I know that I should stay out of politics, but I don’t usually do what I should.

I have to say that I’m very happy that Zapatero won. Or almost more to the point, I’m very happy that Rajoy lost. One xenophobic homophobic leader (ahem, Bush) is enough for me.

This morning as I sat in a cafe listening to my iPhone and reading the paper, I was a bit surprised by La Vanguardia’s (the Catalan newspaper’s) headline: “Zapatero Gana Por El Apoyo de Catalunya (Zapatero Wins Because of Catalunya’s Support)“. Probably true, but somehow I didn’t think that was the most important element of the story. It’s like if Obama wins and then the headline were “Obama wins because Blacks Voted for Him.” It would be undoubtedly true and marginally newsworthy, but for me there is so much more at stake than regional pride.

Anyway, when I got to the office, I thought it’d be interesting to look at how international newspapers covered the story. The Wall Street Journal’s headline was: “Socialists Win in Spain, Get Clear Mandate“. The WSJ defines the mandate as “engineering a soft landing for a country that has fueled European economic growth for a decade” — which, for me, is the most important thing, ahead of which region played what role in the electoral process.

For the most part, the Journal has a favourable write-up of Zapatero noting that “[t]he Socialists’ re-election is a clear vote of confidence in the charismatic Mr. Zapatero, who became prime minister four years ago at the age of 43. Mr. Zapatero’s tenure has focused on social issues, including introducing gay marriage and tougher penalties on domestic violence against women.” The Journal also seems reassured that Zapatero “can count on the well-respected former European Union Economic Affairs Commissioner and two-time Spanish Finance Minister Pedro Solbes, who is likely to be finance minister in the new government.” In short, Zapatero is seen as a charismatic leader with a clear mandate and an effective team. Not bad, considering that the Journal is a more conservative newspaper.

The New York Times, which has more of a liberal slant, also noted that the election gave Zapatero a clear, new mandate. The headline was “Socialists Re-elected in Spain, After Bitter Campaign“, and the article noted that “[d]espite a bitterly fought campaign, the outcome seemed to endorse some of Mr. Zapatero’s boldest decisions, including the withdrawal of Spain’s troops from Iraq, the granting of more autonomy to Spain’s rebellious regions, simplified divorce and the legalization of homosexual marriage.” Again, the focus is on the fact that Zapatero is a bold leader with a clear mandate to move Spain toward modernity (in line with the direction that the NYT has called for the US goverment to move in).

Interestingly, the NYT ran a story on Saturday in which the author noted that Rajoy seemed just the opposite of modern. The reporter explained: “Mr. Rajoy, a 52-year-old former interior and education minister, has not been helped by his personal style. He has a graying beard, apparently to cover scars from a car accident years ago, that makes him look old-fashioned and older than his years. He laces his speeches with 19th-century expressions and suffers from unfortunate nervous habits, sticking out his tongue and bulging his eyes when he is angry.”

I agree with the Times and the Journal. Rajoy was an unwanted blast-from-the past that used fear of difference (gays and immigrants, among others) to win votes. Zapatero’s message was more inclusive and optimisic. So I prefer Zapatero. I think that he’s moving Spain in the right direction. The economic downturn is scary, but thanks to the Bush family, I’ve already lived through a few recessions, so what’s one more? It’s part of the cycle of life. What goes up, must come down . . .

My only hope is that either Obama or Hillary will win, because 8 years of Bush is almost more than I can bear. The US needs someone to take us back in the right direction.