As Edward Luce reported in yesterday’s FT, Obama’s sensibly merged his campaign team with the pre-election transition team headed by former White House chief of staff John Podesta, thus trying to avoid the mistakes of the newly elected Clinton Administration in 1992:
Many Democrats believe with hindsight that Bill Clinton’s hazard-prone first term was derailed even before inauguration day in January 1993. A brilliant but mercurial leader, Mr Clinton was also chronically undisciplined. Much of the time that should have been spent fastening the nuts and bolts of an incoming administration was wasted on in-fighting between his campaign team, which decamped to Little Rock, Arkansas, and his ineffectual transition team in Washington DC.
But even if Obama manages to pull off a smooth segue between his top-level planning staffs, you can’t help but wonder what will happen on the public engagement front. For Obama’s challenge now is not merely that the many tens of thousands of people who signed up to help his campaign are likely to have unrealistic expectations of how much he’ll be able to achieve in the context of the appalling policy mess he’s inherited. More fundamentally, just imagine the comedown his supporters will be about to experience after the incredible adrenaline surges of recent weeks.
From Ralph Nader – yes Ralph Nader, the consumer advocate and the man who, in 2000, running to the left of Gore, did most to get Bush elected:
To put it very simply, he is our first African American president or he will be. And we wish him well. But his choice is, basically, whether he’s going to be Uncle Sam for the people of this country, or Uncle Tom for the big corporations.
Yes really.
Watch Nader – who ran again this time and got 4 or 5 votes – destroy the last shreds of his credibility here. The Fox News presenter he’s talking to is too flabbergasted to really know what to say…
And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of our world – our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand.
To those who would tear this world down – we will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security – we support you.
And to all those who have wondered if America’s beacon still burns as bright – tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity, and unyielding hope.
For that is the true genius of America – that America can change. Our union can be perfected. And what we have already achieved gives us hope for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.
Update: I can’t find embeddable video of today’s victory speech, but here’s the BBC version. Contrast though with Obama’s speech after he stormed to victory in the Iowa caucuses back in January:
You see how immediately how Obama has withdrawn into himself, become more dignified, more Presidential – after Iowa he was looser, happier, free of that foreboding he must feel now that the USA (and the mess it’s in) is his responsibility.
It reminds me of the famous picture of Cherie hugging Blair as they arrived in Downing Street the morning after Labour’s 1997 victory – where she has that poignant ‘oh shit – what have we done?’ look on her face:
Update II: Sad to see McCain having to quiet the boos (for Obama) as he conceded the race, though the crowd did get more gracious as the speech went on. As I have argued, this is probably one of those elections where the loser is driven into a temporary period of insanity by its defeat.
Rather ominous, then, that the only full-throated cheer of the night was for (a slightly tearful) Sarah Palin, who McCain described as: “one of the most impressive campaigners I have ever seen and an impressive new voice in our party for reform, and for the principles that have always been our greatest strength.”
Thought the body language between the two was pretty chilly, though. And remember this vicious quote from a few days ago, from an unnamed McCain adviser:
She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone. She does not have any relationships of trust with any of us, her family or anyone else.
Also, she is playing for her own future and sees herself as the next leader of the party. Remember: Divas trust only unto themselves, as they see themselves as the beginning and end of all wisdom.
Update III: Have to say, I’m feeling pretty happy about my prediction of a 5% victory in the popular vote, which I made not long after Iowa and have stuck to steadfastly ever since. Have also been irritating people by saying that Obama is already a two-term President – time will tell on that one.
Update V: Surprising factoid of the night – via Kos:
Something to look at in the next couple of days — turnout sucked. Not all ballots are in, but we’re currently at almost 119M for the night. We had 122M vote in 2004. So we may get to 2004 levels. A quick spot check confirmed numbers down in many states (e.g. CA, NY, OH, etc). Could it be Republicans staying home? A look at the exit polls will be on my agenda tomorrow.
