Ask any American who pays attention to politics and they will tell you that the most recent election was a massive vote of confidence for President George W. Bush and his Republican party. For those who didn’t watch TV, the newspapers declared the “Republican Victory” in this midterm election. Yet the results beg one to take a closer look at the situation; to view whether or not this was actually the great “mandate from the people” that all of the conservatives allege it to be.

There are several points that must be analyzed in order to understand exactly what transpired and, more importantly, what it means for the future of American Democracy. The most important thing to understand is that this election did NOT radically change the future of American politics, nor did it substantially show a change in the feelings of the American people. The more one looks at it, the more this election seems to fall into place; to reflect simply the feelings of the American people at a certain point in time, namely this past November.

Let us divide the election into five parts: Party platforms, American public opinion, the War on Terror, the Economy and the Legacy of 9/11. Then, after looking at this, we can see what the results of the election have yielded America.

Party Platforms

Most voting Americans came into this election looking at the two parties (since unfortunately in America we only have two real parties) and their different approaches on the issues facing our nation. Republicans tended to concentrate on security and the need to protect America both at home and abroad. Democrats, on the other hand, gambled on the economy route – a decision that in hindsight seems as folly but in reality was probably as good a bet as any.

Keeping in mind that they were facing a President whose approval rating was as high as any in the last century, they needed to take a chance on trying to salvage something here. Theoretically, the democrats were not playing to win; they were playing to tie, equating this with not losing the Senate and thus being able to keep the pressure on Bush and the republicans via blocking votes, etc. So they gambled on the economy, figuring that it had helped them seize the White House in 1992, but they failed.

The reality was that in spite of all the polls saying that the number one issue on the minds of voters was the economy, when they went to the booths that November day, America voted for security and an expansion of the war on terror. This is, to most people, an amazing trend; after all, most Americans, when polled, did NOT favor expanding the war, yet, when it came time to vote, they placed the government squarely in the hands of those who are most dedicated towards waging offensive wars. How is this possible? It is the Israeli Effect, something that will be discussed in the section regarding the aftermath of the elections.

American Public Opinion

Picking up on the last point, Americans in the majority of polls favored a government that was going to take care of the economy first and Osama/Saddam and company second. This is classic American voter tradition, seeing that whenever the economy has been down (and it is in a depression right now, don’t let anyone tell you otherwise), the party in power takes it on the chin for the condition.

We could see this during the Presidential elections of 1980 and 1992, and there were different parties elected each time, lending credit to the thought that Americans do not care who changes things so long as it gets done. American public opinion was swayed somewhat by the massive campaigning of President Bush, most unusual for a sitting President, in the weeks leading up to the election. In many close races, Americans voted Republican because they fell sway to Bush’s “good old boy” charm and Southern drawl. Besides this, the majority of Americans did feel that Bush was doing a rather good job in the 9/11 aftermath, and this certainly played a roll in giving him some leeway as far as the economy was concerned.

The War on Terror

The attacks on 9/11 did more than simply take the lives of 3,000 people on American soil; it made perfectly clear the fact that America was not capable of defending itself against this new kind of warfare. Further, it showed that American borders were particularly vulnerable to infiltration and that security at major ports (air, land and sea) was lax at best. It also brought into the fray questions about the legitimacy of profiling for racial, cultural or religious reasons. It forced America to look around and take account of what nations stood with her or against her (in a very simplistic approach to a very complex issue), and to lash out against all foes, real or imagined.

However, most Americans felt that choosing security over freedom was a positive thing, urged on by conservative forces who even to this day are trying to suppress our freedoms of speech and attempt to make the Bill of Rights a relic consigned to the dustbin of history. It has been said before, and it bears repeating now, that those who would choose security over freedom deserve neither, and because all of these so called “homeland security” steps are nothing more than window dressing, it remains to be seen not if there will be another attack on America, but rather when. Until that time, the Republicans will continue in their crusade to make sure that we live in “America: love it or leave it” land.

The Economy

This was supposed to be the ace in the hole for Democrats. It had served them well during the 1992 election where they were able to parlay it all the way into the White House. America currently is in a depression; anyone who tells you otherwise is simply trying to mask the truth. We have, however, thanks to the Republicans, entered into a “jobless recovery,” which makes about as much sense as it sounds.

People are not working and, even worse, the Republican party has offered no real solution to this, preferring to blame everything on Osama and Saddam rather than face the fact that there are several critical problems with the US economic system as a whole. However, democrats here dropped the ball by offering no alternative other than a constant reminder that during Clinton’s term the economy was in 5th gear and now it was failing miserably.

At the end of the day, although Americans vote with their pocketbooks over anything else (mostly because that is the only thing they understand in the realm of politics), at this critical juncture they chose to vote in favor of those who promised that economy recovery could happen in spite of waging a war of aggression against multiple countries. Truly we live in very interesting times, if nothing else.

