The great expectations for newly elected U.S. presidents

Priscillia Sundah Suntoso, ,  Jakarta   |  Sat, 01/03/2009 10:33 AM  |  Opinion

It is still fresh in my mind how I woke up on the cold Boston morning after Election Day on Nov. 7, 2000, with curiosity and anxiety as to who was going to win the U.S presidency. After concluding that the recount was not going to be resolved for at least several more weeks, I decided not to spend another late night glued to the TV watching the epic battle between Bush II against the two-time Democratic vice president Al Gore.

As a reminder, the highly contested 2000 U.S. presidential election was proven to be controversial. Tallahassee became the most famous city in the United State during November-December 2000. The 5-week suspense ended when the U.S. Supreme Court finally rendered its decision in a matter of hours after the oral argument to halt the recount of votes, to the dismay of Gore supporters.

In fact, it has only happened three times throughout history that a U.S. presidential nominee lost the election despite winning the popular vote. In this case, Al Gore topped Bush II with more than 1/2 million votes across the board.

Tracking back eight years, one can only wonder whether 9/11, and a whole lot of other things, including the economic crisis, would have taken place. Would things have been different had Gore ascended to power? It is worth remembering that Gore went the absolutely opposite direction from Bush; Gore won a Nobel Peace Prize for his work with the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2007, while the Bush Administration invited controversy for not signing the Kyoto Protocol and with the two wars in the Middle East.

The controversial reign will perhaps end as controversial as the way it started: The Gallup (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/popularity.php) shows that Bush II may exit his term as one of the nation's most unpopular presidents.

Reflections:

At the time, I was a law student living in a historically blue state where it is obvious that Gore was heavily favored. Eight years later, here in Jakarta, I also waited for the results of the election on Nov. 5 via CNN and the Internet. I was a lot less anxious thanks to the convincing poll results leading up to Election Day. Bradley, Wilder, Bandwagon Effects, whatever -- I was certain that Obama was going to make it.

Reflecting on the two elections, it was striking to me that they were similar in certain perspectives. Perhaps there is some truth that at least in part Gore lost the presidency because of Clinton and McCain because of Bush. History has repeated itself yet again.

Back in 2000, yes, many opined that they were quite sick of seeing the Gap navy blue dress over and over again and were tired of hearing the impeachment process. I remember how a photo in the Boston Herald of George and Laura holding hands together amid balloons and confetti had such a great impact, even on my friends at the law school -- at least to the point where they talked about it.

Now, President Obama's landslide victory perhaps silver-lined the fact that voters heard enough statements from the Bush administration explaining reasons for the faltering economy or justifications towards the war or WMD.

Both Gore and McCain similarly had to take the extra mile to distance themselves from their own party's incumbent administration and were careful of any association with them during their campaign.

However, it is very important to remember the similarity that both candidates have prior to being elected -- that both Bush and Obama offered change and hope at different times, although they indeed came with different packaging.

Disregarding the fact that Bush lost the popular vote back in 2000 and the fact that his popularity is way down at the moment, we must not forget that he initially ascended to power carrying high hopes and expectations from the people, just the same way Obama position is right now. This may be oversimplifying, but it is only normal to have one on one side and the other on the other side.

If back in 2000 the "change" Bush offered was centered upon honesty, moral character and family values, and the focus was to "restore honor and dignity to the White House" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/oct/31/uselections2000.usa2), the rapid rise of Obama is no different. The American people wants Obama to restore prosperity amidst the tumbling stock market and the subprime mortgage crises, during the time of which the entire world is watching its only superpower's descent.

The election of the 44th United States President-Elect Barack Hussein Obama marked history as the nation elected its first president of African-American descent. It is also a lesson for other nations to learn about what real democracy is all about. Only in America, the people can elect a person with such a name similar to Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, both at one point, the most wanted person in America.

For the simplest example, my Microsoft Office 2003 does not even recognize the word "Obama" and the grammar check instead suggested "Osama". Who could expect that the diversity America had been promoting for hundreds of years which seemed to had been wiped out just in two terms, got revived in just one night?

If the result of the election can offer any analogies, if Bush started on the wrong foot (recount and all), and Obama started right (landslide win), perhaps one can cling to a brighter hope for the world's future.

The writer is IDEAS-Indonesia Fellow. She obtained her JD degree from Suffolk University Law School and currently lives in Jakarta.

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved.