Five Key Takeaways From Frank Rich's Column

Frank Rich's latest column may be, to Obama-philes, like the feel-good op-ed of the year, but I'm just glad to see Rich taking the election results and demonstrating how many assumptions about the American electorate can now be put to rest:

Good Bye, Bradley Effect:

The most conspicuous clichés to fall, of course, were the twin suppositions that a decisive number of white Americans wouldn't vote for a black presidential candidate -- and that they were lying to pollsters about their rampant racism. But the polls were accurate. There was no "Bradley effect." A higher percentage of white men voted for Obama than any Democrat since Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton included.

Detente In The War Against 'Elites':

Obama also won all four of those hunting-and-Hillary-loving Rust Belt states that became 2008's obsession among slumming upper-middle-class white journalists: Pennsylvania and Michigan by double digits, as well as Ohio and even Indiana, which has gone Democratic only once (1964) since 1936.

Not So Monolithic:

And what about all those terrified Jews who reportedly abandoned their progressive heritage to buy into the smears libeling Obama as an Israel-hating terrorist? Obama drew a larger percentage of Jews nationally (78) than Kerry had (74) and -- mazel tov, Sarah Silverman! -- won Florida.

Let's defend Hispanic-Americans, too, while we're at it. In one of the more notorious observations of the campaign year, a Clinton pollster, Sergio Bendixen, told The New Yorker in January that "the Hispanic voter -- and I want to say this very carefully -- has not shown a lot of willingness or affinity to support black candidates." Let us say very carefully that a black presidential candidate won Latinos -- the fastest-growing demographic in the electorate -- 67 percent to 31 (up from Kerry's 53-to-44 edge and Gore's 62-to-35).

The Youth Vote Won't Be Dismissed:

Young voters also triumphed over the condescension of the experts. "Are they going to show up?" Cokie Roberts of ABC News asked in February. "Probably not. They never have before. By the time November comes, they'll be tired." In fact they turned up in larger numbers than in 2004, and their disproportionate Democratic margin made a serious difference, as did their hard work on the ground.

My Personal Favorite:

Even the North Carolina county where Palin expressed her delight at being in the "real America" went for Obama by more than 18 percentage points.

But, I'd still point out one big caveat that looms within all the good news:

Though Rove's promised "permanent Republican majority" lies in humiliating ruins, his and Bush's one secure legacy will be their demagogic exploitation of homophobia. The success of the four state initiatives banning either same-sex marriage or same-sex adoptions was the sole retro trend on Tuesday. And Obama, who largely soft-pedaled the issue this year, was little help. In California, where other races split more or less evenly on a same-sex marriage ban, some 70 percent of black voters contributed to its narrow victory.

There's much to celebrate in our, perhaps, more perfect union, but let's not toast its perfection just yet.

Comments

[HighInfoVoter]

The Rovian method of dividing the electorate into contentious factions to be collected for the 50%+1 win works when the choices are relatively mediocre. It depends on small ideas for smaller minds. It fails when confronted with big ideas. Unfortunately, people who not only have the big ideas but can also articulate them and who can lead are rare.

That rarity is what propelled Obama to win.

The key to defeating anti-rights crusades is appealing to the big idea of our freedom. Eliminate the "threat to marriage" argument by convincingly and simply reframing the issue as a threat to everyone's freedoms. The oppressors have always framed the recognition of rights for all as a threat to the easily frightened, which is always easier when they are seen as rights for "other"s.

What has to be done is not getting people to see the others as another acceptable group ('though that's important, too); the concept of equal rights for everyone has to be promoted. As we, hopefully, continue toward the expansion of liberty for all, it can't be seen as an expansion. It must be seen as an equality issue.

[Nonamnesiac]

Prop 8 will be the death knell of the homophobic movement. The attention that will be directed at this last vestige of know-nothing, stupid, dishonestly portrayed bigotry will end this crap once and for all. It has reached its high water mark and will subside so that it is unrecognized within the next couple of years. Only Dixiecrat Joe Scarborough and Nazi Pat Buchanan and the Limbaughy-clones will be genuflecting to it, and they will be unsuccessful, except to a small, troubled, bitter minority of gay haters.

Gay marriage will be normal throughout the country, except in the deepest part of Dixie.

[SethBLiNK]

Here is to me what is most amazing about Barack Obama...

Frank Rich very eloquently has shown all the myths that have been discredited by Obama's victory. Two years ago, Obama not only knew they were myths, but had the foresight and inspirational skills to fly in the face of all these long-held misconceptions.

