Republicans have been doing a week long mandate based on argument that the Massachusett's election is a rejection of liberal policies, and a victory and mandate for conservative policies. However, just a year ago, Republicans were out in force arguing that the 2008 election was not a rejection of conservative policies, nor a mandate for liberal ones.
Democrats Shouldn't Overinterpret a Victory Mandate
NOVEMBER 1, 2008
There is a very challenging question facing America that few pundits and politicians have discussed as we approach an election that could produce a landslide of potentially historic proportions.
How will a renewed and increased Democratic majority judge the results of the election? What implications will they draw from these results?
Stated simply, if the Democrats conclude that they have a mandate to implement their agenda without real consultation with the Republicans, as Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island suggested in an interview with the New York Times last weekend, the country will be headed for trouble.
Real trouble.
This election is not a mandate for Democratic policies. Rather, it is a wholesale rejection of the policies of George W. Bush, Republicans, and to a lesser extent, John McCain. But it is not, as poll after poll has shown, an embrace of the Democratic Congress, which has approval ratings that are actually lower than that of the president.
The American people are actually seeking a middle route: consensus, conciliation and a results-oriented approach to governance. We need consensus on how to best stimulate our economy, and how to get a deficit that is approaching $1 trillion under control. We have tough choices to make involving entitlement programs like Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security.
Yet, Republicans are now hailing the Scott Brown victory as some mandate and rejection of liberalism when they argued that the 2008 election did not constitute a similar mandate in support of liberal policies.