Whoever Wins, Chill A Bit...

Whoever Wins, Chill A Bit

Glenn Harlan Reynolds 11.04.08, 3:07 AM ET:

We've had eight years of Bush Derangement Syndrome. Before that, we had eight years of Clinton Derangement Syndrome. And though people forget it now, President Reagan inspired a lot of anger and hatred, too.

Can I ask that, regardless of who wins, we tone things down a bit?

There's been a bit of leadership on this front in the blogosphere. Rightish blogger Rick Moran, in a post entitled If Elected, Obama Will Be My President, wrote: "An Obama election will mean changes - not all of them for the better. So be it. We will fight like hell against what we believe to be wrong. But we [will] not do it by trying to delegitimize the elected president." In response, leftish blogger (and famous science fiction writer) John Scalzi wrote: "This is exactly right. And this is why, you'll notice if you crawl the Whatever archives, I have made a point of noting that George Bush is my president.

… One of the reasons I have always registered as an independent voter is that I believe my highest allegiance as a voter is not to a political party but to the Constitution of the United States, the foundational document of our law. Our Constitution sets up the system we use to choose a president. If a candidate--any candidate--fulfills the requirements of that system to become our president, then I believe it's my duty to acknowledge that, yes, that candidate is now my president. I can criticize that president, argue with that president, loathe that president and work to replace that president in the manner allowed for by the Constitution … but what I can't do is deny that he or she is my president. That's wrong, factually and morally, and it's dismissive of the Constitution of the United States."
I agree. I thought it was wrong when Bush supporters in 1992 slapped "Don't Blame Me, I Voted for Bush" stickers on their cars before Clinton was even sworn in. The simmering Clinton-hatred was bad for the country and, for that matter, for Republicans. Likewise, the even more over-the-top Bush-hatred of the past eight years has been bad for our polity, and for the haters. Now I hope that whoever wins, the nation will follow the lead of Moran and Scalzi.


You don't have to love the "other guy." You don't have to hold back on fighting against policies you don't like. You don't have to pull punches. But once someone is duly and legally elected president, you do owe some respect to the office and the Constitution. And to your fellow Americans.


I'm not an Obama fan, particularly, but a lot of people I like and respect are. To treat Obama as something evil or subhuman would not only be disrespectful toward Obama, but toward them. Instead, I hope that if Obama is elected, their assessment of his strengths will turn out to be right, and mine will turn out to be wrong. Likewise, those who don't like John McCain or Sarah Palin might reflect that by treating Palin and McCain as obviously evil and stupid, they're disrespecting tens of millions of their fellow Americans who feel otherwise. And treating a presidency held by a guy you don't like as presumptively illegitimate suggests that presidents rule not by election, but by divine right, so that whenever the "other guy" wins, he's automatically a usurper.


We don't have to agree on issues, or on leaders. But if we can't agree that a free and fair election can produce a legitimate president even when it's not the candidate we like, then we've got a very serious problem.


Glenn Harlan Reynolds is a law professor at the University of Tennessee, and will be commenting on the election at PJTV.com.

These are the thoughts of Glenn Harlan Reynolds and do not reflect the opinions of Abstract Minds N.Y.C

------------------------

Very interesting outlook indeed. In a time where "choosing or losing" is a more than ever scathing reference to which "Guy" you choose, we must remain composed and realize that there is no right or wrong when expressing your political views in regards to the Constitution of the United States. One point that was brought up and duely noted, was that the Constitution of the United States is held as a foundational document to which fulfillment and duty fall on the shoulders of the elected. Whoever you deem eligible for occupation of the assigned position, whether it be Court Justices etc., should be your matching principle for your Constitutional beliefs.

With that said, we will wait.

With Respect.

Abstract Minds N.Y.C