He knew that the young and the disenfranchised would show up to vote if you gave them something worth voting for.

He knew that middle American white folks who not only say they were willing to vote for a Black President but would actually show up and do it.

He knew what we as a nation was capable of, before we even knew it about ourselves.

Can you imagine a better quality to have in a leader during troubled times?

[mikal214]

I'm a gay guy watching from Texas. Gays in California have the worst timing. Why would you get this ball rolling way back with prop 22 when it was pretty obvious it would crest with this election. Obama did not need this and he could not be overly supportive. We should've waited until we had a sympathetic president to push it that could get behind it without losing any votes. And who takes their elementary class to a gay wedding??? You gotta know that is going to end up on your opponent's TV ad. Gavin Newsome breaking the law a couple of years ago to let gays get married before it was legal does not help with average voters either. Pushy in your face demands will never work and now you have it in your constitution to prove it. Those of us that live in states with really stupid voters are also heart broken about it.

Oh yeah, and dear Mormons that feel marriage is between one man and 24 women, teens too, shouldn't get to tell people about marriage.

[SethBLiNK]

What may be less obvious to those outside of California was that it was a proposition to ban gay marriage, not to allow it. It's more obvious to us Californians because we had to remember "no means yes" when we went to the polls.

I bring this up because it wasn't pro-gay-marriage proponents who got this on the ballot in this of all years. It was well-financed anti-gay-marriage advocates. For their puposes, their timing was impecible. They knew that in the middle of an election, Obama would take a centrist approach (though he did come out in favor of voting no). They perhaps anticipated a strong black turnout at the polls and anticipated resistance from some blacks to the proposition.

So, Mikal, yes, the timing was bad for our side, but it was the other side that set the timetable.

[Doofus]

Something similar in Massachusetts, where we had Proposition 1, where
a No was to keep the state income tax, a Yes was to repeal it. Being smart
and liberal, we were able to deal with that & retain the income tax. Are you
suggesting that Californians weren't 'smart enough' to vote No, so as to
continue allowing gay marriage?

It seems as if the people behind these initiatives are getting fairly shrewd
about designing the type of choice required relative to the proposition, since
liberals have a 'natural', stereotypical tendency to vote 'Yes' on most issues.

[theone718]

I truly hope I never her the words "Bradely Effect" again after this election settles down.

[AtTheMoon]

I savor every Frank Rich article, this one in particular! Frank Rich nails it like nobody else can. Such a beautiful writer and thinker. I am a disciple of Frank!

[PalmG]

I wish people would stop including the aggressive gay agenda in with real civil rights issues. The reality is gays DO have the right to marry, just like everyone else, someone from the opposite sex. They do not deserve EXTRA rights, the right to marry someone outside of their gender. Why must they be given extra special treatment? And what's wrong with civil unions? Most people, myself included, support that, the right for gays to have financial benefits like married people. I blame the overly aggressive gay mafia for the Dems' being in the wilderness with mainstream America previous to this eleciton. Had they not dwelled on this stupid gay marriage issue, the fear mongering from Rove and crew would not have worked in 2000 or 2004. They insult Blacks by conflating their extra rights agenda with Blacks' history of disenfranchisement of basic civil rights. They are selfish and narrow-minded. Newsflash: the country will never accept gay marriage as equal to traditional marriage. What happened in Californina was not a fluke, was not the fault of the Mormon church or anyone else. The people spoke loud and clear, not just in Cali but in other states, they don't believe in gay marriage. Gays need to get over it and move on and accept civil unions as the law of their land. We have bigger things to worry about now. How dare they usurp this historic moment to b*tch and moan about this triviality.

[glfrgrl]

God forbid they be allowed to marry a person they love!

[considerthis]

Guess you just don't get it. It's all about equal rights. "We" allowed the "colored folk" tp to have bathrooms and waterfountains. Just not "ours". What were they complaining about? "We" let them on the bus. After all, it's not our fault that gays are less than 100% American or human - is it???

[SethBLiNK]

I'm on your side, Considerthis, but the "you just don't get it" argument convinces nobody. "PalmG" and millions of others in America, believe in Civil Unions. Don't think of that as a repudiation of all you believe in. Think of it as a start. Work from there. Don't insult the very people whose votes you need.

