Americans are still instinctively fiscally center-right
November 14, 2012 at 3:08 pm in Accountability by Dustin Siggins 34 Comments
With things still fleshing themselves out from Tuesday’s election, many proponents of big government are declaring small government principles dead in America. To a degree, they are right – our fiscal crisis is now going to get significantly worse as more Americans receive income from the federal government, and many Americans are thus incentivized to vote for more expansive government – but they are also wrong, as our fiscal crisis will force eventual budget sanity.
However, there is one other thing to keep in mind as we move forward: Americans may not have voted for small government candidates this week, but as the Washington Examiner’s Philip Klein notes , this is what many actually want. From his recent column:
But as tempting as it will be for analysts to pin the GOP’s 2012 defeat on an embrace of small-government extremism, the results from last night don’t actually bear this out.
According to exit polls as described by Politico, “53 percent of those surveyed said the government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals — a figure that’s risen 10 points since the 2008 election. Comparatively, 41 percent of voters said they believe government should be doing more.”
And there’s more:
And yet, the Romney-Ryan ticket obliterated Obama among voters over age 65, winning the group by a 12-point margin. That number not only beat John McCain’s performance among seniors, but also the five-point margin former President Bush enjoyed over John Kerry in 2004 — the year after Bush signed the Medicare prescription drug benefit into law.
At the same time, Republicans maintained control of the House of Representatives, which overwhelmingly passed versions of the Ryan budget this year and last.
Those who want to blame conservatives for Tuesday’s results will also point to Republican missed opportunities in the Senate. But here, too, it’s difficult to say that limited government extremism was to blame. In Wisconsin, Tommy Thompson was the Republican establishment candidate.…While they did support Richard Mourdock in the Indiana primary, polls showed him winning until a few weeks before the election, when he made a controversial comment about abortion in an instance of rape. This, not his position on federal spending, is what cost him the election.
And regarding independent voters:
If Romney lost the election because the electorate was rebelling against small-government extremism, it should be reflected in his numbers among independents. Yet that group of voters broke for Romney by a five-point margin, according to exit polls. Obama won because Democratic voters outnumbered Republicans. If anything, this would suggest that Romney didn’t do enough to rally the conservative base, though I believe that conclusion would go a bit too far.
These are the facts: Americans instinctively want smaller government. Yet as a nation we are incentivized towards wanting more government because of welfare programs, unemployment benefits, retirement programs, etc. And while this makes convincing Americans of the value of weaning ourselves away from a growing federal government more difficult, it means we still have a chance of doing so. We’ll simply have to go back to basics, remembering the totality of our principles beyond the petty tactics of winning this demographic or that demographic the professional politicians focus so much attention on. We must make certain our principles help everyone, regardless of race, creed, sex, or political persuasion.
Only the Tea Party is willing to do this hard work. So keep up your spirits – the battle for fiscal responsibility is not over yet.
The most significant threat to our existence is the debt.
The Republican leadership in Congress was so weak, they allowed the Democrats to run the government without a budget. We haven’t had a budget since Obama took office. We are drowning in debt, and the Democrats solution is to eliminate the budget. You can’t get more insane than that.
There is no other example of incompetence in our government more glaring than this. And, there is no other more obvious evidence that the Republicans need to change leadership in Congress. The current Speaker and Minority Leader have demonstrated that they are completely incapable of influencing government toward a sane functional operation. They have proven themselves to be very weak. We need a change. If we do not change, only an idiot will expect anything different than we have seen the previous four years.
The next Speaker of the House should be Paul Ryan. He will not be a coward when he has to stand toe-to-toe against the insanity from the Democrats.
And, with Paul Ryan as Speaker, you can rest assured that the insanity of running the government without a budget will end.
By the way, if Chris Christi hadn’t sabotaged the election so he could be the next president, Romney would have won and we wouldn’t even be having this discussion now.
Yes! The Republicans lost because they WEREN’T CONSERVATIVE ENOUGH! I really hope you TPers are successful in selling that.
The reality is, Chris Christi sabotaged the election. Him snubbing Romney then sucking up to Obama caused a 5-point swing. Without that, Romney wins. It’s that simple.
“Conservatism” is partly the principle that the government must comply with the Constitution and have a budget. We haven’t had a budget since Obama took office. We are drowning in debt, and the Democrats’ idea is to eliminate any kind of a budget. You can’t get more insane than that. That is why our debt will continually increase until it becomes an impossibility for our economy to pay it, and there won’t be any nation in the world that will be foolish enough to loan us any more money.
