The polls have been open for an hour and a half or so on the east coast, and won’t open for a little less than an hour and a half here on the west side of the country.  When they open, I will go and cast my vote for the McCain – Palin ticket.  I’m sure some of my neighbors will also vote on the way to work.  But the voting is the easy part.  What comes next will be much more of a challenge – for all of us.

The election has not been one of the triumphs of the American democratic process.  Both candidates promised a new electoral dynamic, an honest, open discussion of the issues, and acceptance of federal funding.  We got the same old mud wrestling match with negative campaigning (it works), and a return to big money politics.  Yes,  if I may make a prediction, regardless of who wins, federal campaign finance is dead.  Campaign finance reform is dead.  You can screw the lid on the coffin, and send the flowers.  Then again, save your money – because you’ll need it if (when) you are asked for a campaign contribution.

The mantra of change may have been too penetrating to avoid.  But the reality is, those who are voting for Obama are voting for someone with no administrative experience, not much of a legislative track record, and an exceptionally bad case of politician’s mouth – telling each audience what it wants to hear, never mind the reality.  Change is not necessarily bad.  But Obama doesn’t seem to have much going for him in terms of concrete accomplishment except for a couple of books of autobiography, a telegenic person, and a good speaking manner.  The comparisons to John F. Kennedy are not especially favorable.

Kennedy, who was young, telegenic, and had a good speaking style, was also rather light on governing experience.  Kennedy had, at least, completed a longer tenure in Congress, and he had been an officer commanding a PT boat during world War II.  But was Kennedy a successful president?  It seems to me that a case can be made that he was better on style than substance in many ways.  Certainly Kennedy’s decisions to dabble with the invasion of Cuba, and the escalation of Eisenhower’s involvement in Viet Nam are not given much coverage by the legion of Kennedy supporters.  Perhaps his greatest accomplishment was the space program – no small accomplishment, to be sure.  But in some ways, Kennedy was every bit the foreign policy crusader that his party finds so objectionable in George W. Bush.

The challenge facing the republic starts tomorrow.  It will be much more difficult than it might be.  Because unlike the election of 1960, the results of four decades of identity politics is manifesting itself in the media and on the street.  The tribalism which equates Governor Palin with inbred morons,  and Obama with Martin Luther King, Junior; or Obama with Islamist terrorists and McCain with all-American heros has not served us well.  Identity politics was beneficial to the media who wanted to sell advertising and stories; it was not beneficial to our civic society.  The big challenge will be for the new President elect to govern, recognizing that he is president of the entire nation,many of whom voted for his opponent; and for the citizens to accept that their new president must govern for the benefit of all citizens, not just those who voted for him.

Are we ready to work together with the new president to address the challenges facing the republic?  I hope so.  The problems are substantial.  We cannot address the economic collapse in a responsible way which does not include both cutting spending in some areas, and raising taxes in others.  Social concerns, environmental concerns, world diplomatic concerns, the world economy – all require a lot of effort and expenditure of money.

There are no quick or inexpensive, painless ways to fix any of these problems.  Unfortunately, during the campaign, we had a lot of promises, but no specifics.  There is no realistic way that Al Gore’s prescription for reduction of CO2 emissions can be accomplished in the ten year period he has called for.  It is impossible to reduce US dependence on foreign oil without finding short term alternative supplies until different technology makes us less dependent on petroleum.  That means either we destroy the US economy or we accept new coal fired power plants and drilling for oil in the US and off its shores until sufficient replacement technologies or alternatives like wind power generation and nuclear generation can come on line?

Can the people who voted for the losing candidate accept the results, and recognize that the successful man needs to have their support and assistance in working to solve the many problems the nation faces?  Can the people who voted for the winning candidate accept the fact that many of their fellow citizens voted for the opposite candidate, and can they genuinely accept the need to govern inclusively?  Can the president elect recognize the need for a bi-partisan cabinet and a truly centrist administration to address the current problems?

Those are serious challenges.  I hope we will prove to be up to meeting them.  Generally, Americans have been able to do so.  But this year, the divisiveness of identity politics seems to be an especially unwelcome addition to the mix.  Regardless of who wins, it would help for people to remember that he must work for all citizens, not just the ones who voted for him.  An old fashioned concept – good citizanship – is much needed, coupled with good sportsmanship.  Can we rise to the occasion?  Let us hope so.