Party loyalty

Let the party demonstrate some

The Republican Party want me as a conservative to hold my nose and vote for the Republican nominee. Their arguments are unpersuasive: Abortion, civil liberties, shrinking government, fiscal responsibility, economic policy – except for the rhetoric, it just doesn’t seem to make much tangible difference who is in the White House. This is even more the case if it’s a liberal establishment Republican from Massachusetts.

Who the president appoints to the Supreme Court makes some difference, but with the Senate evenly split, and the inherent unpredictability about what the appointee will do after she’s confirmed, and the boot-licking eagerness of the Republicans to sit at the cool kids’ table with the liberal establishment, who knows how much difference it makes?

The only half-way persuasive argument is that the press won’t provide any oversight if the president is a Democrat. Even so, I’m still not convinced the press wouldn’t take it easy on a Romney administration. If you like Romney, vote for Romney, for whatever good that will do. I don’t think he’s a bad guy. He’ll probably do less harm than four more years of Obama. It just makes too little difference to get excited about. We can drive over the cliff at 60 with the Democrats, or at 30 with the Republicans. If the Republicans what me to care, let them give me a reason to care.

What I really wish is that Ron Paul’s supporters could get their (expressed) wish and have him elected, without the rest of us having to live with the result. But of course we would all have to live with the result; anyway if it looked like he had a serious chance his support would collapse, because he’s nuts and his supporters know it. It’s safe and satisfying to cheer for Ron when he has no chance of actually winning the election. Like Ralph Nader he’s a great stick to beat the pols with, but if too many people take him seriously his support will collapse. Vote for him if you want, but I’d rather have James Marshall. They say he can’t win either.


5 Replies to “Party loyalty”

  1. I was with you when it was the Media-whore McCain (aka Amnesty John) vs. an unknown, but now that Obama is a known, I have to disagree. Romney is among the top two or three Republican candidates on immigration and he has never shown the tendency to snuggle up to the national press by showing how much he despises conservatives like McCain did.

    Also, you have to take into account how really, really, bad Obama has turned out to be. His endless corruption and cronyism and his willingness to ignore law and constitution when it suits him is enough to make any law-abiding Americans vote against him for any candidate who seems to be more law-abiding.

    And finally, there is a good chance that we will end up with a more fiscally conservative Congress this time around. Even if Romney isn’t a fiscal conservative himself, he won’t fight conservatives in Congress tooth and nail the way Obama would.

    Obama has been so bad for the country and so bad for the rule of law that I would even vote for Newt or Ron Paul if necessary.

  2. I’m not very excited about “I’m not as bad as Obama!” as my choice. My two year old would be a better leader… that doesn’t mean that the pathetic showing we’ve got is going to enthuse me.

    Obama has been so bad for the country and so bad for the rule of law that I would even vote for Newt or Ron Paul if necessary.

    Exactly why I’m so annoyed that we’re going to get another squish– it would’ve been nice to see the social liberals have to hold their noses just a little.

  3. Maybe with a Republican in the White House the press will actually do some reporting instead of just regurgitating the administration’s press releases. Or maybe not – they seem awfully keen to have Romney be the nominee.

    Last time I supported Romney because the others were worse. This time it’s the Instapundit’s turn to hold his nose and vote. Let the Republican party worry about the consequences of anointing Romney. After years of empty promises, I don’t trust them.

    We’ll have to see how things shape up. I plan to vote on election day. We’ll see who is on the ballot. There are important local races where the outcome makes a difference. Local issues, eye-glazingly tedious though they are, are more important. Maybe the Republicans will trick me again into trading my vote for empty promises and differently focused waste, fraud, and abuse. Best case, we get four years of gridlock.

  4. Well, the press has picked the Republican nominee for every presidential election since Bush Sr. I’d like to see that change, but it looks like it’s not going to this year. Rest assured Romney will become the press’s devil incarnate as soon as he has the nomination wrapped up. It always works that way.

    Frankly, there wasn’t a qualified conservative running this year. Bachman and Santorum have no administrative experience and Santorum isn’t a fiscal conservative anyway. Perry looks decent but there are indications that he can be bought. And I tend to think that he really isn’t too bright, which would make the traditional Republicans-are-stupid assault by the press that much more effective.

    So, all in all, I think the conservatives got a fair shot this year and just couldn’t pull it out and I’m not inclined to be contrary like in years past.

    Besides all that: OBAMA!

    1. “Besides all that: OBAMA!”

      Okay, there’s another good argument. I would like to see his economic policies repudiated.

Comments are closed.