Republicans edge closer to inevitable choice of Romney to face Obama

By David McElroy · January 11, 2012

I’ve never met a Mitt Romney fan in person. They obviously exist — because I see evidence of them on TV and they show up to vote for the man — but I don’t talk to real people who admit to having any enthusiasm for the guy. So why is he going to win the GOP nomination?

The short answer is that he’s the guy who most Republicans see as the least-offensive available candidate who can defeat Barack Obama. That’s not a very high standard to set, but given what most voters believe, it was almost inevitable for Romney to win.

The question I have for Romney voters is what they would hope to achieve by replacing Obama with Romney. Other than the color of their skin and their party affiliation, what are the substantial differences between the men? They certainly pander to different people with their rhetoric, but on the issues of substance, I can’t see that they’re much different. Can you?

The question I have for supporters of the social conservatives in the race — Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry — what do you hope to gain by supporting Romney as your eventual nominee? Does he stand for what you believe? Or do you simply hate Obama so much that you’ll support anyone else?

Most importantly, I have a question for Ron Paul supporters. What are you going to have to show for all of the time, money and effort you’ve poured into this campaign? The overall percentage of people who believe what we believe (or some form of it) isn’t going to change as a result of the campaign. It’s still going to be around 10 percent. When are you going to be ready to give up on the coercive state?

I’ve regularly had Paul supporters tell me — very confidently — that I’m wrong to say Paul can’t win. I’ve outlined my reasons why he can’t win and I’ve also outlined why I won’t be voting for him (or anybody else). But I’ve given up on trying to argue with Paul believers about the issue. Some tell me honestly that they know he can’t win, but they believe it’s worth it to “educate” people. (That doesn’t work in any substantial numbers, even though you won’t believe me about that, either.) But many of his supporters have honestly believed that he could win. It was always fantasy.

I’m only bringing this up to ask if it isn’t time to accept reality. The reality is that the vast majority of people don’t want a libertarian society (or any version of an anarchist one). Seriously. They don’t. They don’t trust us when we tell them that it would be better than what we have. They think we’re crazy for believing it would be. All of your high-powered logic isn’t going to change their minds.

So are you going to spend the rest of your life begging people to choose individual liberty as a political path? Are you going to keep thinking that this time it might be different? If the majority don’t get why freedom is better and more moral, they’re not going to suddenly change their minds — at least not in substantial numbers. The democratic system is only going to produce one thing. It’s going to keep producing people who want to control your money and control your life. That’s what the majority want. Honest.

So since we know what they want — and it’s clear that your beautiful logic and hard work and begging aren’t going to change that — why not consider searching for an alternative? Why not at least consider that maybe — just maybe — there could be a future that doesn’t involve elections and coercive governments telling people what they must do?

I believe there are alternatives — multiple ideas that different ones of us are going to try. (Many of us are trying to figure out which one works best for us.) But even if you don’t believe there’s a workable alternative, since it’s obvious that other people don’t want what we want — and it’s obvious that your political work is all in vain — wouldn’t it be smart to withdraw from the system and concentrate on real life? Wouldn’t it be smarter to be figuring out how to protect yourself and your family as things get worse?

There’s no return on a political investment. There is a return on the investments you make in real life — your family and in your financial future. Aren’t those investments worth more than whatever time or money you’ve wasted on a campaign that’s not going to change a things?

Share on Social Networks

We are ruled by the dumbest and most incompetent people among us — and we have a system which allows stupid and irresponsible people to force the costs of their idiocy onto smarter and wiser people. Can we get away with that? Yes, for quite some time. But we eventually reach a point at which the dumbest of the dumb — who are habitual liars and mentally ill fools — lead us to the disasters and destruction that some of us have seen coming for years. We are approaching that point. And yet most of the idiots around us still wave their rhetorical banners of support for the evil people who are leading us to ruin — and all of them point their fingers at someone else, never noticing that their own enthusiastic support of evil is to blame. When things finally fall apart, blame yourself for your blindness to the evil, not whoever happens to be in power when it happens.

