Hello, I’m Mark Floegel for WebActive, speaking to you today from pundit purgatory. As I speak these words, it is still not known who won the presidential election. As you hear these words, the outcome may still be in doubt.
A month ago, I stuck my neck out and made several predictions about this election. Let’s see how well they held up. First, I said this election would not be as close as all the analysts said it would be. I said the margin would be closer to Clinton over Bush in ’92 than Kennedy over Nixon in 1960. I was wrong. Very, very wrong. It looks like election 2000 may be the closest presidential race of our time.
I predicted a win for Al Gore. I still don’t know if I was right or wrong on that one, but I said Mr. Gore would not win by much. I was certainly right there. One of my reasons for predicting a Gore win was that George Bush was struggling in Florida. That one was on the money, too. However the electoral college shakes out, it looks like Al Gore will win a small majority of the popular vote. So I think I read the country’s mood correctly, but I might need help with my geography.
I ended that particular commentary by urging people to vote for Ralph Nader. Was that wrong? I’m sure the Gore campaign would think so. If the people who voted for Ralph in Florida went to Al Gore, Mr. Gore wins, so I’m sure Ralph will be Al’s whipping boy – even though exit polls show Nader voters would not have otherwise voted for Gore, even though other states where Ralph did well, like Washington and Wisconsin, wound up in the Gore category.
If Al Gore loses, I think he has no one to blame but himself. Mr. Gore failed to carry his home state of Tennessee, with 11 electoral votes. Move Tennessee from the Republican column to the Democratic column and George Bush cannot win the presidency, regardless of which way Florida breaks. Al Gore cannot blame Ralph Nader for losing Tennessee, he can only blame himself.
The Gore campaign lost Arkansas, Bill Clinton’s home state. Gore lost Arkansas even while he kept Bill Clinton, the best campaigner of his generation, fenced in the Rose Garden on Pennsylvania Avenue. The president did campaign for Hillary Clinton in the New York Senate race, and she won by a comfortable margin.
In Vermont, this election was widely seen as a referendum on our state’s first-in-the-nation civil union law, which extends the benefits of marriage to same-sex couples. “Take Back Vermont” signs sprouted on rural roads and right-wing Republican Ruth Dwyer led a phalanx of conservatives who pledged to do their best to repeal the law.
Unlike the national race, Vermont decided early. It was all over by 8:30 and the Republicans lost. Democratic Governor Howard Dean was returned to office. The GOP made gains in the legislature and it looks like Vermont’s statehouse will be as gridlocked as Congress. In Chittenden County, where I live, only one of six state Senate seats went to a Republican and she supports civil unions. Go figure.
Whoever wins the presidential race will be looking at two houses of Congress that are divided more evenly than at any time in recent history. Between now and January, there will be great behind-the-scenes horse trading to try and convince conservative Democrats and moderate Republicans to change parties. Given the reed-thin margin for whoever wins the Oval Office and the divided Congress, don’t expect to see anything significant out of Washington anytime soon.
In the next two years, state legislatures will be reapportioning Congressional districts, based on the 2000 census, so for now at least, the never-ending political cycle won’t even slow down.
Any more predictions? Like Senator Bill Clinton from Arkansas in 2002? How about this prediction? In the next two years, American politics won’t be pretty, but it won’t be dull, either.
Dewey Defeats Who?
Hello, I’m Mark Floegel for WebActive, speaking to you today from pundit purgatory. As I speak these words, it is still not known who won the presidential election. As you hear these words, the outcome may still be in doubt.
A month ago, I stuck my neck out and made several predictions about this election. Let’s see how well they held up. First, I said this election would not be as close as all the analysts said it would be. I said the margin would be closer to Clinton over Bush in ’92 than Kennedy over Nixon in 1960. I was wrong. Very, very wrong. It looks like election 2000 may be the closest presidential race of our time.
I predicted a win for Al Gore. I still don’t know if I was right or wrong on that one, but I said Mr. Gore would not win by much. I was certainly right there. One of my reasons for predicting a Gore win was that George Bush was struggling in Florida. That one was on the money, too. However the electoral college shakes out, it looks like Al Gore will win a small majority of the popular vote. So I think I read the country’s mood correctly, but I might need help with my geography.
I ended that particular commentary by urging people to vote for Ralph Nader. Was that wrong? I’m sure the Gore campaign would think so. If the people who voted for Ralph in Florida went to Al Gore, Mr. Gore wins, so I’m sure Ralph will be Al’s whipping boy – even though exit polls show Nader voters would not have otherwise voted for Gore, even though other states where Ralph did well, like Washington and Wisconsin, wound up in the Gore category.
If Al Gore loses, I think he has no one to blame but himself. Mr. Gore failed to carry his home state of Tennessee, with 11 electoral votes. Move Tennessee from the Republican column to the Democratic column and George Bush cannot win the presidency, regardless of which way Florida breaks. Al Gore cannot blame Ralph Nader for losing Tennessee, he can only blame himself.
The Gore campaign lost Arkansas, Bill Clinton’s home state. Gore lost Arkansas even while he kept Bill Clinton, the best campaigner of his generation, fenced in the Rose Garden on Pennsylvania Avenue. The president did campaign for Hillary Clinton in the New York Senate race, and she won by a comfortable margin.
In Vermont, this election was widely seen as a referendum on our state’s first-in-the-nation civil union law, which extends the benefits of marriage to same-sex couples. “Take Back Vermont” signs sprouted on rural roads and right-wing Republican Ruth Dwyer led a phalanx of conservatives who pledged to do their best to repeal the law.
Unlike the national race, Vermont decided early. It was all over by 8:30 and the Republicans lost. Democratic Governor Howard Dean was returned to office. The GOP made gains in the legislature and it looks like Vermont’s statehouse will be as gridlocked as Congress. In Chittenden County, where I live, only one of six state Senate seats went to a Republican and she supports civil unions. Go figure.
Whoever wins the presidential race will be looking at two houses of Congress that are divided more evenly than at any time in recent history. Between now and January, there will be great behind-the-scenes horse trading to try and convince conservative Democrats and moderate Republicans to change parties. Given the reed-thin margin for whoever wins the Oval Office and the divided Congress, don’t expect to see anything significant out of Washington anytime soon.
In the next two years, state legislatures will be reapportioning Congressional districts, based on the 2000 census, so for now at least, the never-ending political cycle won’t even slow down.
Any more predictions? Like Senator Bill Clinton from Arkansas in 2002? How about this prediction? In the next two years, American politics won’t be pretty, but it won’t be dull, either.