That is the first line of Picket Fence Apocalypse, today's New York Times column by Charles M. Blow, who in my humble opinion is overdue for his own Pulitzer Prize for Commentary.
Read that first line again. It is a rejoinder to the likes of John Sununu and Rush Limbaugh and others of their ilk.
Blow follows that line with these two paragraphs:
That’s the message voters sent the Republican Party and its Tea Party wing Tuesday night when they re-elected President Obama and strengthened the Democrats’ control of the Senate.
No amount of outside money or voter suppression or fear mongering or lying — and there was a ton of each — was enough to blunt that message.
Blow revisits the statistics of this electorate and how the President did, then offers us quotes - from Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh.
He points out that for those who think the world came to an end on Tuesday, they are right if their view of the world is through the prism of the 1950s or the 1920s, because the America of those days is no more. And he offers the other side this caution:
Republicans are trying to hold back a storm surge of demographic change with a white picket fence. Good luck with that.
Read the column. And if you want my thoughts on this, you can continue below the fold.
Many commentators have noted for several years the changing makeup of this country. But it is not just the increasing percentage of people of color, it is also the changing attitudes of the younger generation, something I saw during my 17 years in the secondary school classroom.
Consider this fact from the exit polls - young white people between the ages of 18 and 25 split equally between Obama and Romney. Given that young people of color tilted heavily towards Obama, you can see the forthcoming demographic time bomb in this piece of data.
As you can in this fact: 50,000 Latinos turn 18 every month.
What about those young people?
In general they are somewhat libertarian in their social views. They are used to seeing gay and bi- classmates who are "out." Interracial relationships by and large dod not upset them, considering how many of them either are the product of such relationships (as is the President) or are themselves engaged in same.
They might be persuadable on some other issues, but consider also this: their experience of the economy is very different than that of those older than they are. While you might be able to scare them that social security could be in financial trouble (even if that is not true), they have seen the difference government intervention can make to help those in need, and they have seen the difference a communal spirit can make to help when governments do not, whether it is those out of school a few years who became concerned about Darfur, or it is those more recent who were not upset by the likes of the Occupy movement in response to the greed of Wall Street.
This is about more than messaging, which is what too many are discussing in light of the Republican failure in both the Presidential and Senatorial contests Tuesday. It is also about a search for a sense of meaning in life, one that goes beyond self-interest narrowly defined. The political figures that speak to that, the political party that addresses that, has a huge appeal to the younger generation. That is one reason Obama inspired so much hope in 2008. That Romney seemed to be a rejection of that, that they could see that Congressional Republicans obstructed movement in that direction, is one reason that the percentage of young voters, contrary to expectations, actually increased in this election.
I have a suggestion for pundits and politicians. Don't decide for them what young people want. Ask them. Give them an opportunity to redefine policy and communication. IF you want their commitment, you have to empower them. For all its flaws, the Obama organization understood this far better than do the Republicans. One undervalued reason for the failure of 2010 is that there was no organizing mechanism to keep young people involved. It has to be about more than electing one historic figure to the Oval Office to keep young people involved. Had they been involved in 2010, the Republicans would not have won all the close races. After 2 years ago, I think young people better understand the importance of off-year elections, and it will be interesting to see their level of involvement in 2 years.
The nation has changed greatly during my 6+ decades of life. I think it is for the better.
But then, I never was a fan of white picket fences.
What about you?