s really stayed with me. If you haven’t seen it, get to it.

Dave Barry is also analyzing things. Via Betsy.