More than 130 million people turned out to vote Tuesday, the most ever to vote in a presidential election.
With ballots still being counted in some precincts into Wednesday morning, an estimated 64 percent of the electorate turned out, making 2008 the highest percentage turnout in generations.
In 2004, 122.3 million voted in what was then the highest recorded turnout in the contest between President George W. Bush and Sen. John Kerry.
Previously red states targeted by the Barack Obama campaign demonstrated remarkable turnout, setting records in North Carolina and elsewhere. Increased turnout was also reported in states including Virginia and Indiana.
Update VI – Here’s an eye watering statistic. The election cost $4.2bn ($5.3bn if you include the congressional and senate races). 120-130m Americans voted. So that’s nearly $35 spent for every vote cast.
Update VII – From the department of sore losers, the batshit crazy Debbie Schlussel:
With Black Panthers ruling the polling places and idiocy ruling the minds, America is now unstable. This election will instantly change our lives . . . for the worse. And dummies and the mob mentality are dominating voting booths across America. Our country is now unstable like those of Europe. The numbers of Muslim aliens and U.S.-born Muslims will eventually mirror those of Europe. We’re just a decade or so behind.
Congrats, America. We’re the new Europe.
(No deodorant, lack of showers, and women without shaved pits and legs can’t be far behind . . . along with the Islamic wildings and mobs. I can already smell it. And it’s malodorous.)
Just watched Wonder Boy’s speech. Hmph. “Callused hands?” When did he ever have callused hands?
All right, I’m sour. The most liberal member of the U.S. Senate! And that shakedown-artist of a wife, with the permanent frown! And Joe Biden! …
I’m sour about the GOP too. What did it all get us, those 8 years of pandering and spending? If GWB had turned his face against new entitlements, closed the borders, deported the illegals, held the line on calls to loosen mortgage-lending standards, starved the Department of Education, and declined those invitations to mosque functions, would the GOP be in any worse shape now?
What won this election was the packaging skills of David Axelrod, the swooning complicity of the media, the ruthless opportunism of Barack Obama, and the unprincipled thuggishness of his supporters.
Before McCain took the stage, Nathaniel Eyler, 29, of Phoenix, mouthed the words as the song “God Bless the USA” played.
“Scared,” he said in response to how he felt about the outcome, calling Obama a “socialist.”
“I’m not going to sugarcoat it. I’m scared. Just the idea of Barack Obama as president of the United States scares me. It does not embody the idealism I grew up with and am passionate about. We’re Americans. We’re resilient. We’ll bounce back. Our government’s idiot-proof. There’s nothing he can do that we can’t fix in the end.”
Still, he said, “We’re going to be taking steps backwards.”
Obama’s ground game continues to be where the action is – and it’s taken him deep into some very red states:
Almost as soon as Sen. Barack Obama declared that he was running for president, Chrisi West signed up to volunteer. The Fairfax County resident was dissatisfied with the status quo on income inequality, domestic violence and the Iraq war. What she heard from Obama during his speech at the 2004 Democratic National Convention and what she read in his book “Dreams From My Father” convinced her that he — with her help — could turn dissatisfaction into action.
So West, 29, took her first step into politics. She went to Obama’s Web site, set up an account and began an almost two-year journey through a new kind of grass-roots campaign, centered largely in her electronic world. She met like-minded supporters, began organizing and helped build a network of volunteers with a reach so vast that, in a Washington Post poll released this week, more than half of voters surveyed in Virginia said they had been contacted by the Obama campaign about supporting the Democrat in his bid for the White House.
If Obama becomes the first Democrat in 44 years to win the state, it will be in large part because of the Chrisi Wests of the world. They have sent e-mails, made phone calls and knocked on doors. They have texted and Twittered. And the Obama campaign has helped make it happen by speaking the language of cellphones, text messages and e-mail accounts — and by giving thousands of young Americans who communicate this way the power to participate.