[ConcernedAboutRFuture]

BECAUSE most gay marriages/unions/relationships last longer that heterosexual marraiges. So let's say you spend 25-30 of your life with a partner, grow old with him/her and when you or he passess away, all the things you've gained together and worked for go to a 2nd cousin twice removed from a trailer park in Alabama.... rather than the SPOUSE with whom you spent your entire life with.

Still don't get it, that's like my husband dying and his sister coming along to take my home, and anything else we worked for together.

Still sound fair?

[Progress08]

You can't blame gays. It's the media. Their could be 500 charity marches, championed largely by democratic politicians and the media will cover the gay pride parade instead. I think gays should be allowed to get married because... who gives a $hit. Is it really such a big deal that they be allowed to wed? The only people who are more concerned by this issue are the religious freaks, who frankly believe their wives are property, the devil put dinosaur bones in the ground to mess with us, and when they picture Jesus they see a brown haired, blue eyed distinctly caucasian man.

I know several gay people and I've never once heard them refer to the difficulties for gay people as likened to civil rights.

[Teckwreck]

Growing up in California, a child of divorced parents in the 50's, the most caring and stable relationships I saw were among the gay couples that my mother did business with. They were clever, they knew stuff, had great crowded, gilded, worn velvet living rooms, and really gave a crap about each other. I often though if my mother and father had been even a tiny bit this generous and caring, they would still have been married.

[imaxfli]

Hilary voters went to Obama because of the Palin pick...if McCain would have picked a Moderate woman, alot of Hilary voters may have voted for McCain.

[breakingnews]

If "if's" and "buts" were candy and nuts, we all would have a wonderful Christmas.

[breakingnews]

If "if's" and "buts" were candy and n uts, we all would have a wonderful Christmas.

[RoseBlue]

You are absolutely right. Republicans lost because they miscalculated women. They saw Obama"s broad support from African Americans, and thought they could recreate the same sweeping support from undecided women and Hillary supporters. So they picked Palin, disregarding dozens of better qualified women in an attempt to also please their moronic base. There was a fundamental misunderstanding of the post-feminist woman. True equality means that woman can vote for the smartest, most competent candidate, REGARDLESS of gender. Just as African Americans voted for Obama because, while being black certainly didn"t hurt, he also happened to be the best man for the job.

[psmealey]

Truly, Palin was an abysmal pick. But the bigger factor was two fold: 1. Bush fatigue and 2. McCain's complete inability to distinguish himself from Bush.

The racial line vote that HRC trumpeted at the end of the primaries (hard working Americans, white Americans) never happened. Why? Because the economy trumps practically everything else.

Incidentally, I do think HRC would have beaten McCain as well this year, but would have only done so by carrying the Kerry states + Ohio. I think the gains in Virginia, Colorado and North Carolina are significant, and will help Obama's agenda. I suspect that had Hillary won, we'd see more gridlock and business as usual from both sides.

[blaqntelligence]

"Just as African Americans voted for Obama because, while being black certainly didn"t hurt, he also happened to be the best man for the job."

Truer words were never spoken. I spoke to many many Black people about why they were voting for Obama and that was the consistent response.
Of course, there were a few "...we gotta get a brotha' in the White House" but even that was supported with agreement with his policies and positions.

[intelliwoman]

Actually I know many Hillary voters, and NOT ONE would EVER have voted for John McCain, no matter who his pick was.

His views on Iraq, his denial of civil rights to many of our citizens, his lack of knowledge about the economy, his stated intent to put more right wing conservatives on the Supreme Court,,,,,

Face it folks, this is a center/left country, the republican party has obliterated itslef and is now a regional party, and we've finally come to our seneses in this country

[burpgun]

I stand somewhat alone! This election from start to finish was a referendum on Bush-Cheney! I am pleased that Barack Obama won from many standpoints not the least of which was the possibility that my old buddy Rush Limbaugh may have contributed to his win by trying to manipulate the Democratic Primaries through his Chaos plan. I think that President elect Obama has a new and unusual approach to American Government-Smart Government! Has a nice ring to it! Not Conservative, not Liberal, not left, not right, but smart! Now "Smart" is a uniting word and America needs to be united!Obama called himself a "Mutt" as a joke but it is interesting that the First Black President is a man of that is Black and White, of two cultures-black and white, and yet has an outstanding educational background-He truly represents a blend of the best of both ethnic groups. There is only one race-The Human Race-many nations, many cultures, many differences, but one race. E Pluribus Unum!

[dagnew]

Very well said!

