Rocking ever so slightly for weeks between 49 percent and 51 percent of the vote, supporters of Sen. John Kerry believed in the days just before Tuesday that their candidate would win. Many of President Bush’s supporters seemed to believe it, too. But by early Wednesday morning, it was clear that President Bush had not only won a second term, he had won cleanly – capturing a record majority of the popular vote and at least 274 Electoral College votes.

This was a divisive race, a race that often had Sen. Kerry standing in as merely Not George Bush. But now it’s over and, as disappointed as Kerry voters are, this nation has too many important challenges before it to have half its population bitter. John Kerry was gracious and eloquent yesterday in defeat; he pledged to work with President Bush to remove the forces that drive the nation to see so many issues through the prism of politics. Despite the differences in the campaign, he said, “the next morning we all wake up as Americans and that is the greatest privilege and most remarkable good fortune.”

President Bush was subdued but strong yesterday, briefly describing his agenda for the next four years and telling supporters of Sen. Kerry, “I will need your support and I will work to earn it.” His challenges are more than what has become a protracted war in Iraq. He will face deficit problems at home, environmental issues that worsen by the year, an economy that sputters and Social Security funding, among other issues.

But the test of both candidates’ reassuring words will arrive in the form of a new Supreme Court nominee should Chief Justice William Rehnquist soon step down. Will the president name a relative moderate or a hard-line conservative? Will Senate Democrats notice the difference or merely object to any nominee? The answers will tell all and show what the nation will face among its leaders in the next four years.

The presidential race drew about 60 percent of eligible voters (who are those indifferent 40 percent anyway?), the highest turnout in a generation. If there is a mandate in Tuesday’s vote, it is that an unusually high number of people care, often passionately, about the direction of the country. That is as hopeful a sign as possible for a nation with so much at stake.

There were many lessons in the campaign. Here are two the parties learned:

Democrats: that Republicans could get out the vote too, especially Evangelicals.

Republicans: that the liberal senator from Massachusetts was one tough campaigner; he presented an unexpected image of the left.

.

Republicans, as expected, picked up seats in the U.S. Senate, likely a net three. Generally, the new GOP senators are more conservative than those currently in office, shifting the Senate closer to the House’s ideology, with the increase making moderate senators, such as Maine’s, less necessary for passing measures by simple majority.

Democrats lost a good leader in Sen. Tom Daschle, and South Dakota lost more than it may have guessed. But once Democrats get over this, they would be wise to choose a new party leader who can work effectively with Republicans. Senate Minority Whip Harry Reid of Nevada wants the job and is well liked among Democrats. Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut is also mentioned. Whoever is chosen, the new minority leader should be more interested in getting things done than tying up opponents’ legislation.

.

In Maine, the Palesky tax reform got creamed, which may have been the most heartening expression of trust in state government since residents let lawmakers return after the ’91 shutdown. Gov. John Baldacci says an improved version of reform will be the first business of the new Legislature. It should be. But the public should reject anything that doesn’t have the strong support of both parties. Maine doesn’t deserve another protracted fight over reform, nor a lot of demagoguery from opponents. Democratic and Republican leaders should produce a substantial property tax cut, especially for those who need it most, and together pledge to find a way to fund it.

.

Something to watch: Municipal governments and schools have held off on spending while the tax cap was being debated. The pent-up demand for spending must be considerable. Which school will go first, expanding a program or hiring more teachers? Which town will suddenly discover unpaid bills that require immediate attention?

One other note: Opponents of the tax cap were sometimes over-the-top with dire predictions of the carnage Maine would see had the cap passed. To its credit, Tax Cap Yes! ran a decent campaign that responded to the worst threats with calm and patience.

.

The results on a proposal to ban baiting, hounding and trapping bears was 47 percent yes to 53 percent no, a vote much closer than this region might have guessed. Advocates of the ban need only look at Maine’s shifting population to figure out that their time is coming – unless alert lawmakers act sooner. A sensible step would be to separate baiting from trapping and hounding, protect the first and ban the latter two.

.

Watching the long lines at polling places nationwide or Ohio laboriously count its provisional ballots or New Mexico delay making an announcement, reminded us of how 19th-century voting remains, despite touch screens. Maine’s system of paper ballots seems to work well; no doubt more high-tech ballots work equally well, but the lack of a consistent ballot nationwide, consistent interpretations of voting laws and adequate machinery makes the nation seem barely able to carry out a basic requirement of democracy. Both parties have an interest in an accurate and swift ballot count. It would make a fine place to begin the bipartisanship President Bush and Sen. Kerry pledged.