Bush to Fellow Republicans: Sorry, My Bad

After being narrowly raped across the country, President Bush has essentially admitted defeat. For a full transcript of his remarks, check out www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/08/bush.transcript/index.html.

There are some interesting comments among the usual rhetoric. Here are some tidbits (the italics are mine to separate my opionions from the quotes):

I'm obviously disappointed with the outcome of the election and, as the head of the Republican Party, I share a large part of the responsibility.

That's pretty reassuring. Of course, being a second term man and a party man, this is what we'd expect. Still, at the very worst one has to admit that the President is pretending to take responsibility.

The message yesterday was clear: The American people want their leaders in Washington to set aside partisan differences, conduct ourselves in an ethical manner, and work together to address the challenges facing our nation.

The democrats made huge leaps yesterday, the republicans therefore lost. So if the message yesterday was clear as President Bush states, it means that republicans stand for partisan differences, conduct themselves in an unethical manner, and do not work together to address the challenges facing our nation.

Do you think he really meant to imply that? I doubt it. I am far left of President Bush, though I do not necessarily love democrats by any means. Honestly this lands me a bit left of middle. I think yesterday was a clear message that says: we intensely dislike the President. This candidate has an R by their name. The President has an R by his name. Game over.

My main annoyance is that the label is still more important than the candidate in many of these races. It seems like you could have two dogs run, one with a little sweater that has an R knit into it and the other with a D, and it would land about the same as with real people.

They'd probably crush the independent, even if she were the only human!! Plus there'd likely be a scandal when she noted that she's running against a pair of total bitches.

Getting back somewhere near to the point, I think the next six months will show whether the democratic party is worth anything or not. We have just delivered the first blow to the most corrupt, lazy, despicable, and worthless congresses in the history of our nation. If congress doesn't start making their 180 degree change now, we may see a new kind of election in two years.

One thing I find fascinating is how a wide margin in these elections is 53 to 46 percent. Most are 50 to 47, or 51 to 48, etc. With margins this close, there is a concern building in my mind. The closer the two numbers are, the greater number of people disenfranchised.

Yes, they were able to vote, but in the end, their vote did not result in a victory. With that loss, they can potentially be ignored. The only saving grace is that the close ratios make those people on the fence much more important and likely to get some attention. Those far from the middle, however, are blown-off entirely.

In congress, this disenfrachising isn't necessarily a concern. In presidential elections, it's a real mess. I have not sat down to do the math, but my guess is that in close races (like say, the last election) approximately 40 percent of voters might as well have never cast a ballot.

This may not concern a reader, but it should. Did your vote count? Don't you think it should?

It may be premature, but I'd suggest that the electoral collect needs some serious work.

That's all from the podium.