The debt will end our existence if we do not stop borrowing money.
We do not have a plan to stop borrowing money.
The only voices of reason in the government are from the TEA Party.
We need a new Speaker of the House.
Paul Ryan.
You gotta be kidding! Christie is the only one with balls among all of them! I talk to New Jerseyians who like Christie because: 1) he tells it like it is, 2) he’s the only governor who has had the guts to make necessary cuts to trim the state budget and reduce taxes! None of the previous governors have had the temerity that he has had in order to reduce the debt to middle and upper middle class citizens of that state. I only lived there for 7 years when Jim Florio was governor….and he was the worst! Taxes went up…the sales tax increased to 7 percent, the whole tax structure got screwed up, and I litteraly picked up and went back to Pennsylvania.
You are exactly right…that and a LOT of voter fraud!
Your point, that Americans are still fiscally center-right is, in my view, correctly argued.
To make a generalized statement “Republicans lost because they weren’t conservative enough”… is TOO broad a statement to really put your mind around. The problem, in my view, isn’t the degree of conservativism, but in the insanity created by the fringe of the party.
It is obvious to ALL Americans (R’s, D’s, Conservatives, and Progressives alike) that the federal government is too big and spending too much. The issue ISN’T whether the federal government is too big, it is how do we reduce it to an acceptable and cost effective level. The devil is in the details. From a broad perspective, it will take three factors to correct the problem: 1) spending must be reduced, however it must be reduced in such a way as to avoid creating more problems than it solves; 2) revenue must be increased in order to provide the funds to continue to fund those programs that necessary and proper and to pay down the debt;and 3) full employment must be a high priority in order to increase the tax base AND to provide the consumers with funds to build the economy.
This is the second cycle where the R’s should have and could have taken control of the Senate. They failed because they nominated candidates that appealed to the far right (anti-abortionists and religious right) and were too extreme for the center to accept. The lesson to be learned is that the country will not accept an extreme position. It scares them and a person won’t vote for someone they are afraid of!
Those that advocate “shutting the government down” all all costs are hurting the brand of the TP! Those that advocate “sesession” are hurting the brand of the TP! Those that advocate de-funding Planned Parenthood completely are hurting the brand of the TP! Those that advocate defining a marriage as between one man and one woman are hurting the brand of the TP! Those that advocate the immediate deportation of all illegals and their offspring are hurting the brand of the TP! Those that advocate the Republican loss was due to ‘Voter Fraud” are hurting the TP!
For the Republican Party to return to a competitive, main stream party, all they have to do is demonstrate by actions that their number one goal is to improve the lives of the people of America.That doesn’t mean compromise their principles. It does mean that they have to listen to the voice of the majority; accept the will of the majority even though it contravenes their personal belief’s; and take appropriate actions to make all our lives better.
Mr. Romney is, in my mind, a good and well intentioned man. However, I couldn’t vote for him because he would bring with him the radical right. Simply put, I personally believe that abortion is wrong, but I can’t impose my view on others. I believe that human life begins at viability, not conception. To declare, as state policy, that a human embryo has legal rights while still a simbiont is unrealistic and unreasonable to me. I accept the fact that illegal immigration is a violation of administrative law, deportation in all cases is not a reasonable alternative to the violation. I believe that religion should remain in the churches and stay out of the state houses.
Joe,
While I can appreciate your views on social issues, they should not now with this economy and dangerous world be the deciding factor between these two candidates. Our current President has meant to make the United States weaker economically and militarily. While Mr. Romney may have a far right stance on some social issues, he would have enough on his plate to correct our economy and strenghten our security.
Social issues will be last thing I will be worrying about when I am out of work and/or defending my property and my life.
All that being said, I believe most Republicans, moderate, center or right, first see our security and economy a priority and all of these organizations around the country…Tea Party, Town Hall, The Heritage Foundation any Republican organization need to come together in new movement, pool our resources, educate the public of really who we are and not allow propoganda define us, leveraging what media resources we have…..we have to come together, we are smarter than this, we are smarter than our opposition, we need new leadership.
How about this idea:
NO MORE DEBT. NOT FOR ANY REASON.
Then, they’ll have to grow up and act like adults. They’ll have to generate a budget, which we haven’t seen in 4 years.
We need stronger leadership in Congress. Our current leadership is obviously too weak.
Paul Ryan should be our next Speaker of the House.
Joe, if all Tea Partiers…or even just a large minority of them…were as rational and thoughtful as you are, we Democrats would have lost this election.
