Nov 10, 2012
I am still undecided if the Republican’s problem is standing for everything and anything or standing for nothing. The GOP loses Hispanic voters and pro choice voters yet abortion is illegal in Mexico. And Blacks largely oppose gay marriage. The NAACP actually applauded Romney when he defended traditional marriage. We think the differentiation is ethnic but as Zogby pointed out you can determine a voter’s choice more accurately by where he/she shops and the balance in their 401k than their ethnic heritage. And even if the GOP adapted everything the Democrats value in the social sphere they would likely pick up very few converts and would likely loose even more of their existing base. I may disagree with the GOP position on various social issues but I am not certain that changing it would add enough voters to make a difference
Perhaps the difference is less about ethnic, religious and social values and more about which side of the check one signs. Perhaps the number of people who own businesses or work in a steady traditional job is a declining minority. As we left the farm we lost touch with the natural principal of reaping and sowing . We do not have to plan ahead to eat; we just go 2 miles to a supermarket, passing a dozen fast food joints on the way. As fewer and fewer people actually produce a product or service and as more people are able to consume without producing more and more voters believe money is like fresh produce and paper towels- it’s just there.
Years ago at a local Chamber of Commerce meeting I notice how few members were actually with for profit companies, and how even fewer were with locally owned small businesses. It is a declining minority. And it will be declining further in the next few months.
Wealth producers have always been a minority but as our society has become more progressive we have lost more than the understanding of the natural laws of wealth and creation, whether we are talking about farm products, search engines, or next day air delivery. We have lost a sense of accountability at a deeply personal level. We believe we can harvest crops without planting seeds and we can consume an ever increasing array of products and services, from transportation to health care, without even considering how the increase in wealth we need to pay for it will be generated.
I am constantly amazed at the otherwise intelligent friends who support the endless programs this president values when I ask them who is supposed to pay for it. The response is either a surprised expression as if they had not even considered this question, “the rich who aren’t paying their fair share”, or they quickly change the subject.
Selling this reality to voters against a party that promises that government can solve every problem is tough. Unless the economy plummets to the point that failure cannot be excused or blamed on someone else, unless the MSM starts challenging entrenched power regardless of party, and unless a better leader who has the principles, competence, and trust to persuade the public to adopt a better course we will find this course very difficult to reverse.