http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/03/post.election/index.html
This is pretty interesting.
Just over half -- 51 percent -- of 621 American adults surveyed said they were pleased with the outcome of the presidential election; 38 percent said they were upset.
51 percent voted for him. 51 percent are now satisfied. Can you say MANDATE? OK, sarcasm off.
The group surveyed also had a distinct opinion on how Bush should lead now that he's won another four-year term.
Sixty-three percent said Bush should emphasize a bipartisan program. Just under a third, 30 percent, said Bush needs to advance the Republican agenda.
What does this mean?
Well, if you listened to any Republican talking points on Tuesday, you know what it means. The Bush Republicans KNOW they haven't won a New Deal or Great Society victory. They know they won by turning out their base. So, when asked if the country can get some kind of unity now, they say: That depends on the Democrats. The Democrats need to stop being "obstructionists" (to quote John Thune). If they obstruct the Republican agenda, they are being partisan.
The success of the Democrats in the next few elections - especially 2006 - will hinge on reminding voters that it's Republicans alienating the middle to push their agenda. It'll probably take a SCOTUS fight to put the reality of this into relief. The average person doesn't know who Priscilla Owen is, but he may know the Democrats filibustered her. But if Bush nominates Priscilla Owen for the high court, with all the media scrutiny and TV drama, they'll know that Bush is not being a uniter. And 70% of voters will not like that.
Incidentally, that's what makes me optimistic about the SCOTUS right now. Either Bush will take a breath and nominate O'Connor types, or he'll push some extremists into the Senate and the Republican philosophy will be exposed. A really extreme nominee could have the effect on 2006 that Clarence Thomas had in the 1992 elections. It could be used as an anchor on Republicans in blue or purple states.