You want some "facts and figures?" Nibble on these from Another Liberal Blog: Some historical perspecitve on the election. Go there for the full spreadsheet of data:

*Assuming Bush gets New Mexico and Iowa, he will have gotten the lowest percentage of electoral votes (54%) of any incumbent running for reelection since Wilson. If those two states should swing Kerry's way (NM might), it'll be even lower.

He will have won with the lowest percentage of the popular vote (51%) of any incumbent running for reelection since Truman (well, technically since Clinton, but he also ran against Perot, who was a more significant 3rd-party candidate than Thurmond and Wallace were in '48)

He will have won by the lowest margin of the popular vote (3.5M) of any incumbent running for reelection since Truman (2.1M, and back then only 50M voted).

Bush will have won the three states that put him over 270 (OH, NM and IA--assuming the last two go his way) by only 161,989 (not counting the provisional ballots, absentee, etc.) [which in OH at least should make it even closer -- Lib]

Nevertheless, telling the 59 Million dumbasses who now figure they now have a license to get away with murder is an excersize in futility.,, Right Matt?

Hat tip, Ara

Liberals and democrats are passing through the various stages of grief and navel gazing; from counting those blessings we can take solace in, to quietly quaking in our boots in apprehension of what a Bush and GOP "mandate" means.  What I believe is emerging is the the genesis of a liberal, open-source internet think-tank which could solidify as an influential  base for future sculpting of the minority agenda.

Not to suggest that we shouldn't be concerned with the details, lord knows that conservatives don't seem to be.  But beyond filling in each color of the rainbow with a fine camel-fair brush, we need to make sure to fill the canvas of our American portrait with sky blue -- using a roller.  That way we will be able to simply point to the self-evident truth when the next Orwellian double-speaker tries to convince the masses that up is down and so clouds the atmosphere the rainbow is obscured.

We have an opportunity to "think big," as long as we don't get bogged down in the minutia. 
 
We need our own theme, our own shade of blue to call our own.  One not based response to the GOP in any way whatsoever.  One not based on opposition.  Unless we do we are doomed to their control of the agenda and the way in which they frame the issues and the argument.  We cannot retake the higher ground until we can state succinctly who and what we are and unite behind that definition.

We need to paint with a broader brush, and there's no time like the present to start.  Realistically, there's not much we can do to stop the impending excesses about to assault our sensibilities by the "War President."  Catalog it, push for reform, make your voices heard, but keep in mind the bigger picture -- who we are and not what we're against.

Matthew jotted down some quick but "crucial, dammit, crucial" bullet-points, some of which touch on the background colors and not the details which could be washed away if a new shade of periwinkle is plastered on the wall. 
Even more broadly, I think we need to build a consensus on what should trigger a use of military force.  Not merely a repudiation of the "Bush doctrine," but a sound argument why our position is better. That's the whole point Matt.  More navel gazing is certainly necessary so let's hear some of those muddled thought and we can vet them.  We have some time right now to engage in "stream of consciousness brain-storming.  So go ahead and throw the ideas out.  That goes for everybody.  Mine will emerge as and you can come back here to ridicule as you want or advise and tinker as you will in the comments.

7. Liberals need to learn to talk the talk and walk the walk of nationalism better. Hopefully in some guise that doesn't simply involve invading countries at random. Michael Lind has historically had smart things to say about this, and hopefully will more such smart things to say in the future.

I'd like to know a little bit about what this means and where he's going on this.  I'll say this at first blush -- I'm not too comfortable with a the implications of liberals turning into "nationalists."  I'm assuming that he's referring to this or this from Michael Lind, and possibly this too.  Tell you what, sometime today you read these, I will too, and we'll meet back here to exchange thoughts on it.

Matt has more, but they are delving into the details which can be flushed out after the canvas is set.  Stoic Ara Rubyan points to two articles by Bill Saletan at Slate which get the ball rolling.  The yesterday's article echoes a recurring theme of Ara's blog, keeping the message simple.  Today's is a simple message, become the party of responsibility.

The sad fact is that being utterly shut out of power, being a watchdog is the only effective role left for the democratic party, Bill "simply" says make the most out of it.  Well in the spirit of being all we can be, that's not bad advice.  Where Saletan goes too far afield is telling us not just to "act like you care about this stuff. I'm asking you to care about it for real, and not just at election time." 

I don't see any difference between what Saletan suggests as an approach to pocketbook issues (making it a moral issue verging on class warfare, rich vs poor), and what true liberals have been saying right along.  In fact, if he had been paying attention, he'll realize that this is exactly what Kerry, as well as Gore, Ducakis, Kennedy, Mondale and every friend of Bob Schrum has been saying in every election the Democrats have lost.  Did he not listen to a single speech by John Edwards.

