Op-Ed: No Electoral Mandate for Barack Obama?

One day after Election Day, Republican members of Congress and right leaning pundits, were quickly out in front of cameras stating that Barack Obama's resounding victory over John McCain, did not equate to a mandate for the newly minted President-elect.

America’s 2008 General Election was historic and convincing on the presidential and Congressional level. The election was an obvious a big win for Democrats, with Barack Obama’s win especially overwhelming. President-elect Obama won the election with the largest popular vote total for any Democrat since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964. As the evening showed, it served as a referendum to change the manner in which the Republican politicians have run the country into a dark area. This is clearly evidenced by the stunning turn of many states from red to blue, and even more of them turning purple. In 2004 President Bush defeated John Kerry in the general election winning a slim Electoral College margin of 286 votes to 251. That was the smallest margin of victory in the Electoral College since Jimmy Carter defeated Gerald Ford in 1976. Illinois Senator Barack Obama defeated Arizona's John McCain by a 365 to 173 in electoral votes, with Missouri's votes still undecided. Following President George W. Bush's 2004 victory, the conservative media rushed to declare that the election was a decisive mandate for Bush's agenda, and mainstream media outlets quickly followed their lead. After last Tuesday's election, Republican Congressional members and pundits started the spin. Before the results of traditionally red North Carolina and Missouri's tally was in, they were stating President-elect Obama's victory did not constitute a mandate. I cannot fathom how the right does not agree that Barack Obama's blowout does not represent what George Bush's narrow victory did. John Podesta, President and CEO of the Center for American Progress, who has been tasked to head the Obama transition, explained on Yesterday's Fox News Sunday , program that President-elect Barack Obama’s victory last week constituted a strong endorsement by the American people of a “progressive philosophy” and has given progressives a “real mandate for change.” Two Republicans, Congressman Eric Cantor of Virginia and Senator Mike Pence of Indiana, rebutted those statements later on the same program. CANTOR: This was not some kind of realignment of the electorate, not some kind of shift toward some style of European social, big government type of philosophy.

PENCE: I don’t think this was a victory for a progressive, or a liberal victory, I think this was a victory for Barack Obama. The Republicans want you to believe the election was not a repudiation of all things conservative or Republican. While that may be true, it was however, clearly a repudiation of the manner in which the Republicans handled running the government. Though short of a mandate for Barack Obama to govern along the lines of House speaker Nancy Pelosi’s far-left policies, it is a mandate for cooperation and bipartisanship. The electorate voted for the hope of a Washington that functions for the good of the American people. Pelosi has already stated that she expects Barack to govern from the middle, and she seems intent on helping him do just that. Furthermore, I do not think that the Democrats are reckless enough to throw away the gift the American people have handed them. Americans should not expect to see any extreme fissures among their party in the short or medium term. As was the case with the Obama campaign, discipline with be strongly enforced, and the Democrats will likely proceed prudently.