This is a frightening article to anyone who thinks deeply about the state of the American electorate. It seems that the Republican candidate for Governor in the Commonwealth of Virginia is prospering from a growing sense of disappointment in the performance of President Obama. Interviews with voters such as Chris Ann Cleland reveal the depth of their regret...and their growing openness to the Republican Party.
A couple of things here. It is hard to fathom the almost complete cluelessness of someone who would have voted for Obama turning on him now because he isn't doing enough! That's just plain wrong. The problem is that he's doing too many things and too many of the wrong things. Even more clueless though is the sense from Ms Cleland that more should be done--and that it is the Republican Party who is going to do the doing.
I'm all for voters coming over to our side--but not so that we can prove to them that we can out-socialist the Socialists. That's what Ms Cleland is looking for--a sugar daddy government handing out middle class entitlements so that Amy Van Meter--a cancer researcher at George Mason University who was presumably duped by a mortgage broker into taking on an ARM she couldn't afford (what does this say for the state of cancer research?) can be bailed out by the feds.
I'd prefer informed voters, not lemmings who vote for the last person who told them what they wanted to hear. I see a lot of that in this article.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
7 comments:
You are right on. I'll welcome these voters as well, but it really goes to show you how fickle we are. When the new guy doesn't deliver, we quickly lose interest.
I particularly like the illustration of the woes of the 'struggling residents in this upper middle class enclave.' Perhaps they'd be more at home in an enclave more befitting of their status.
But don't discount the massive opportunity here for Republicans. If they can be brought into our camp, we can articulate to the likes of Ms. Cleland of why our way is the right way (if that's possible), we may have created some new lifelong Republicans.
I don't know, Sally. A vote is a vote, to be sure, but I'm with CW that I would much prefer an informed, thoughtful voter to one who only goes after shiny objects. We can build a coherent platform with the former. We'll just bounce about in party disequilibrium with the latter. But if such voters, in their hard-to-comprehend ignorance, want to throw their vote our way and it stops this Obamadness, I suppose I'm with you...but just for this one vote. Then they can go back to pondering the complexities of, oh, I don't know, where ringtones come from perhaps.
Listen, the voters are suffering from buyer's remorse not because Obama isn't going far enough, but because he's going too far. They thought they were electing a moderate Democrat along the lines of Bill Clinton. They thought they were getting a pragmatist not an ideologue. WRONG!
Most people, especially lunatics, will tell you what they're going to do, all you have to do is listen. Read what Obama wrote in his two books. It's all there in black and white. The man is a socialist/fascist. He believes in the collective. He believes in equal outcome not equal opportunity.
A man once said socialism is a system that fails 90% of the time but will be tried first 90% of the time. Why? Because it centralizes power and therefore protects the rich, the powerful and the elites.
One last thing to prove my point. In 1990 Forbes came out with one of their top 100 richest Americans list. From 1980 to 1990 there was about 80% turnover (new faces). It was noted that from 1970 to 1980 about 80% were the same. There ya go.
Greg - Not sure I follow the point of the Forbes list as it applied to the rest of you post. I believe the main factor in the changes of faces in the 90s after years of relative "list stability" prior has more to do with the dot com and information technology revolution than with governmental policies. But, I'll admit to having not done one ounce of research to support my claim which is why I ask you for clarification. But either way, you make a good point, however, in the specific context of the article, we're talking about someone (and there certainly are others) who believe he hasn't gone far enough. That such people would expect GoP to drive more quickly toward socialism just says how stunningly unused their brains are.
Greg, I agree all you had to do was pay attention and do some reading last year and you knew what you were getting with Obama. But when you campaign as a reasonable centrist and a complicit media helpfully explains to everyone what a pragmatic consensus builder we're getting, it's no wonder people fell for it.
Mudge says "I would much prefer an informed, thoughtful voter"
Well unfortunately, the thoughtful voter in the United States of America is an endangered species.
If the majority of Americans who even bothered to vote were thoughtful, we would not be having this dialogue.
Any thoughtful person would have noted that then Senator Obama's political philosophy was a little to the left of Mao Tse Tung that he had little political experience and zero executive experience.
But thanks to those unthinking voters, he is now the President of our country and will in all likelihood preside over its demise.
There will be little left for Republicans of any stripe to govern and severely diminished if any revenues with which to fund their proposed programs.
Good point Smoothfur. Good point.
Post a Comment