I’ve been making some changes to the site lately and there are more changes coming in the days ahead, so don’t be surprised if you some small differences. This is not a wholesale redesign, but rather the addition of some features. Since they’re smarter than I am, I’ve put Oliver and Alex in charge of the technical work, which you can see in this action photo from the control room of our media complex. I recently added a series of landing pages for readers who randomly discover the site from an Internet search. I’ve also changed the YouTube link at the top of the page to go to the new YouTube channel for video essays that reflect things I’ve already published here. (Here’s a little bit about both of the YouTube channels I’m working on.) In addition, I’m trying to move away from using Instagram, so I’m experimenting with photo plug-ins that will eventually allow me to host the pictures — cats, dogs, sunsets, whatever — that I often take. So don’t be surprised to see more changes. Thanks for your patience. Let’s hope Alex and Oliver know what they’re doing.

I have no use for the theocratic and repressive government of Iran. The people who run the country are cruel at best and evil at worst. The Iranian people deserve freedom. But I have no personal quarrel with anybody in Iran. While I’m not thrilled about a future Iranian government having nuclear weapons, I’m just as concerned about nukes in the hands of politicians in Israel, Pakistan, India, China and Russia. I’m not even thrilled with the U.S., Britain and France having them, either, because I don’t trust any politicians to be responsible with such terrible weapons. All I can say with certainty is that American taxpayers have no business attacking Iran, especially since we’re being forced to pay for this attack in order to benefit the politicians of Israel — and nobody else. If Middle Eastern countries want to fight among themselves, that’s none of my business. It’s not the business of the U.S. government, either. I have no quarrel with anybody in Iran — and having the government which claims to represent me launch an unprovoked attack against a sovereign country will only make all Americans less safe in the near future. This attack is poorly conceived and morally unjustified. Remember that when the Iranians launch attacks that we will then condemn as “terrorism.” What the U.S. is doing right now looks like terrorism to me. And let’s not forget that the attack is the latest in a long line of unconstitutional wars by various U.S. presidents — who have no legal power to declare war on their own, according to the U.S. Constitution.

A child having a tantrum understands only one thing: Did I get my way or not? He doesn’t understand the issues involved. He doesn’t understand the reasons that went into a decision. He doesn’t understand any of the things that mature and reasonable adults have to understand in order to live healthy lives. By his reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling to strike down his disastrous tariff scheme, Donald Trump shows himself to be — once more — a screaming child having a tantrum. Outside the world of mob bosses who expect to get their way every time, normal adults don’t act this way, but Trump isn’t normal. He’s an angry and vengeful man who has narcissistic personality disorder. And we are in danger as a result. Trump doesn’t understand the legal issues involved in this ruling. He doesn’t understand economics. He doesn’t understand rule of law. He doesn’t understand that he can ever be wrong. All he understands is that he didn’t get his way. And he is now a narcissistic and raging little boy who also happens to hold life-and-death power over most humans on this planet. He’s dangerous — and the system which gives him that power is even more dangerous.

Is it an attempt to blur the gender line between men and women? Or is it some weird tribute to the traditional Scottish kilt? It’s hard to say, but fashion designers keep pushing for men to wear skirts in the last few years. Both men and women in modern fashion seem oddly androgynous, as though it would be offensive for a man to look manly or for a woman to look feminine. A CNN article about the latest fashions from Paris caught my attention Monday and left me wondering about the ugly clothes the designers are hawking. If a man wants to wear a skirt — or a kilt — that’s OK with me, but I’ll stick with a traditional dark suit with a white shirt and tie. (Well, when I’m not wearing t-shirts and sweats, of course.) I always wonder who actually buys the outlandish garb from fashion designers anyway. I would be humiliated to be seen in any of this stuff, but I obviously have no sense of high fashion.

Related Posts