Mainstream democrats will shy away from that like the plague after the drubbing handed out with the "liberal" label this time around, and rightly so.  Bill seems to be telling us to forget the center and go to the warm embrace of the left.  Forget that they'll label us as commies, forget decorum and political correctness.  That works fine for a blogger like me, but not someone attempting to win national office. 

Internationally, don't ask me to be something I'm not Bill.  I DO believe in consultation with allies and a global approach to fighting terrorism as one of the essential elements in effectively securing our safety.  You can call it weak all you want, I call it smart.

The same approach is my preferred method when it comes to trade.  More importantly, when another country starts violating the rules -- like China in dumping cheap goods on our markets -- we need to enforce the agreements we have and actually use the built in protections we do have to punish cheaters.

The solution is not to delve deeper into traditional liberal values, or even frame them in so-called moral terms.  If that were the true way to win votes in America, we'd all be yelling how Ralph Nader made things even worse for us this time.

In fact, I seriously wonder just how much we're supposed to change, either in our thinking or approach, if at all.  I suspect the answer may not be in simplifying ourselves or our message, but rather recognize that no matter what we do, the right wants to eradicate us completely.  This is a culture war and what the centrist/moderate democrats need to see is that they can't avoid being lumped in with the true liberals.  That doesn't mean changing who they are is a good idea either, especially when sincerity is the essence of simplicity.

One thing we can do is start calling the right exactly what they are, and make the labels stick just like they have done to sully the word liberal.  We should make it clear that the mix of corporate domination of our culture and government is the foundation of fascism and coupled with erosion of civil rights will lead beyond the mere efficiency of trains running on time.

We have to be clear that the domination of policy decisions by reference to religious values alone is no different than the fundamentalist theocracies of the middle east.  We must argue for the plain fact that the systematic destruction of the middle class that the right has been working on for forty years, is a return to feudalism; and the cult of misplaced faith in the infallibility of our oh-so fallible President is nothing more than the false security found in believing in the divine right of kings.

The only way to fight appeals to ignorance and fear is education.  That alone will clear the air of propaganda and let some sunlight in.

Putting some Dispassionate science into politics, think about this.  Last election, Al Gore received more votes than any man in history for President of the United States -- 50,999,897.  At last count, John Kerry has him beat by over 4.5 million with 55,546,066 and by the time all the votes are counted (and they will be) it could be a 5 million vote slaughter.  Bill Clinton couldn't touch these numbers, or unfortunately Bush's 60 million.

Fantastic!  Everyone, every last one of us can stand tall.  And when the snarky wingers mock and gloat, spit in their eye and let them know that we are never going away, never going to stop shouting from the rooftops when we see injustice, corruption and inequity.  Kos and Chris Bowers as MyDD are ready to hang Terry McAulliffe from a lamppost and think Howard Dean is a "no brainier" for DNC chair. 

Think again guys.  McAulliffe delivered more than anyone's dreams and Howard Dean couldn't deliver a decent second in a single primary.  We got beat by the worst president in history who only knows how to play politics, not lead a great nation -- and everyone knows it who hasn't drunk the Kool Aide. 

The GOP aren't better leaders with better ideas.  They've been feeding on fear and ignorance for a generation.  It worked again, in spades.  But we can't become what we aren't or advocate what we know is merely an appeal to the lowest common denominator; the worst in us, not the best. 

Taegan Goddard gives us this Thought of the Day

"When you trade your values for the hope of winning, you end up losing and having no values -- so you keep losing."  -- Howard Dean

It's called integrity.  I've yet to see any from our current President and it is in short supply throughout the GOP.  It's the fight itself, election results certainly count but the actual progress in making this lump of rock better for even those than don't know any better is the real goal, and that struggle goes on no matter who is in power.  Indeed, we have to work that much harder now.  But most of all, we must remember the Bard's advice: "To thine own self be true."

There's a lot of talk about who we will put up next.  Kerry called John Edwards and "extraordinary leader" and for his part, Senator Edwards promised not to give up the fight for all we care about. Outstanding.  Much talk has centered around Hillary Clinton next time around which is interesting, but mere speculation.  We have a shooting star in Senator (sounds nice doesn't it) Barack Obama, and he has the promise of being a light far into our future.

Keeping Bob Schrum away from our candidate has a certain appeal though.

But lest we forget.  John Kerry, an authentic hero, a great American, an icon for forward thinking men and women throughout the world, is the guy that got more votes than any human being save one.  He's my guy, and I will follow his lead until he tells me to follow someone else.

Unless of course I change my mind -- Hey look, they got ice cream! Maybe I'll try that bland vanilla flavor everybody seems to like. Nyaa.)