The whole world now knows that Barack Obama has won the 2012 US Presidential elections, but with the decision being a close one (although not as tightly packed as first suspected), the concern is that the USA is still too divided to be able to devise and make stick the policies that come from the top. Obama’s recent job creation good news and foreign policy wins (Geronimo alone would have been a significant factor) were enough to carry the tide in his favour, but the rift is going to make being president for a second term just as tough as his first four years.
The issue was reiterated earlier today by Moira Stewart on BBC 2 when she argued that because the divide is so entrenched in US news and media channels, which staunchly stick to one side of the fence, there will always be a close split between the Democrats and Republicans. Without impartial news coverage the best policies of the day will always be second to the concept of sticking with your party (or the news channel’s party of choice).
It’s not just US media that are culprits of one sided reporting either. You’ve only got to watch Andrew Marr’s Obama beating What Happened to Hope? for some clear-cut one sided political journalism from Mother himself. The concept of congressional blocks to Obama policies hardly passes Marr’s lips as he condemns Barack Obama for not living up to the promises he laid out (he also looks an absolute nonse sat on some steps drawing the Washington skyline on his iPad).
However, surely there’s always been a big element of one sidedness in US media, but maybe that element is now so pronounced that it has led in some way to the closeness of the more recent US Presidential elections.
Though more impartiality is clearly needed in US media, it would be too easy a target to say it was the reason in itself. There’s also the severe economic conditions to take into account when reviewing the political polarisation. When chips are down it’s time to look around for people to blame. Some look to the mistakes of the Bush administration, while the other half point to Obama’s economic fixes.
Another significant factor is Andrew Marr’s point about the unfulfilled promise of Obama’s first term. Whether or not you give the right level of credence to the opposition’s congressional dog fight, there are political promises made in the last election that have still not been realised.
The reality is that it’s probably a higher potency of all of the above with a few more complex none of the aboves that would condense into a ball of truth around the divided political landscape in America. But if the country is to instigate the policies it needs to take the country out of recession, Afghanistan and social & environmental difficulty it’ll have to unify for long enough to bring about less hard fought change.
Despite the Democrat’s retained Senate majority, the ongoing hegemony of the Republicans in the House of Representatives means that there will be just as many promises that face unrestrained contest in Congress for Obama’s second term in office.
