Campaign

It has always been said that in polite company one should never talk about politics or religion. Today, let's do both.

There was a lot of discussion throughout this election about religion. Would born-again Christians vote for Mormon Mitt Romney? Would Barack Obama lose white Catholic support? Would Obama turn off Jewish voters because of his handling of U.S.-Israeli relations?

From exit polling, we can shed light on these issues:

President Obama unquestionably owes his historic victory to an overwhelming 71 percent of the Latino vote. In 2004, George W. Bush won 44 percent of Hispanics. Four years later, John McCain, the author of an immigration reform bill, took 31 percent of Hispanics. And this year, Romney captured only 27 percent of Hispanics. Last Tuesday’s result shows that being against the DREAM Act and immigration is no longer good politics for the Republican Party. In fact, for the past eleven months, undocumented youth from across the nation rallied to expose the extreme position of Mitt Romney on immigration in swing states, including his threat to veto the DREAM Act.
 
But the election is over and it’s time for genuine leadership on immigration and the DREAM Act: it begins not only with the president, but also with Congress, specifically Republicans.

The elections are over, and the finger-pointing is in. Most factors that contributed to Obama’s advantage and conversely Romney’s weakness have been thoroughly rehashed in the media. Obama’s more “human” personality, natural appeal for African-Americans, Asian-Americans (the Hawaii connection) and Latinos (immigration), stronger than expected national security and foreign policy record (except the Benghazi embassy tragedy, Bin Laden was killed on his watch – and that’s all that matters to most voters), record-breaking fundraising (being able to out raise businessman Romney is no small thing) and superior “ground-game” operations.

Since Election Day, there has been abundant chatter about the new American electorate, one that is less traditional, less white and more diverse. No doubt, the Obama campaign's ability to deliver victory by surfing the waves of changing demographics -- we used to call this "identity politics" -- was impressive.

Historically, there has been plenty of attention focused on African-American voter participation, which has been a powerful force in the country's politics for decades. More recently, the growing Hispanic vote has become a hot topic of analysis, as well it should be.

As times change, demography is destiny. We see it in the numbers, and the implications are stark.

I feel sympathy for Karl Rove. Yes, his rant questioning Fox News’ correct election night projections was embarrassing. And yes, his allegation of voter suppression rang hollow, as Bush’s 2004 campaign which Rove directed, benefited from much harsher and less factual “swiftboating” ads.

Meanwhile, the surmise that Rove was merely shifting the blame for Republican defeats, was off the mark. Political consultants have lots of experience explaining defeats to wealthy contributors.

What we really saw last week was the death of Rove’s dream: a William McKinleyesque realignment for the GOP. Long ago, Rove wisely realized that the realignments of the Jackson, FDR and Reagan eras, marked by enduring landslides, were ill-suited to our era. Realignments are measured not by landslides, but by the emergence of enduring majorities.

At a time when our country faces great uncertainty, one thing has remained constant – the men and women who stand on the frontline to defend the freedoms and values upon which this great country was built.

The service of our nation’s veterans spans every day of every year of every decade of our country’s existence. Over the past two centuries, our world has changed and the duties of the Armed Forces have changed with it. However, the bravery, dignity and honor of our men and women in uniform remain firm.

If there’s one thing it’s time for us Republicans to learn, it’s that maybe we should start paying attention to those within our ranks who have actually dealt with the issue of illegal immigration, rather than simply being satisfied with the talking points we've come to accept as the most conservative.
 
While Governor Rick Perry’s ill-fated presidential bid was immortalized by the word “oops,” this armchair quarterback still believes the moment that sealed his fate was the Florida CPAC debate.

The results of Tuesday’s election did not change the structural environment in Washington – voters chose to reelect President Obama and return a Democratic majority to the Senate and a Republican majority to the House of Representatives. Most of the same players will return to most of the same positions when the President and Congress are sworn into office in January.

But one change the election might presage is improved prospects for Congressional efforts to address America’s looming immigration crisis through comprehensive immigration reform. Long a hot topic in Washington, the last meaningful attempt at comprehensive reform of the immigration system was in 2007 – and it ended badly. A bipartisan effort led by President George Bush and Senator Ted Kennedy to address the millions of undocumented residents of the United States, deal with border security requirements, and meet the demands of the high skilled workforce fell victim to bitter ideological battles over “pathways to citizenship” and “chain migration” to name a few. Since then, every attempt to reform the system in a meaningful way has been stymied.

It would be easy for Republicans to blame party losses on Mitt Romney. Easy, perhaps, but not accurate. Data shows that Romney can make a stronger case blaming his loss on the party than the party can
make blaming its loss on him.

Romney faced an electorate not particularly enamored with the GOP. The CNN poll conducted right before the election pegged Republican favorability at 47 percent--five points lower than Democratic favorability at 52 percent. Republicans were under water, with their negatives two points higher than their positives. On the other hand, Democrats were seven points more positive than negative.

This year, election night brought results that would have been unthinkable four years ago: stunning wins for proponents of marriage equality for gay couples across the nation. This historic moment indicates how far the LGBT movement and the country have come in the past four years on marriage equality and other lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) issues.
 
Four years ago, President Obama’s win was tempered by the passage of Proposition 8 in California, which undid the state Supreme Court’s ruling that allowed same-sex couples to marry. And given that Obama at that time did not support marriage equality, his victory left many LGBT Americans wondering when a sitting United States president would finally support this right.