Voting

I managed to get to the polls relatively early (by my standards). The birds were chirping as I went along, as if they were heralding this momentous day. There was hardly a line at my polling station and I picked up a ballot and went to the little enclosed space to mark the ballot. As I stood there and looked at the names, a wave of emotion swept over me. It surprised me completely and I was taken aback. I had increasingly become a strong supporter of Obama, but was somewhat detached, content to observe the campaign from the outside (unlike my eager involvement in the Howard Dean and John Edwards campaigns). I do not know why the act of casting the ballot today made me emotional. Was it because the questions and thoughts Obama has in his first book about bringing about social change echoed my own sentiments as I struggled with similar issues as an Asha volunteer? Was it because a President Obama embodied the fact that the United States of America was truly a multi-cultural and multi-ethnic country? Was it because it is amazing and humbling that after 9/11 and after Saddam Hussein is known as a reviled dicator the US can still elect someone called Barack Hussein Obama? Or was it simply that the election of Obama would finally bring to an end to the appalling governance of President Bush?

Perhaps it was all of the above. What I know is I was moved to tears.

Taxes

I think this would be a good non-profit to start (if one does not already exist that does something similar). A non-profit that explained the purposes of taxes, and how taxes can help provide infrastructure that will help taxpayers and their children in the long run. Let us take one example, education. The US has an education quality crisis in schools, and it has to do something to have more youngsters get a college degree. The jobs one could get out of high school are rapidly diminishing and if they want to compete with people outside the US who are working on outsourced projects more and more Americans have to really become part of the knowledge economy. All this requires an investment in education. Subjects like basic Science might not appear to have an immediate monetary benefit and thus cannot be left to private enterprises to manage. Government intervention is necessary. Such intervention is also necessary to guarantee quality education for all as a basic right. It will help the families of Joe the Plumber and Mary the Waitress if an investment was made in education. Of course the taxes have to be fair and reasonable. But the anti-tax folks don't bother to even look at the nature of the taxes - they just say, "we don't like taxes!".

Anyway, a non-profit that focused on discussing this with the people from the grassroots on up would be very beneficial. Then maybe people would not get swayed by sound bites during the general election.

(Amazing how the election has become all about sound-bites, this has been the case pretty much after the two conventions. This is why primaries are fun - issues are discussed. In the general election the targeted voters all seem to be people who don't have the time or inclination to do in-depth research and serious thinking, but are instead be swayed by a convincing speaker who has a good screen presence.)

Socialist! Socialist!

'Socialist' they call Obama - in almost the same tone they would call someone 'thief' or 'a fraud'. If they can successfully make that stick, then they would indeed get some traction, since Americans don't like socialists. Growing up in India in a socialist environment I can see the good things of 'socialism'. But for someone who has grown up in the US that word, and anything that can even be remotely connected to the notion is such anathema. Bred as they are in the environment where wealth is 'infinite' and can 'continue to grow', where supposedly anyone can come up if they work hard, they are opposed to the socialism with a vengeance. It is all a matter of what you are exposed to growing up!

Similarly, the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) was considered a liberating group, a group fighting for freedom when I was growing up in India, because of the Indian government's policy at that time. It came as quite a surprise to me that the PLO is considered a terrorist organization in the US. So much of all of this is just what one is subtly influenced to think.

Going back to socialism, portraying someone as socialist also seems to be one way of portraying someone as the 'other', as someone different from yourself. Instead of saying, "he is black so he is different", the refrain now is, "he is socialist so he is different". People don't want to vote for the 'other'.

Spreading the Wealth Around

Overhead a Dutchman say on my flight to Amsterdam a few days ago - "We spread the wealth around." And he went on to say, "the gap between the rich and the poor is much less in The Netherlands than it is in the US."

"No country in the world has succeeded with socialism", says Palin at rallies. I wonder what she would say if she went to The Netherlands.

Oh, and while we are talking about The Netherlands - it is such an public transport friendly country that we could not get a taxi back from the customer site back to Amsterdam airport. The customer was not particularly apologetic, and pointed us to the train station, where we had to take one of the frequent, very comfortable trains to Leiden and change there to a train straight to the airport. While my colleagues were trying to find a taxi at the train station a couple in their sixties went merrily cycling by. It was raining, but no matter. They wore raincoats and cycled on. It is good exercise too.

It was such a delight when I bought something at a store and the storekeeper did not give me a plastic bag but default.

"Angry Leftists"

Hmmm.....the speakers at the Republican National Convention (RNC) seem to like an enemy. "Angry Leftists" and "the media" seem like favorite targets. Sly digs at "change we can believe in" and "hope" pepper talks, even from those who appear mild like Laura Bush. I don't recall this in the Democratic National Convention (DNC), though I grant that some biases might be coloring my view. :) Fred Thompson went much further accusing the democratic nominee as incompetent, inexperienced and liberal (what a bad word that is at the RNC) who will take the country back ten years etc. etc. The worst I can remember from the DNC is people saying McCain was more of the same from the last eight years. Well, I suppose McCain's heroic personal story makes it harder to attack him with vengeance, but still .....

And oh, women seem to be rather prominent at this convention, from speeches by woman leaders like the captain of fire-fighters in the Minneapolis to Laura Bush highlighting all the women in her husband's administration. Very subtle digs.

