Are those actual quotes, or is it a joke? (Why would the candidates be discussing college football?!)

(Reply) (Thread)

Yeah, those are the real quotes. They responded to questions submitted by Sports Illustrated.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Until last night at four a.m., I disliked America. Now everything about it seems wonderful, and I feel liked agreeing when Americans claim to be citizens of the 'greatest nation on Earth.'

I'm really looking forward to seeing all the front pages on all the newspapers tomorrow. And on January 20th, when the first family is waving from the entrance gate of the White House - that is an image that will command silence and awe for a long time to come.

Thanks for your links through the election: they were very interesting, and gave my addiction some way of being fruitfully engaged (instead of tediously trawling through Google).

(Reply) (Thread)

Also - a couple of things that've been on my mind, and to which I think you might have the answers.

Firstly, was it just me, or did you think that McCain's concession speech was better than Obama's victory speech? I saw something new in McCain: something magnanimous, honourably, decent in the most positive sense of the world. Obama's was more or less the same as his pre-victory speeches in both content and style.

Secondly, what's happening with vote-counting? How come Misouri and North Carolina are still to be called on CNN despite 100% of the votes having been counted?

And how is it that McCain got such a huge share of the popular vote? Is this just an illicit Eurocentrism on my part? Or is 46% of the vote to Obama's 53% actually very small; is there a solid 45% that's going to vote Republican regardless?

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Hi there, I'm glad you're feeling better about my country; I am too! And I'm glad you found my incessant linking interesting.

On to your questions:

(1) Yes, McCain's speech was very classy. People whose opinions I respect argue about whether he's a deep-down good guy who temporarily sold his soul to the far right, now finally free to revert to his true decent nature, or whether he permanently sold his soul a long time ago and is now posturing for a return to media grace. I don't feel able to judge. But yes, the concession speech itself was excellent.

(2) Missouri and North Carolina are both *extremely* close. Absentee ballots and provisional ballots, which are cast in the case of registration anomalies, sometimes take longer to tabulate than the regular votes do. They're waiting on the final results to be sure. Good thing the election doesn't turn on them!

(3) America is the feel-good story of the world right now, but it's still, by European standards, a deeply conservative place. The step that we've just taken to the left, though real, is not huge. Remember, this country elected George W. Bush twice. Things have changed a lot, but they don't change completely in eight years.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

"Remember, this country elected George W. Bush twice."

Yes; every so often I think of that, and I have to pinch myself. Obama makes America seem like Europe, so I forget how much it emphatically isn't our beloved old aristocrat of a super-state.

In watching the BBC's coverage, someone said that America was a deeply pragmatic nation, that votes out of financial prudency, security concerns, or whatever, and not (moral) principles. Sound about right to you?

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

Of course individuals, even American individuals, vary from one to another. And I don't pretend to be any sort of expert on American culture. I'm pretty far outside the American mainstream, myself (although my politics may be about average for an American Ph.D.). But no, I am not much at all inclined to agree with the description of American voters you cited. The American voter, in my impression, is a deeply ideological voter, who will vote for the candidate he thinks reflects his values, even if that candidate's platform will not be in the interests of that voter.

For example, there is still a significant minority of conservatives in America for whom the most important cluster of issues in an election comprises traditional marriage, abortion restrictions, and virginity. Millions of American simply will not vote for a candidate who doesn't want to limit abortion rights -- even if that candidate is the one offering them tax breaks, more benefits, and a more stable nation.

Sometimes, as in this case, these 'values voters' have odd values. (We must protect unborn children from being murdered, but we laugh at the idea of habeas corpus for accused terrorists.) Other times, they're just confused about what values the candidates actually represent. Lots of people voted for McCain because they thought that Obama was a socialist and/or a terrorist!

I should say, 'values voters' cut both ways. MAYBE an extremely wealthy American would be better off under McCain than Obama. (Certainly he'll be taxed less; of course, there are security issues, and energy issues, and general stability issues, so it's hard to tell. But maybe.) But many extremely wealthy Americans believe in Obama's version of, say, America's role in the international community, and vote for him on principle.

Of course, pragmatics comes in degrees, and varies from year to year. Probably there were some voters -- more than usual -- this year who saw their pensions dwindling and set their 'values' aside and voted for the candidate they thought would help them most personally. Maybe this is what the person you saw had in mind. (I'm reminded of some of the anecdotes I quoted over the past few weeks: "I know Obama's a terrorist, but I'm so worried about the economy, that I don't know whom to vote for", or the more succinct "We're voting for the nigger.") I couldn't say how widespread this is usually or was this time, but it doesn't strike me as likely to be the American norm.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)