Roots of Hatred

Probably no big revelations in this piece by Krauthammer, but it's interesting to see the roots of the Democrats' blind hatred of Bush catelogued so succinctly:

"Whence the anger? It begins of course with the 'stolen' election of 2000 and the perception of Bush's illegitimacy. But that is only half the story. An illegitimate President winning a stolen election would be tolerable if he were just a figurehead, a placeholder, the kind of weak, moderate Republican that Democrats (and indeed many Republicans) thought George Bush would be, judging from his undistinguished record and tepid 2000 campaign. Bush's great crime is that he is the illegitimate President who became consequential "

Worth a read.

In the meantime, Sullivan starts to plumb the depths of the antipathy:

faced. But the intensity of the desire to see him defeated - by whatever means and whoever benefits - is a real phenomenon. It's stronger and more widespread than the antipathy to Clinton in, say, 1996. It will propel the coming electoral cycle. All the frustration that so many felt at the cultural realignment in the wake of 9/11 is going to come to a head. It was bad enough for some that this "moron" was elected. But that he presided over a real shift in the country's mood - against apologizing for American power, against appeasement of Islamo-extremism - is still too much to contemplate with equanimity. This is payback time.

This is going to be an incredibly ugly election; it will pit not only candidates, but cultural emotional mind-sets against each other. On the one hand, there is the still-deep-seated anger, fear and rage - mostly but not exclusively in the red states - left over from 9/11. Middle America is still revolved by the idea that we can be attacked, slaughtered in our workplaces, maybe even gassed in our homes. They want payback, and most importantly, security. They don't see it from the Democrats.

On the other hand, we have the incredibly deep hatred of Bush and all he represents among the rest of the electorate.

I'm trying, hard, to remember a time since Reconstruction, other than perhaps the sixties, where overriding social emotions have maneuvered for such a clash. And I don't know that the sixties pitted such large swathes of the population against each other; remember how well the counterculture left did with McGovern in '72? I could be wrong, of course - I was nine years old in 1972 - but that's the impression I get.

What about you? What do you think? Write me if you have any perspectives on this. Cultural clash, or electoral rhubarb?

Let me know.

Posted by Mitch at September 23, 2003 07:26 AM