It is very entertaining to see the differences between the two conventions. Starting with the attire of Laura Bush and Cindy McCain I was struck by the relatively dressy skirts they both wore (not to mention the pearls around Cindy McCain's neck) compared with the relatively professional suits and pant suits of the women who spoke at the DNC. Michelle Obama wore dresses, but somehow they felt more bold than dressy. Then there is the heavy emphasis on the Christian religion, one could be forgiven for thinking the US is a Christian country and not a secular country. It was an unexpected realization that so many Americans seem to want a "Christian" America. And of course the interspersing of military pictures and scenes throughout the events. I wonder whether the RNC always has that or it is more now because McCain. Perhaps both, and the need to be seen as being right about the Iraq war makes highlighting military action necessary. Country music appears to be predominant and you may laugh when I say I quite like that. :)

Fred Thompson has been the most polarizing speaker far, aiming strongly worded verbal slaps at the democratic party. Am I glad he is not the nominee! I wonder that he was not picked as the vice-presidential nominee. Would have satisfied the evangelical base as much as the current nominee I think!

Obama night

Obama's speech at the Democratic National Convention

It was brilliant. A speech suffused with hope, full of promise and possibilities.Hillary Clinton's speech had appeared brilliant when she spoke, but when Obama spokeI forgot it, and I forgot every other speech I had liked at the convention. Obama's speech eclipsed themall. There is something in his speech that makes everything possible. It reaches intoone's soul and makes one work towards possibility.

And interestingly, he is not exactly left leaning or right leaning. The best example is whenhe talked about how the government should help in various things while at the same time saying government cannot interfere in everything and that parents are the first and important influence in a child's life.A feeling of true bipartisanship comes across when he speaks.
On reading his biography and hearing some of his speeches I had gone from thinking I would vote for thedemocratic candidate to voting for Obama the person. After tonight I desperately want Obama the person to win.

He made even me, in my current rather cynical state of mind, believe.

After the Elections

I was driving home when a friend called me to say that Clinton was leading by 4 points. I could not believe my ears. 4 points??? I thought polls had said Obama was leading by 10 points or so, and as I had told the friend earlier in the day, polls are rarely wrong. What was happening?

I got home and switched on the TV, and sure enough Clinton was leading, at times by 5 times, before settling down on a final win by 2 points or so. Pollsters and analysts will be analyzing this for days to come, whether her becoming emotional helped her or not. It appears as though it did – that combined with a perception during the debate that the other candidates were all attacking here seemed to bring out women in large numbers. The final tally for Obama and Edwards did not wary much from the poll predictions, but Clinton’s had, prompting people to think that women turned in large numbers at the last minute. Her campaigning style in the last few days also probably helped get voters who were deciding at that stage, as she was down into lots of detail at that point, whereas Obama was giving high level speeches, with the goal of not doing anything wrong. I myself had liked her speech and answers to questions at the Nashua High School. At work I saw Clinton became a candidate again with colleagues who had been thinking of Obama or Edwards. A lot of people were indeed changing their mind till the very last minute.

Earlier in the day I had spent some time at the Edwards campaign office with last minute calling as part of get out of the vote operations. Most people had already voted (though there was one who had said she had not, but intended to, and was still undecided with one hour for the polls to close). Some folks who revealed who they had voted for said they had voted for Clinton, and this was different from my sense while canvassing over the weekend – then folks had said they had decided on Obama (of course all this is just an observation from one person, not a scientific study). The mood in the Edwards campaign office was somber, with noone talking about the results but still working hard. The volunteers seemed to take it more in their stride, used to it as they probably were of candidates they believed in not winning for a variety of reasons. Some answers brought weary chuckles from the volunteers – someone who could not decide between Obama and Edwards had voted for Richardson, someone who had been leaning towards Edwards had voted for McCain. Election decision thought processes can be funny indeed!

In the end it was very disappointing for me that a candidate who had worked so hard and had started so early, a campaign so focused on issues and a grassroots operation, could do so poorly. Edwards had been in the state from early summer, holding countless town hall meetings. Every question was answered, and if there was no time at the meeting one could email the campaign and get an answer. The campaign had 80 paid staff in the state and a large network of volunteers, and had been working from very early on to build up the grassroots network. They had organized house parties on issues, had visited the Nashua Peace Group and various other neighborhood groups, had been slowly and steadily working towards their goal. I had seen first hand how the folks at the Nashua campaign office had worked their hearts out, out of a deep sense of belief in their candidate and what he stood for. The Edwards campaign had been the first to come out with a detailed policy document on complex issues like healthcare, and had very early on published a detailed 100 page policy booklet outlining all of Edwards’ positions and planned policies (one in particular I had liked was the college for everyone plan). Volunteers had knocked on doors, called countless people on phones, had had extensive policy discussions with voters. But in the end Edwards lost, lost to the media hype, to popularity based on what I considered more superficial characteristics, and to the frenzy that accompanied the process after Iowa. So much for grassroots democracy I cannot help think. So much for deciding based on policy that the early states’ voters are famous for. In the end the feeling in the gut seems to matter substantially (if not the most) – the likeability factor, the desire to vote for a woman or an black president, the desire to be part of history, the desire to vote for a winning candidate.

Driving to work the next morning past sagging signs in melting snow under a gray winter sky, I had the sense that New Hampshire was happy to get back to normal life after the elections. It had enjoyed its moment in the spotlight, as it always does, and is now ready to quietly retreat to its every day life, to the rest of its long winter with plenty of snow, to its range of activities ranging from skiing to the free state project to the peace groups. It is content to be left alone, till the next presidential election cycle brings it into the spotlight again. Volunteers carrying their candidate’s signs were leaving town in the bus I took to Boston that day, and the Edwards campaign office would be closed by now – they had planned to clear out by 2.00pm.

I asked the cab driver who took me to the bus station whether he had voted, and he said he had been working all day. I asked the youth who sold me the bus ticket and he said he really wanted to but had been working all day. How many of the working class had voted? Even the most widespread of grassroots operations that mark the primaries had not involved these people. Democracy still does not involve every single person, and democracy depends on a lot on one’s gut feeling.

I am disappointed. But hey, tomorrow is another day.