By every measure, the 2008 election has riveted the interest of American voters more than any in recent memory. In the short run, greater participation has to be a good thing for the democratic process. But in the long run, a better functioning democracy depends at least as much on the wisdom of the electorate as on the wisdom of the elected. On the eve of choosing a new government, it seems relevant to ask what lessons voters will have memorized from this and previous election cycles.

This campaign has been as polarizing as any. Despite the potential for a landslide that could turn some blue states red and extend Democratic dominance from an Obama presidency to a veto-proof Senate majority, the electorate remains deeply divided along fault lines of party affiliation, culture, war and national security, social and economic principles, race and gender. To some extent, these divides are inevitable, as inherent in our politics as issues and interest groups. Yet there is also little doubt that our divides have reached canyon-like proportions this year, due in no small part to media repetition of some extraordinarily divisive accusations--even by the standards of a presidential race.

American politics has always been rough and unruly. Yet even stalwart Republicans such as Colin Powell and Christopher Buckley have endorsed Barack Obama in part because of the McCain campaign's increasingly overheated rhetoric. The open wounds in American politics now throb with the McCain campaign's disingenuous charges that Obama is anti-American, a closet terrorist sympathizer and a Socialist. It must be said that Obama has levelled some charges against McCain that are equally inaccurate, but none that are of equal repugnance and destructiveness to our politics.

Our news media has too seldom countered the lies of our politicians with exposure to the truth. Much of the public, for instance, still wrongly believes--perhaps willfully--that Obama is a Muslim or that McCain is pro-choice. No wonder recent polls paint a portrait of a schizoid electorate. On the one hand, the vast majority of voters want a change from the Bush policies that have left the country mired in two long wars, horrific deficits and deepening economic woes. On the other hand, the race has been tightening in the final stretch as undecided voters move by slightly higher margins to support McCain, who many regard as the "safe" choice.

Whichever candidate takes the oath of office, he will face a multitude of wrenching problems, including a public desperate for solutions and impatient with partisanship. But the ongoing economic turmoil forecast into late next year could also produce a resurgence of the "bitter" and "betrayed" electorate that Obama once described. If voters are too willing to assign blame when intractable problems don't yield to quick solutions, the national healing that normally follows the inauguration and "honeymoon" could rapidly dissolve in the leftover acids of the campaign.

Call it our final exam. After the election, we will have to decide whether to support the glib rhetoric of easy solutions or the difficult changes our nation requires. To pass that test, we will have to remember--again--what we've learned in spite of stump speeches, political ads and complacent news reporting.

If we've paid very close attention to our own recent political history, the multiple choices after the election will be easier, even if the solutions are not. 

Cross-posted from Postscript in MediaTalk at SCAAMD.org