Divide This…

So, George W. Bush has won re-election over challenger John Kerry. Although there wasn’t a resolution until the next day, it was certainly faster than what took place four years ago.
There were no lawsuits. There were no endless recounts. There was no six-week waiting period for a concession.
What there was in this election was a clear winner and a clear loser. George W. Bush won the popular vote by nearly 3.5 million votes and prevailed in the Electoral College with 279 votes. (Iowa is still outstanding at this writing, now two days after the election.) One would think that since there was such a clear victory, the left would have nothing to complain about.
Wrong!
In the hours since John Kerry gave his concession speech, we’ve been treated to endless use of two particular phrases. No matter where you get your news from, you hear a common theme: George W. Bush must now “heal the nation” because we are a “sharply divided” America.
I hear it on the radio, I see it on the television…I even read it on the web. The latest DNC talking points use these phrases to near excess. They expect the President to “reach out” to the other side and make concessions. In the last forty-eight hours, he’s been asked if he’ll reach out to Democrats for any potential cabinet vacancies and what he’ll do to extend the olive branch to the other side. Here’s a sample:
Reuters: “We will start on Social Security now. We will start bringing together those in Congress who agree with my assessment that we need to work together,” he said in his first news conference after the bitterly contested presidential election.
San Diego Union-Tribune: Defeated Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry struck a similar tone, saying, “Today, I hope that we can begin the healing.”
Chicago Sun-Times: Americans decided to stick with the commander in chief rather than switch in uncertain times. Yet, after the longest and costliest presidential race ever, the nation revealed itself as sharply divided. About half of voters felt the country was heading in the wrong direction and half in the right direction.
Boston Herald: After an election that sharply divided the nation and confused voters with its close calls, President Bush was re-elected with more than 50 percent of the popular vote – a feat not accomplished since his father was elected 16 years ago.
New York Newsday: There are tough choices ahead. The more Bush can unite the country, the better chance we as a nation would have of coping with these problems.
Sharp divide? Heal the nation? Extend an olive branch? You’ve got to be kidding me! He won the election with a clear majority–the first time since 1988, no less–and HE’S the one who has to mend this sharp divide?
What a load of crap.
I didn’t hear about a “divide” in the nation when Bill Clinton was elected with a MINORITY of the vote in both of his Presidential Election. He failed to gain a majority of the popular vote in either election and, in fact, more people voted against him than voted for him. That’s because there wasn’t a divide–just like there isn’t one now.
Let me tell you how elections were explained to me when I was a kid: We live in a two-party political system. In every election one side wins, and one side doesn’t. If your side wins, that’s great. If your side loses, that’s too bad. You deal with it. Move on. You find a way to try to beat the other side four years down the road. That’s it.
The left won’t have any of that, though. According to them, there’s a rift in the nation (caused by Bush) that needs healing because of the negativity and the ideology of the President’s administration. Hmmm…is that so? Wow…well…that must be obvious from the voting results, huh? Let’s take a look at the map.
In fact, let’s go county-by-county so we can see how sharp this so-called “divide” is:

All that red you see on that map are the counties won by George W. Bush. (If you click the map you can see it better in a .pdf file.) All of the blue counties? Those are the ones won by John Kerry. So, the SEA OF RED that covers THREE QUARTERS of the map is apparently all evil and wrong and they need to reach out to the one quarter of the country that’s made up of good and decent folk.
OK, that over-simplifies my point, but it’s valid just the same. Bush won the election. The left should just say it over and over to get used to it. It may have been by 3%, but he won with a clear majority just the same. GET OVER IT.
Instead of whining about the “sharp divide” and how the President needs to “heal the nation,” why not get over it and try to meet him in the middle–especially since he has a history of leading efforts across party lines? Well, I’ll tell you why. Diversity in the Democrat party is absolutely fine as long as it doesn’t include diversity of thought–which is the most important aspect of all when it comes to diversity.
So, they won the major metropolitan areas. Big deal. They usually do. That’s how they’re able to get nearly 50% of the vote by winning a minority portion of the country. That’s the thing though—they won a minority. They lost because they couldn’t reach the middle. The “divide” that exists–if there is one–is best described as being between the liberal metropolis and the rest of the nation.
The problem with the left isn’t that there’s a sharp divide caused by Republicans. The problem with the left is that people don’t like their message and people who vote don’t like to be called names when someone disagrees with them. The left turns people off by their own actions and have themselves to blame–not George W. Bush.
In fact, there’s one Democrat who gets it. One that I can find, anyway.

“If Democrats are going to be a national party, we have to fundamentally change our message and philosophy,” said Democratic consultant Doug Schoen, the pollster for former President Bill Clinton. “We have to move to the center on fiscal issues, cultural issues and defense issues, and develop specific programs to balance the budget and recognize the importance of family,” he said. “And if we don’t, we’ll lose again.”

Yes, and they’ll keep on losing.
George W. Bush doesn’t have to reach out, but he will. He’ll work in a bi-partisan effort on a lot of issues. He doesn’t have to heal the nation, but he will. He’ll strive to improve the lives of all Americans and not just the ones on the right. He doesn’t have to try to please the left at all, but he will. He’ll do it because he’s a leader and that’s what a real leader does.
He’ll be the leader for the next four years and the left would be best advised by meeting him in the middle instead of expecting him to reach all the way across. THAT is how divides are bridged: cooperation, compromise and coming together.
Looking at their tactics and the results of the last election, they wouldn’t know a whole lot about that, would they?
He won, kids. Get over it—and yourselves.
William Smith
ConservativeBlogger.com