Politics is not science

DJ Drummond of Wizbang Politics blog had a great objective assessment on 2008 presidential election yesterday entitled "Politics is not a science." His first paragraph is particularly germane. Obamania supporters may not like it, but they can hardly disagree:

The fact that Barack Obama was elected President is a pretty clear indicator that Politics is not scientific. That is, with all due respect to the President, his resume was the thinnest in memory, with no real substance to support his claims that he should lead the country. Nevertheless, Barack Obama won, defeating first a powerful Democratic party rival with an impressive political resume and efficient campaign machine, then a Republican opponent with far greater experience on most of the issues important to voters. In the 2008 election, however, style won over substance, although it may be fairly argued that neither party's nominee made an effective case on the merits of their qualifications.

I think Obama's major accomplishment in 2008 was that he proved Abraham Lincoln wrong in thinking about fooling all of the people all of the time. One never needs to fooling all of the people all of the time. Just barely 52.7 % is sufficient to enable him to go around and scream "I win." Who needs "all of the people"? By the time"all of the people" realize that they have been fooled, it will be much too late, as much of those who in the 52.7 % have already found out in 2009.

DJ Drummond is not optimistic about 2012. Neither am I. What saddens me the most is that unfortunately my grandchildren will be the ones that suffer the consequence of the 2008 mishap. But I am fully confident that American will totally recover. I have more faith in future generations than the current one. God Bless America!