And the Winner Is . . .

George W. Bush seems poised as of this writing to win reelection, though once again the threat of litigation may hold up a final resolution. Disturbing as the prospect is, this election will be memorable for more than just who won.

Americans on Tuesday reaffirmed their faith in democracy by swarming to the polls with a rare sense of passion and determination that will long be remembered. All those images of long, snaking lines at polling places across the country looked oddly foreign, like footage from some faraway land less accustomed to democracy’s rituals and, therefore, still awed by them.

President Bush was ahead in the popular vote, more so than Al Gore was in 2000, but again the electoral college, an antique remnant, is tripping up democracy. The voters deserve better, and the campaign of John F. Kerry should think hard before ordering legal fisticuffs in Ohio. Voters don’t deserve having judges decide. Again. More so than they have been in a long time, Americans are politically engaged and should be treated as such.

Bush’s close call is proof of his failings as president, which explain how a likable wartime leader couldn’t have assured himself a comfortable victory. Consider his inability to recognize that he lacked a strong mandate after losing the popular vote in 2000 and his refusal to acknowledge unpleasant truths throughout his term in office (starting with the fact that he lost the popular vote in 2000). Whether in characterizing the state of the economy or developments in Iraq, this famously on-message White House has repeatedly opted for Panglossian deception over candor and truthfulness.

Even if Bush prevails, he can hardly pretend that he has been vindicated in his approach. The president had every opportunity to win over the nation during the last four years, and yet he has not dramatically broken the 50-50 stalemate of 2000.

In a second term, he could worry about his legacy, not his reelection. That would require leveling with the American people about unpleasant realities and the difficult choices that lie ahead. He couldn’t remain in perennial denial about the fact that his plans for Social Security would cost trillions of dollars upfront, that tax cuts don’t magically increase government revenues and that the United States may need a larger military.

During the campaign, Kerry promised to restore truth to the presidency, but he didn’t, as a candidate, always hold himself to that pledge. Like Bush, he often refused to level with voters about some of the hard choices that lie ahead, whether on the need to overhaul Social Security, the real cost of his healthcare proposal or his ability to change the tenor of the war in Iraq. Then there is the overarching reality of the nation’s persistent red-blue split and the fact that half the country will be deeply offended by the outcome of this election, no matter what it is.

Our counsel to the president or president-elect is to dust off the gracious Bush acceptance delivered in December 2000. Bush then said he agreed with Gore that they should do their “best to heal our country after this hard-fought contest.” He promised to change the excessively partisan tone in Washington.

“I believe things happen for a reason, and I hope the long wait of the last five weeks will heighten a desire to move beyond the bitterness and partisanship of the recent past,” he said, adding that Americans “share hopes and goals far more important than any political disagreements.”

That speech deserves to be delivered again, because it was never acted on.