04 November 2004 @ 12:10 pm
As far as simple statements of opinion go, I personally believe it's quite disingenous of the Bush administration to claim that they have a "mandate" simply on the basis of recieving 51% of the popular vote, when 48% of the vote was *against* him, and a large number of those voting against him were polled to have done so to get him out, rather than to put Kerry in.

Given the sharp divides between the two camps, I think a much more balanced and rational approach would have been to *recognize* the fact that many Bush policies, programs, and proposals are anathema to almost half of America (not my word, actually a description by the AP which I think is quite accurate), and work on building consensus. Instead, the administration is words which indicate they believe they have been given a blank check to enact their policies, and to hell with those who would oppose them.

I'm not going to call this the end of the world, but the attitude -- two days after the election -- worries me a great deal.
( Post a new comment )
[identity profile] cyfis.livejournal.com on November 4th, 2004 07:43 pm (UTC)
I seriously doubt they'll get the point unless it comes down to rioting in the streets. Bush's administration and even the election campaign has always taken a "see no evil" stand. Some of their rallys, for instance, required the attendees to a) be Republican and b) sign a pledge of loyalty to Bush.

After all, why should a president who doesn't believe in science believe in statistics?
(Reply) (Link)