From The New York Times: Waiting for a President:
If he is going to succeed at achieving anything of substance, the next president will have to help the nation reach some new place where elected officials expect that rewards can be won from cooperation and mutual respect. Right now, we are in the peculiar position of suffering political paralysis, despite the fact that there is a clear consensus on most questions of policy.
Any pollster, and any reasonable politician, can tell you what most Americans want, particularly when it comes to a domestic agenda. Pick the moderate position on almost any issue — Social Security, gay rights, taxes — and you will find the public right behind you. But lawmakers can’t lead themselves into a bipartisan consensus. Only a president can create a new mood, and he can do it only by sacrificing his own short-term political advantage on occasion for the common good.
Then this, via Fatshadow:
The good news: America is a divided nation. Despite the pundit hand-wringing over this fact, it is a positive thing. Nearly — nearly — half of the electorate rejected Bush’s leadership, his agenda, his priorities, his falsehoods. From Eminem to the chairman of Bank of America to 48 Nobel laureates to gangbangers who joined anti-Bush get-out-the-vote efforts in swing states. Nearly half of the voting public concluded that Bush had caused the deaths of over 1100 American GIs and literally countless Iraqis (maybe 100,000) for no compelling reason. Nearly half saw the emperor buck naked and butt ugly. Nearly half said no to his rash actions and dishonest justifications. Nearly half realized that Bush had misrepresented the war in Iraq as a crucial part of the effort against al Qaeda and Islamic jihadism. Nearly half desired better and more honest leadership. Nearly half knew that Bush has led the country astray.