WASHINGTON, D.C., November 5, 2012 — It’s easy to predict who’s going to win the presidential race. Here are the real reasons things will turn out the way they will: ignorance, fear, prejudice and ambition.
When the folks who want someone else to take care of them vote, they vote Democratic. If and when the Republicans offer a real alternative, people will vote for them, too. But Republicans know they can’t dismiss “the 47 percent” and win, so they offer the same socialist stuff, while pretending that it’s possible to let the rest of us keep some of the money we’ve earned, and the freedoms guaranteed in our long-forgotten Constitution.
Economics is the study of choice; all people are individuals, with the freedom to make their own choices. Politics is the study of coercion and power; people are grouped to best control them, and laws are written to remove individual freedoms. Politics almost always makes for bad economics.
Once we go beyond the basics required for civilization to function, laws either force people to do what they don’t want to do, or keep them from doing what they do want to do. Some laws are legitimate functions of government and are also the only kinds of laws that are necessary. They create the stable framework required for the preservation of a free society and to let people of diverse views and wants live together in harmony.
Laws that divide us into groups for the purpose of dividing the national spoils reduce choice and build political centers of power. Women who want others to pay for their sexual lives will vote for Obama. They don’t care who pays; only who gets. (Their boyfriends usually won’t care, either, as long as it won’t cost them anything and they have no personal responsibility.)
Blacks who believe that there is no way to better themselves, will want Obama to do it for them. They, too, don’t care who pays; only who gets. American blacks are so solidly behind Obama that the reason cannot be anything but racism. Racism?! Yes. Voting for or against Obama because of his policies has to do with available information and good citizenship, and that should not vary so widely across racial lines. Voting for or against him because he’s black is simply prejudice.
To say that only a black can understand black issues or only a woman can understand women’s issues is ignorant and condescending as well. It’s an argument that all citizens are fundamentally unequal, and a rejection of the idea that different groups can live together in one nation under one law. It’s a declaration that our laws are unjust, that the Constitution itself is unjust, and that blacks, women, gays, and white men for that matter are not individuals, but only members of their own groups. Group identification is the lazy intellectual surrender to “black leaders,” “women’s leaders,” and whomever else purports to lead such groups.
Hispanics who place their ethnicity above the law are another such group. When they seek amnesty for illegal immigrants (usually Hispanics, though there are probably a few illegal Canadian immigrants slumming around Seattle), they put identification as Hispanics above identification as Americans. This loyalty to ethnicity rather than country is disturbing and has long-term destructive effects for America. Since Obama has pledged to ignore his duty to prosecute the laws of this country equally and to do whatever he pleases regarding enforcement, Obama’s their guy.
Many college graduates finish their degrees with enough debt to buy a house, but no house. Then they get into more debt for that house (or apartment), the car they need to over-pay for because they know nothing about how to pick a used one, and all the “necessities” they put on their credit cards: cell plans, iPads, sound and entertainment systems…
These students, knowing there’s a long hard road ahead, just to break even and get out of the debt they already have, and knowing that their diploma won’t get them a job, want some way to reduce their debt load. Inflation – adding money to the money supply, and reducing its value – is the ideal way to “borrow dear, and pay back cheap.” They want someone who will pump money into the economy, thus making money easier to get and of lower worth. They think Romney is responsible with money (though he has actually shown only very small indications that his might be). They know Obama throws trillions of dollars around like they’re meaningless; Obama’s just like them; he’s their man.
Old folks (baby boomers on up) have more life experience, but a lot of them want a share of the spoils, too. Some have paid into Social Security and Medicare for decades and now just want some of that money back, but others feel entitled well beyond the use of these programs as insurance. A responsible leader knows there isn’t enough money to meet the obligations on the books, but both candidates have largely ignored the reality of near-future desperation. Either candidate will continue to pump money into the AARP vote, but Obama promises to be more aggressive in doing so, so he’s the choice of the old folks on the take.
Folks with guns, who want to keep the, will vote for Romney. What’s strange is that he’s no outspoken believer in the individual right to carry. On the other hand, Obama has said that the Second Amendment protects an individual right, but nobody believes him.
“The military” is a myth. We have two militaries. One fights and trains; the other used to do that, or married someone who did that, or is the child of someone who did that – but they don’t do that any more. So there’s the “warfighting” military and the “welfare” military. The welfare group spends more money and grows, and will not have its payments and benefits cut. They signed up for the benefits; they’re entitled to them. The warfighting group sees its budgets cut. The warfighting military wants a president who understands that VA benefits won’t keep the country safe, but M1 tanks and naval exercises and smart bombs can, But the welfare military’s population is larger. They’ll vote for more welfare, and they’ll get it. Warfighting military to Romney; welfare military to Obama.
Unions and big business? Their world is one of special privilege, secret deals, bailouts, and having others pay for their greed and mistakes. They’re Obama’s friends.
When one looks at the post-election “red and blue” state maps, one sees blue (Democratic) majorities in states that are dominated by big cities, where social herding is possible. When one looks, though, at the “red and blue” county maps, this becomes obvious: the land area is overwhelmingly “red” (Republican). Democrats need campaign only in the big cities, to win the states. They need address only the wants of city dwellers to win the states, and three states - California, New York, and Illinois - dominated by a handful of major urban areas get them to almost half the electoral votes that they need.
Then there are early voters - the folks who won’t be swayed by any more information. Their minds are made up. They don’t want to listen or learn – their big motivator is convenience. That’s why the early voters go with the other lazy and ignorant minds, and why early voting is so important to the candidates who work on peoples’ emotions rather than on any ideas that could stand examination. Advantage: Obama.
There are many groups we could look at, but the writing is on the wall for American politics for now and years to come. Enjoy the election, but don’t believe what you hear about it being a nail-biter. There’s more suspense in a cookbook.
This article is the copyrighted property of the writer and Communities @ WashingtonTimes.com. Written permission must be obtained before reprint in online or print media. REPRINTING TWTC CONTENT WITHOUT PERMISSION AND/OR PAYMENT IS THEFT AND PUNISHABLE BY LAW.