End Of The Line?

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville

Why is it that single women and minorities are the most loyal Democratic voters? They know which party will offer them the most goodies (at someone else's expense).

I hope that we as a nation are not doomed, demographics do point in that direction though: The underclass is growing and the productive classes are not.

Added: I was discussing these issues with my 15 year old daughter and she pointed out (correctly) that it is rational for people to vote in their own interest. We fairly explain the votes of the dependent class, but why to elites vote to the left so often? They make a lot of money and would be hit hard by higher taxes, it is certainly not in their interest to vote the way they do. Maybe it is a mirror image of What's the Matter with Kansas?

Mary Matalin of The Corner Has It Exactly Right

A political narcissistic sociopath leveraged fear and ignorance with a campaign marked by mendacity and malice rather than a mandate for resurgence and reform. Instead of using his high office to articulate a vision for our future, Obama used it as a vehicle for character assassination, replete with unrelenting and destructive distortion, derision, and division.

Read it all here.


Added: That he got away with it says something about what we have become as a people. That something is more depressing than the prospect of putting up with this clown for another four years.

Two Elections: Each A Defense "Of The One Big Thing"

It is too early yet to know if Obama has managed to be re-elected, but I see a real parallel between George W. Bush's re-election in 2004 and this race:

Both men were highly polarizing. To my view, the left (including the press) hated Bush and never saw his win as legitimate and therefore felt free to attack him with little regard for the good of the country. In Obama's case, he is polarizing because he has nothing but contempt for about half the country and we have noticed. Not to get too sidetracked, but each re-election only really mattered due to what it would prevent:

For Bush, it would prevent the left from pulling a Vietnam in Iraq and abandoning the cause after most of the effort was behind us.

For Obama, it is to prevent the overturn of "Obamacare".

There are a lot of differences too. The war was initially very popular and the Republicans made it a central point of the campain. Obamacare has never been all that popular. I don't think it has ever gone up to 50% and has fallen from its peak--though it is more popular now than the gulf war ended up being. Though, I suspect that if the president is in for another term, by the end of it Obamacare will be about as popular as the war ended up being. In any case, defence of the healthcare law has barely been mentioned and has not been a central theme.

Really, there hasn't been a central theme at all, just small snipey gripey things like threats of abortion being totally banned, big bird and tax breaks for millionares. Basically just a bunch of substanceless BS.