Wednesday, November 29, 2000

Uniting A Divided Nation, Op-Ed, By Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. Elections are supposed to be about choices, and the policy choices between Gore and Bush were relatively stark. In short, the
fundamental choice was between Bush's emphasis on a greater role for state governments and Gore's emphasis on the need for
continuing a significant federal role.

But, since both campaigns knew that the nation was divided over these very policy options, neither side was confident they could win the
national debate if they revealed their true selves. So instead of making the choices clear, both candidates campaigned to conceal their
differences by tailoring and blurring their message for a relatively narrow voting market of undecided suburban independent voters.

The election confirmed the obvious. We are a divided nation. But what was the divide. The professional pundits have focused on the
division between Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives. But, if one looks at the electoral map, the division was as old as
the Civil War itself -- North and South. Bush won the old states' rights Confederacy and the states of small western cities and rural
communities whose politics reflect a similar ideology -- plus Ohio, Indiana and New Hampshire. Gore won the Union states of the North
and Northeast, the larger western states of California, Oregon and Washington, plus New Mexico.

The American people chose a virtual tie for governing in the White House, the U.S. House and Senate. If compared to a chess game,
Gore and Bush, Democrats and Republicans, took no chances, played a perfect conservative game and the result was a stalemate. While
the two presidential and party mates checked each other in the campaign, and neither can really be declared a winner or a loser, the
American people may very well end up the losers with neither person or party able to accomplish much. Our politics could end up in an
ugly mess and a nasty feud.

No comments:

Post a Comment

con·cept