My take on the election was that to many Americans, Bush represented radical change. As a consequence, my prediction last week was that Americans would vote for Kerry, who was, ironically, the "conservative" candidate. While Bush talked about having a national sales tax, eliminating social security, tax cuts to reward wealth and punish work, and a slew of new worldwide invasions, Americans would be frightened off and vote Kerry. I was right that Americans would vote against radical change, but it turned out to favor Bush.
It was the Republicans who saw and opening and exploited Americans' tendency to vote against change. Republicans concentrated on an issue where this natural conservatism of Americans could be exploited in Bush's favor-- gay marriage. In Ohio and West Virginia, Republicans came out in droves not in support of the privitization of social security, tax cuts, and the invasion of Iran, but rather in opposing to the extension of same sex marriage.
The Democrats went wrong in making their message of "no radical change" implicit. The Republicans made this message explicit on the issue of gay marriage (and, from those WV fliers, the Bible).
What's the solution for the Democrats? I say, find the issues where the Republicans are promoting major changes, and run against it-- not just quietly, but loudly. A candidate running against Bush should have talked about how Bush wants to destroy social security, tax your family's groceries at 23% and fire your child's favorite teacher to fund NCLB. This isn't to say that Democrats shouldn't support changes that conform with our values, it's just that this can't represent the primary message of the campaign.