Harry’s Place posts a short but interesting piece on one aspect of the Republican party’s triumphalism. I reproduce it here in full because it’s too short to pick from:
Of all the Republican reasons for claiming a mandate from Tuesday’s election, probably the most absurd is that Bush won more votes than any Presidential candidate in history.
By the same measure, Bush was rejected by more voters than any other candidate in history except Kerry.
Gene is correct in highlighting the intellectual dishonesty in interpreting the gross vote that way but it should not alter the forceful evidence that Bush has been issued with a substantial mandate.
The only important factor of Bush’s victory margin has been that it was achieved through a referendum that reached the largest portion of Americans in recent history. A candidate can win 70% of the votes and have a laughable mandate if only 1/3 constituents of her constituents voted.
The Republicans are right in claiming the mandate to be considerable, not because of the size of the turnout as regards Bush’s numerical superiority (which Gene is entirely right to refute), but because of the size of the turnout full stop.
Large and representative turnout alone begets a meaningful mandate from the people. It is upon that exact principle that the universal suffrage movement fought and in many parts of the world, continues to fight today.
Later
John
Posted by John Swaine at November 6, 2004 05:47 PM | TrackBack