That participation has reached a crescendo in recent days, with Obama volunteers taking to the phones in such volume that more Virginians who are likely to vote have heard from them than not. More than 10,000 volunteers are working for Obama in Virginia, according to the campaign. They appear to be making a difference: According to the Post poll, Obama had a 75 to 22 percent advantage among likely voters who had heard from his campaign in person, on the phone or via e-mail or text message but had not been reached by Sen. John McCain’s campaign.
“We have so many amazingly dedicated, just generous volunteers,” West said. “It’s just crazy how this whole thing grew, honestly.”
Grass-roots activity in Virginia for McCain appears to be less energized. A recent two-day swing through every Northern Virginia campaign office for both candidates found crowds of volunteers for Obama on the phones, being trained to canvass and passing out signs, stickers and other material. McCain’s offices were universally quiet, in some cases with just one or two field workers sitting at a counter or table and little foot traffic. This week, just days before the election, Obama’s Web site advertised more than 300 events in Northern Virginia; McCain’s advertised seven.
No issue has been the source of greater trans-Atlantic division during the last eight years than international law and counter-terrorism. The policies associated with the Bush administration’s “war on terror” — including detention of “enemy combatants” at Guantanamo Bay, coercive interrogation rising to a level that most Europeans would see as torture, the holding of prisoners in secret “black sites” or their rendition to countries that are know to use torture — have undermined the U.S reputation as a supporter of international law, alienated European publics and, arguably, worked as a recruiting sergeant for the very people the policy has aimed to defeat.
With an Obama administration now likely, many Europeans can’t wait to see Guantanamo Bay closed and for the U.S to adopt a different, less kinetic counter-terrorism policy.
But Europeans would do well not to get too ahead of themselves. The Illinois Senator has made clear that if he is elected he will continue to target terrorists where necessary. Last year, Senator Obama said he would “wage the war that has to be won”, with a strategy that includes “developing the capabilities and partnerships we need to take out the terrorists” while also “engaging the world to dry up support for terror and extremism”.
In other words, his administration is likely to adopts what Anthony Dworkin of the Crimes of War Project calls a “a mix of crime and war”, a hybrid model that combines existing legal norms from American constitutional law and the laws of armed conflict. In an essay, Dworkin – son of noted American legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin – lays out what Obama’s counter-terrorism policy will likely look. For example, an Obama administration may restrict all US personnel, including CIA agents, to those interrogation techniques listed in the Army’s interrogation field manual.
But Dworkin goes further, underlining that an incoming administration is likely look to its European allies for tangible assistance. For example, if the US closes down Guantanamo Bay what should be done with those detainees – around 50 – that the US would like to release, but who cannot be returned to their home countries because they would be likely to be tortured? “The US will look to Europe to absorb some of these men”, says Dworkin. He suggests that European governments should offer to take symbolic numbers of these prisoners, for example the Uighurs, as long as the U.S takes some ex-prisoners too. This could serve as the opening of a new chapter of trans-Atlantic cooperation on counter-terrorism.
The key, though, to success is for Europe to make small positive steps rather than making unrealistic demands and expecting them to be acted on immediately, like demanding that the U.S immediately join the International Criminal Court. Instead, Dworkin suggests beginning with “a wider reaffirmation of common principles”.
This, the war-crimes fighter thinks, could include the following principles: no one can be held for an extended period without charge except in situations of national emergency or armed conflict; no prisoner should be held for an extended period without his name and place of detention being publicly confirmed; no prisoner should be subjected to torture or cruel and inhuman treatment; no one should be transferred to any country where they face a real risk of being tortured; no one should be transferred to another country if they will be detained without due process.
Such declaration, to work, would – in my view – have to be wrapped together with a clear reaffirmation of the need to confront terrorism and not only through judicial means. But to my mind, Dworkin is beginning to do what few others have until now, namely lay out a practical way forward for trans-Atlantic counter-terrorism policy.
