There is a reason I usually concentrate my political efforts on initiative measures: by being selective I can avoid making things worse.
Electoral politics, on the other hand, is always fraught with dangers: compromise and betrayal are the norm.
And the voter, when observant, often gets the feeling he’s being “played.” And he (and she) is.
This week I argued that Romney not being elected might be a good thing. I piled on to this notion by supporting Gary Johnson’s Libertarian Party run. Most of my readers who commented disagreed. Vociferously. Their main point? Obama must be stopped.
I note that my readers addressed almost none of the actual reasons I floated for equanimity in the face of a Romney defeat. Instead, they reiterate: Obama must be stopped. I agree, his policies must be stopped; but, in turn, reiterate my point: Romney will do little to reverse course.
Let’s not forget that George W. Bush and the united GOP Congress significantly increased the size and scope of government, and its debt . . . in effect, paving the way for Obama. Too few of us dubbed it “socialism” back then.
Romney seems all too likely to repeat this performance.
We certainly don’t need another president praising free markets and limited government while moving us step-by-step closer to a quasi-socialist serfdom.
I suggest we concentrate on Congress — especially new blood in the old institution — and on Court action, for the most effective resistance to the Democrats’ (and Republicans’) insane lust for spending and debt.
And we need creative initiative action in the states.
By resting hope on a Romney “victory,” I fear conservatives are walking straight into a trap, a familiar trap.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.