Of course, the left is demanding we all unconditionally support Barack Obama because he has a “mandate”. However the word “mandate” is in the eye of the beholder. A simple Google search with the words “Obama” and “mandate” garners over 2,070,000 results, so it would appear the overall sentiment is he has one.
What a difference four years makes.
(CNN) — An evenly divided electorate split sharply, and in some states decisively, on age, gender, religious, racial and ideological lines, according to national exit polls.
— CNN, 11/3/04
In 2004, George W. Bush won 51% of the popular vote yet the electorate was “split sharply”, implying that the American people didn’t want him to do what ever he wanted. According to the left (who declared he wasn’t their president), Bush had no mandate.
Fast forward to November 5th, 2008 and the definition of “mandate”, at least to our progressive wing, changed….
(thinkprogress.org) — John Podesta, President and CEO of the Center for American Progress (currently on leave to head the Obama transition), explained this morning on Fox News Sunday that President-Elect Barack Obama’s victory last week constituted a strong endorsement by the American people of a “progressive philosophy” and has given progressives a “real mandate for change.”
— Think Progress, 11/9/08
Barack Obama won only 52% of the popular vote.
Thus the confusion.
Why was George W. Bush denied the mantle of mandate while Barack Obama was declared his, and only with a one percentage point difference between them?
Can you say delusional wishful thinking made reality?