Obama (and to a lesser degree McCain) both are saying that more is at stake than just winning an election. If you win an election in such a way to make it hard to actually govern and get things done, then any victory is ultimately hollow, because nothing important gets done.
Our system (wisely) is designed so it is nearly impossible to just ram anything down the throat of the opposition (if they have any backbone). Thus, one must reach across the party divide.
I for one have been very frustrated with the invertebrate nature of Democrats recently and hungered for more of a fighter. But is this best for the country?
Both Obama and McCain, and Huckabee and Edwards, are no darlings of their respective party establishments. It will be interesting how this plays out on both sides.
One thing is clear, the biggest problems facing our nation cannot be solved without cooperation (terrorism, global warming, health care). Cooperation requires a certain amount of trust and honesty. We need an approach that allows the parties (and nations) to cooperate effectively to solve big problems.
Either an attitude adjustment is needed (civil discourse in lieu of kneecapping and Swift boating) or a change in process (the end of single member districts and the two party system). Or both.





Loading comments…


Posted January 7, 2008 | 03:05 AM (EST)