As set forth in the Constitution, when we went to the polls on November 4th, we chose our states' electors. Today those electors will cast their (ideally representative) votes for President and Vice President.
There's no suspense here, of course. For the record, I'm not going to argue the pros and cons of holding indirect elections in the modern age, nor will I discuss some states' punishment of so-called "faithless electors."
This is how Americans choose a president. Citizens are best served by examining our own role in the process -- engage, register, turn out, vote, repeat.
According to statistics compiled and reported by Michael McDonald of George Mason University, voter turnout on November 4th was 61.6%, the highest national rate since 1968. State-by-state, rates ranged from just over half of eligible voters to almost 78%.
Kudos to the civic-minded citizens of Minnesota, Wisconsin, New Hampshire and Maine. Shame on the slackers in West Virginia, Hawaii, Utah, Texas and Arkansas. Here in Ohio, my neighbors and I beat the national turnout rate, with 66.9% of us going to the polls.The numbers are interesting, mildly encouraging and, for McCain-Palin supporters especially, instructive. The GOP, however, doesn't seem to be paying attention.
Yesterday the Republican National Committee released a YouTube video entitled "Questions Remain." Reprising the guilt-by-association approach that sealed its fate in November, the RNC now attempts to link President-elect Obama to disgraced Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich.
Questions remain? Sure -- just not the ones that Republicans are asking.
Maybe party leaders should ask themselves why they insist on appealing to a base that didn't (and couldn't) deliver enough votes to prevent a thumping six weeks ago. Perhaps it'd be worth wondering why the marginal, mind-numbing Sarah Palin, whose nomination contributed greatly to the ticket's doom, continues to be considered a rising star in a party that should be moving in the opposite direction.
Is Mort Kondracke right?
"How can the Republican Party rebound? The first step would be to quit letting Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham set its agenda. ...Step One is to fire Rush Limbaugh and his ilk as the intellectual bosses of the GOP."
Is the party willing to quicken its pace to keep up with a changing electorate? Might it be politically more productive to focus attention where the people live, not merely where 1980s-era votes are assured? Is the GOP capable of speaking to the interests of independent Americans, on whom its success depends?And finally (for now), isn't it just a wee bit late to launch an attack ad?
Personally, I don't believe that the party has the self-awareness to conduct a proper interrogation -- it's been breathing its own fumes for far too long. Denial, like Kool-Aid, runs deep in the elephants' habitat.
Questions do, indeed, remain. Until Republicans ask (and answer) the hard questions, they're riding the express train to the political wilderness.
