I’m really not sure the gloom-and-doom Democrats get the point here. They’re blaming the religious fundamentalists, the right-wing whackos, the FoxNews channel, everyone but who they should be blaming… themselves.

They approached this election thinking that any warm body would win an election against a sitting president. So they nominated one. Hell, it worked in 1992, didn’t it?

They approached this election thinking that saying “I’m not him” was an adequate campaign platform. So that’s all they said. Again, it worked in 1992.

Had they put up a dynamic, energetic candidate that could energize the moderate left with solid rhetoric (say, ummmm, Howard Dean, until he imploded), they could’ve unseated a very vulnerable president. Therein lies part of their problem. The Democratic party today is a mishmash of young up-and-comers (Edwards, Obama) and tired old farts (Kennedy, Kerry) and unelectable liberals (Hillary, Daschle). They had NOBODY of national prominence that hit the sweet spot of the moderate electorate (I guess Edwards is the closest), and ended up with an empty suit as their flagbearer. You know what? They’re gonna have the same problem in 2008 while the GOP has groomed McCain, Giuliani, etc. for a run at the presidency. Hillary? You’ll see a 60-35 deficit if she’s the candidate.

So what should they do? Instead of belittling and denigrating the American voters, Democrats should be asking themselves, “What should we have done?” The trap they’re falling into is assuming they did everything right, and the voters fucked it up because we’re too stupid to listen. WRONG! The liberal leadership is too stupid and pigheaded to listen to the voters, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.