[NamelessGenXer]

Regarding the Youth Vote: MediaCorp and the GOP once again demonstrate their ignorance of history beyond living memory. Comparing this election to 2004? Silly pundits - this election is best compared to 1932 and the last time The Youth became acutely aware that it was *their future* at stake.

[Doofus]

Putting aside Frank Rich's liberal/progressive celebrations for a moment,
there is a huge puzzlement relative to California's overwhelming support
FOR Barack Obama AND hostility AGAINST Gay Marriage. What is up
with that? I believe the rest of US are surprised & confused.

[Mahi Joe]

I find it more disappointing than surprising. Ask yourself, how many true Liberals have some conservative views on certain issues? I don't think that a Liberal or even a Progressive votes 100% on any ideology because they agee with everything. We may vote for a Liberal/Progressive platform because most of the solutions to common issues we agree with but that doesn't necessarily mean we agree with everything.

[suziq]

I live in CA and am only sort of surprised by the vote. Religious organizations had A LOT to do with the defeat of prop8. If they would only live by their 10 commandments...

[suziq]

OOPS - meant the passing of prop 8...

[losangelian1]

There were a lot of smear ads for Prop 8 (funded by the Mormon Church). There were deceptive robocalls. One even used Obama's voice saying he was "against gay marriage" to make people think he supported the ban. Also, it was confusing in that a "Yes" vote meant to ban gay marriage, while a "No" vote meant to support it. This was won by manipulating people that just weren't paying very close attention.

But, it was really close. And I think with the awareness it's getting now... will be overturned in one way or another.

[Doofus]

It's disturbing when politics is done by subterfuge, preying on the tendencies
of people to be easily fooled, and it's worse, really, that people can be so
easily fooled. One of the 'great' things about Massachusetts politics is
that if the legislature doesn't like the outcome of a 'proposition', they
will just ignore it. You can get away with that when it's 90% Demo
& 10% 'not Demo'. (If you run as a Repo here, you'd better not
mention that in your campaign literature - it can't hurt!)

[jamesspada]

Frank Rich is toxic only to Republican thugs and hypocrites. He's brilliant, and his column is consistently the best thing in the Sunday Times

[gadfly55]

Well, this trip has been interesting, since January, writing from Ireland, although a dual citizen, and not yet clear of this political blogging addiction, but soon to come back to just being here, still crying sometimes with the joy. Frank Rich sums it up, and has been clear from the moment I started reading him in January about the clarity of the Obama campaign, and the quality of the candidate. As soon as I saw Obama after Iowa, on the internet, sitting here in Sligo, Atlantic coast, northwest Ireland, I donated to the campaign and kept doing so to the end, as well as diving into the blogosphere for the first time. Frank Rich has brought a perspective drawn from a lifetime of appreciating the humanities, especially theatre, drama and film. He also writes with integrity and compassion. Outstanding, and a must read. Culture determines action, and he understands this fundamental principle. For the moment, the progressives have regained the high ground, but no doubt, the fundamental damage done to the minds of people by a cynical dumbing down media, will require strength, courage, and relentless purpose to overcome.

[newpotusplease]

Jason
the Frank Rich article- a masterpiece, even the Lady Liberty with a hangover- Priceless

Forgot to mention this to you: the Clare Booth Luce society women anticipating their GOP women in mink catalog that is coming out
no kidding!

http://www.cblpi.org/calendar/index.cfm
you can scroll down the page to get a preview
Featuring:
Miss January " Kellyanne Conway
Miss February " Star Parker
Miss March " Susan Phalen
Miss April " Nonie Darwish
Miss May " Mary Katharine Ham
Miss June " Michelle Malkin
Miss July " Amanda Carpenter
Miss August " Sandy Liddy Bourne
Miss September " Ann Coulter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! tee hee
Miss October " Kate Obenshain
Miss November " Miriam Grossman, M.D.
Miss December " Clare Boothe Luce
too bad Sarah wasn't available. well I am sure you could put it to good use for.. ?....

[UWNBM]

Frank Rich? The man that theater people wanted drawn and quartered for his terrible reviews and nasty attitude when he was the critic for the Times...?
The man is toxic.

[Michael Gene Sullivan - Huffpost Blogger]

Actual theater person here.

Always liked Frank Rich. If you don't like him, fine.

You... don't try to speak for us.

[ElTommo]

Well played, Mr. Sullivan! Is an "Oh snap!" in order? XD

[gadfly55]

agreed, and don't shy from confrontation