The Nation: "For Obama, A Bigger Win Than for Kennedy, Nixon, Carter or Bush (an implied mandate)

[amborin]

For Obama, a Bigger Win Than for Kennedy, Nixon, Carter or Bush

John Nichols on November 7, 2012

It wasn’t even close. That’s the unexpected result of the November 6 election. And President Obama and his supporters must wrap their heads around this new reality—just as their Republican rivals are going to have to adjust to it.

snip

Despite a brief delay by Republican challenger Mitt Romney, and the commentators on Fox News, Obama claimed his victory on election night not the next day, as Richard Nixon did in 1960, or even later, as George Bush in 2000.

And it was a real victory.

snip

By the time Romney conceded at 1 am, Obama had a 250,000 popular-vote lead, and it grew to roughly 2 million by dawn.

snip

Obama’s win was bigger than John Kennedy’s in 1960 (303 electoral votes, popular vote margin of 112,827), bigger than Richard Nixon’s in 1968 (301 electoral votes, popular vote plurlaity of 512,000), bigger than Jimmy Carter’s in 1976 (297 electoral votes, popular vote margin of 1,683,247), bigger than George W. Bush’s in 2000 (271 electoral votes and a popular vote loss of 543,816).

snip

Significantly, Rove’s man, George W. Bush won his 2004 re-election run with just 286 electoral votes, and faced serious challenges to the result in the state that put him across the 270 line: Ohio.

snip

Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid do not need to be “reformed.”

They need to be strengthened and expanded.

snip

.....The President and Congress should stand with the people who elected them and reject any cuts in Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid, strengthen Medicare by expanding it to cover everyone, and insist that Wall Street begin to repay our nation for the damage it caused our economy with a small tax on Wall Street speculation, the Robin Hood tax.”

snip

The place to begin is with a project he mentioned just before the Democratic National Convention: amending the constitution to overturn the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision.

snip

Seeking to amend the constitution to reform our election system is an ambitious endeavor, especially for a president who has just beaten the combined power of Karl Rove and his billionaire boys club.


http://www.thenation.com/blog/171085/obama-bigger-win-kennedy-nixon-carter-or-bush

[speedoo]

1. There has to be an easier way to overturn Citizen's United.

Yes?

[patrice]

2. We need to think about the cost:benefit ratio here > amendment ratification is a LONG

very very dicey process. Do we have that kind of time? Those resources? Can we afford to ignore other pressing issues in order to focus on a "movement" to amend? How will super PAC money affect the development of such a "movement"?

From the article linked in OP:

"Seeking to amend the constitution to reform our election system is an ambitious endeavor, ESPECIALLY (my emphasis added) for a president who has just beaten the combined power of Karl Rove and his billionaire boys club."

I, for one, am wondering how you abridge 1st amendment rights of persons who happen to be corporations. Don't our arguments against the sort of thing created by DOMA, i.e. a permanent legally discriminated against underclass, apply here too? For this reason and others, I think we should do an "end run" and work on voting reforms that include national voting guides of the type used in Oregon and instant-runoff, hand-marked paper ballots, counted in public, in order to ensure the vote audit trail.

[robinlynne]

4. I don't think one excludes the other. I belive the election changes you suggest are necessary,

and so is overturning citizens united.

[truebluegreen]

3. Only other possibility is a new Supreme Court decision overturning it...

which will take new justices....of which we may get 3 in the next 4 years. It will also take an appropriate case wending its way through the justice system to be decided by a new Supreme Court. May take years. Edited to add: a different Court could change it back too

It might be easier to pass an amendment: that decision is unpopular with people on both sides of the aisle (politicians not so much). While we are at it, we should tack on Federal standardized requirements for voting procedures, etc. to prevent the mess the 50 different states have concocted between them. No more changing the laws right before an election, or making it harder for citizens to exercise their constitutional rights. No more day-long waits (people voting at 1:45 a.m.? WTF?) or Secretaries of State for either party who can swing an election with their shenanigans. A national holiday for election day would be good too, or nationwide mail-in ballots.

And while we're at it, Virtual Run-Off voting and limiting elections to 90 days! That's as much as any sane person needs to make a decision, or put up with.

OK, that's enough for now.

[ProudProgressiveNow]

9. +1 nt

[INdemo]

15. When I think about all the money wasted by these outside groups I think

about how that money could have been better spent for education,computer lab upgrades,for college scholarships and more..For medical research for cancer or cardiology research..and hundreds if not thousands of more projects those millions of dollars could have sponsored..Its shameful....
But yet the billionaires just shrug their shoulders and say "oh well"
But then when we have an ongoing fundraiser for seizure research there has to be arm twisting to get a few thousand dollars contributed by these guys....
Yes its just selfish and shameful

[Horse with no Name]

5. With the shit I am hearing from the the republican "leadership"

Obama needs to get out in front and DECLARE a mandate.

Take the wind out of their sails before the meme sticks.

[Care Acutely]

6. "unexpected?"

I thought it was obvious, what was coming. I expected a landslide.

Rock on, Mr. President, rock on.

[NOLALady]

7. A big win

in spite of voter suppression.

[closeupready]

8. Hearty K&R for every single point in this.

Thanks for posting it, amborin.

[ProudProgressiveNow]

10. Great read!

Very realistic look. K&R

[toby jo]

11. Republican at work showing their colors:

"Wow, I am really shocked. I thought it would be a landslide for Romney. I mean, what are people thinking?"

I tried to tell him. The funniest thing was when I said the economy was in free fall at the end of Bushs' term. No it wasn't he said.

There ya go.

[ananda]

12. The House will not acknowledge or accept a mandate from anyone except..

.. the rich corporate interests.

All that gerrymandering you know.

I guess everyone knows by now that the Dems would have won the House without the ridiculous gerrymandering in states like Pennsylvania, Texas, and others.

[moriah]

13. I was extremely saddened that Arkansas is now sending four Republicans to the House.

Even in areas that are strong Democratic strongholds here in the state -- the district that includes Pulaski County, Little Rock itself -- the Republican candidate was spending a TON of money trying to win on local airwaves, and had a *very* focused message. I don't recall hearing a single ad for the Democratic candidate.

Though, we *did* almost pass medical MJ -- the closest I think any Southern state has come to doing so. So maybe there's some hope.

[Art_from_Ark]

19. You and me both

This will mark the first time since Reconstruction that all of Arkansas's representatives will be Republicans! Argh!
And on top of that, the R's will control the state senate, and possibly the lower house as well.
One reason why my enthusiasm for this election has been seriously dampened.
And now I'm worried that we'll get another Huckabee in two years when Bebee will be ineligible to run for a 3rd term.

[mountain grammy]

14. Do not let the rw control the conversation

Mr. President, get out there and take control.. they got a "shellacking."

[Scurrilous]

16. K & R

[aaaaaa5a]

17. K&R! nt

[VPStoltz]

18. PrezO won by over TEN MILLION last time!

And those PRICKS said it wasn't a mandate.

[99th_Monkey]

20. THANK YOU -> The Nation. Someone needs to print this on Blitzer's forehead. nt