qatsi (qatsi) wrote,

Ready to drink the hemlock yet?

Or, as an alternative title, 1992 And All That, here is the obligatory Oh-My-God-The-World's-Going-To-End post.

Throughout the campaign, it seemed fairly clear that Bush was the more likely winner. I can't quite explain why other than by observing that people can always be more stupid than you think. Kerry may not be particularly outgoing or interesting, but isn't the most important factor competence? For a short time last night it looked as though there might have been a surprise result, but it didn't last.

I'm just a bit surprised by those exit polls, as they remind me of the UK General Election in 1992, when voters lied to the pollsters because they were too ashamed to admit voting Conservative. In which case, you have to credit Americans for being ashamed of voting for Bush.

On the positive side, higher turnout is a Good Thing; the winning candidate also winning the popular vote is a Good Thing; and (at least in terms of numbers) the Nader vote not affecting the outcome is a Good Thing. From my f- and f2-lists, I observe other responses which cheer me up: this is Bush's mess, and I want him to finish it from spiritof1976; the potential for Russia and the Middle East to destroy the US economy from walpurg; and (rather more flippantly) the prospect of the Democratic states seceding from the Union in a thread from andrewwyld.
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 1 comment