The Legacy of 9/11

We must say one thing for President Bush regarding his response to the 11th of September attacks: he faced them with resolve and courage, and even if one wishes to disagree with his responses (such as the author), one cannot argue that he did not do his best to keep America in one piece at a time when the nation was ready to split down the seams.

From the beginning, Bush urged calm and recognized the need for the country to grieve in the early stages of our response. He courageously went to Ground Zero as soon as was safe for any civilian to be there and began the task of leading America from grief to a just response, which the attack necessitated. He urged patience and tried to steer Americans away from rushing to judgment on their fellow citizens who perhaps belonged to the same religion as the culprits or came from the same region.

In fact, despite the constant attempts of his cabinet to play hardball with some Americans, such as bringing in “experts” to term Saudi Arabia a terrorist entity, Bush managed to bring a surprisingly even-handed middle ground mentality to the equation. It was at this point where all of the jokes about him being somewhat stupid melted away because the country saw him as they needed to see him: Bush acted every part the leader of the greatest nation on earth; brave, courageous and calm. He truly did lead America through one of the most horrific times in her history, and for this the voting public was loathe to shy from supporting him.

So what has this election yielded America? Yes, the party of the President is now in power and there is talk of him getting much legislation through congress with much less of a problem (especially the controversial “Homeland Security” legislation), but will this really be the case? Democrats still occupy key seats in both the House and Senate, and their power nationwide has been slightly lessened but by no means have they been beaten down into a non-factor as some would have us believe.

America seemed to be suffering from the Israeli Effect, something I will define as a soft of political equivalent to the abused child syndrome: the voting public tended to drift towards the party that was more militaristic although the public was in theory against such a stance. 

In Israel, although most of the people fall more in line with Labour Party ideology, they have in the last election turned out a Likud Bloc and all signs seem to point to either Sharon or Netanyahu winning this coming election against anything Labour has to throw against them.

Since now the United States has suffered an attack that has been seen by many as a challenge to her power, will her people follow in the lines of what the Israeli public has done for years? We certainly seem to by this vote of confidence to a party dedicated towards making America the latest global empire, complete with the rights to decide who rules the little countries on the fringes of our borders (and economic spheres), and occupation of lands that we see fit to occupy. The last time I checked, America still had tens of thousands of troops showing no signs of leaving the Gulf States, ten years after hostilities in the region were concluded. Take that sign as you will.

Indeed, the legacy of this election rides on two factors, both of which will have their outcome made manifest in the following months: the ability of Bush to sell the American people (and indeed the rest of the world) on his ever increasing visions of this “war on terror,” and the ability of the Republicans to do something, anything, about the economic conditions in America.

As for the former, already the “war” has taken turns for the worst. In Afghanistan, news of which has been relegated to page 30 of the press, tribal warfare has resume in almost all of the provinces. Opium production, which the Taliban severely curtailed, has resumed and according to some projections this year’s crop is likely to be an 800% increase. Osama bin Laden still remains elusive, plotting from abroad. Some of his key lieutenants have been captured, but the vast majority remains in action ready to strike at a moments notice. However the United States has shifted its vision, like Sauron from Mt. Doom to the Black Gates of Mordor and the advancing Allied army, from Afghanistan to Iraq. There are no concrete plans as to exactly what happens once, and if, Saddam is decisively defeated. Meanwhile, civil liberties in the United States continue to erode little by little.

As for the economy, there is no real reason to believe that we are anywhere close to beating this depression. A war may provide some temporary economic relief, as well as taking the public’s mind off of the real issue here, but at the end of the day the economy will come back to haunt Bush if he is unable to provide some relief and at least show signs that he can provide the infamously elusive “guns and butter.” He need only to ask his father what becomes of Presidents who fail in the economic sector.

All in all, although for the time being things seem rosy indeed for the Republican party, there remains the specter of war looming in the distance as well as a dragging depression and the prospects of a “jobless recovery,” which may help corporate America recover on the books (long since cooked and re-cooked). But for the average American this may mean little in the long run. If President Bush and the Republican Party insist on taking the American public into a long, ultimately un-winnable war while at the same time eroding our civil-liberties and refusing to address the economy, he (and they by proxy) may find themselves out of a job in a few years. For the sake of the free, civilized world let us hope this is so.

Anthony J. Aschettino is a scholar in Middle East and South Asian Studies. He is currently doing freelance work while researching his first book on Neo-Colonialism and the Muslim World. He is dedicated towards the principles of Marxism while applied in a pragmatic manner and with justice. He has spent time in Pakistan, Egypt, Israel and Palestine during the course of his studies and travels. You can reach him at aschettino@islam-online.net

The articles posted on this page reflect solely the opinions of the authors. Views Archive Advanced Search Views & Analyses