Will historians remember 2012 contest?
For sheer intensity and outsize characters, for a sense of history being made as it unfolded, the 2012 election has paled before the 2008 presidential race. However gratifying or dispiriting the possibility of winning or losing might be to partisans on both sides, this campaign has struggled, so far at least, to avoid feeling like a bitter anticlimax.
But maybe we should all take another look, because 2012 is shaping up in many ways to be more important to the direction of the country than 2008 was.
Unlike the last race, when both candidates competed for the center and the differences between the parties often seemed bridgeable, this campaign is asking voters to choose between starkly different paths.
Will the Keynesian principles that have guided economic policy for generations be affirmed or replaced by a belief that smaller government will make room for a more vibrant private sector?
comments powered by Disqus
- U.S. Textbook Skews History, Prime Minister of Japan Says
- Recalling a Film From the Liberation of the Camps
- Skull Fossil Offers New Clues on Human Journey From Africa
- Are crude conspiracies right? Research shows nations really do go to war over oil
- Famed SC civil rights protesters have convictions erased
- Columbia University professors Eric Foner, Alan Brinkley, and Alice Kessler-Harris to retire
- A powerhouse appropriations subcommittee is now headed by a historian: Republican Rep. Tom Cole (OK)
- Slavic scholars divided over a scholarship sponsored (and withdrawn) by Stephen F. Cohen
- Claire Strom to Step Down as Editor of Agricultural History
- Joan Peters’s legacy assessed by one of her fiercest critics, Norman Finkelstein