I agree Joe! Very logical and factual. Frankly, I was surprised to see it on this website.
Wendel:
By any and all normal political scientific criteria, Obama should have lost; the Senate should now be controlled by the R’s and the house should have gained seats,
Originally, I thought the TP was a good idea. I still believe that their fundamental principles are sound and beneficial for the country’s future. Their brand have been taken over by psychotic extremists; religious zealots; and uncompromising bigots. There are still sound minded, reasonable thinking people associated with the movement. It is to those people that I speak.
The concept that the extremists don’t understand is that in order to win the game you have to be in the game. Politically, there aren’t sufficient progressives to control an election and there aren’t sufficient conservatives to control an election. It is the centrist, moderate that makes the difference between winning and losing. Those are the people that have to be courted.
Romney was beat before he ever got started. To win the nomination, he had to go to the extreme right. That identified him to the general public. After he was nominated, he tried to shift to the center, but his positions within primaries were a major problem.
The right felt that there was so much hatred of Obama that it would be an easy win. They looked at 2010 and misread what happened. That underestimation cost them. If they are not careful, that same thought process will destroy their chances in 2016. By the way, they will be more effective in 2014 than 2012 because it is an off year election and participation is generally 20 to 25 % less than it would be in a presidential year. That is unless they shoot themselves in the foot again!!!
Joe, what you say does sound reasonable. But, as a middle aged Christian male, how do I wrap my arms around and embrace gay marriage and abortion?
It seems that Christianity is slowly being chipped away at and I am almost made to feel guilty for being a white male who has faith in Christ.
The extreme left doesn’t seem to back down from their views why should a conservative Christian. I came to this site to seek for like minded but I guess in the end I must be one of those extreme right people.
Brian
I don’t think anyone has to embrace embrace gay marriage or abortion, but then no has the right to force your idea of right behavior on anyone else. I don’t really care what they are doing. I might not think that abortion is great, but a little education and prevention might be in order. Some form of sex ed is obviously needed, but the question becomes from where, schools, parents etc.
Brian:
Thank you for, what I consider, a reasonable question.
I can’t tell you how to handle the conflict what your faith dictates and what the secular world will accept. I can only provide my view and if you find merit in my approach, well that’s fine. If you don’t find merit, well, that’s fine too. You have to live with yourself and with your God as do I.
I am not a religious man, but I do believe there is a God and I do accept Jesus as his son. I believe there is a significant difference between God and religion. Suffice it to say I don’t accept man’s adaptation of religion.
I don’t view the situation with regard to gay marriage or abortion as you have couched it. I live my life in accordance with MY values. I don’t try to impose those values on any other man nor will I accept any man attempting to impose his values on me. In my mind, it is that separation that makes the gay marriage issue and abbortion issue palletable to me.
i am not gay and have never had any inclination to be gay! I look back over my 65 years of life and I can’t think one instance where the sexual orientation of an associate interferred or effected my life or the decisions I made. For the most part, I can’t think of a time when sexual orientation was a factor in any decision I made. It simple was never a consideration. For me, as long as it doesn’t affect me directly or indirectly, what another man does or doesn’t do is between him and his God! Is the fact that same sex couple can marry going to change my marriage? Not that I can think of! Is their legal recognition going to have any affect on my marriage or entitltments? Not that I can think of! Is the fact that a same sex couple gets married going to force me tochange my values or habits in any way? Not that I can think of! My position is simple, If I want to be left alone to live my life as I choose, why should I interfere with someone elses right to their version of life, liberty and happiness! For me, ther is nothing to wrap my arms around.
I apply the same argument to abortion. I consider it unamerican to impose my views on someone else. I was faced with the abortion situation in my own family. My youngest son is married and has three children. My daughter-in-law became pregnant (unplanned) with a fourth child. They told me they were considering an abortion. I argued vehemently against it and offered many different alternatives. They made the decision to have the abortion. While I disagree with their decision, I accept and respect the fact that it is THEIR decision, not mine. Today, I love them both completely and without reservation and our relationship is strong and mutually beneficial.
I don’t know you, but I fail to understand why you feel you are made to feel guilty for being white or for having faith in Christ. For me, if I have a fixed, firm and sincere belief in something, I am more than willing to discuss that position with anyone so inclined to such a discussion. I can explain why I believe what I believe and will listen to opposing arguments. In rare cases, I have changed my mind as a result of said discussions. At the very least, I have gained in my knowledge by understandin and giving respect to opposing views.
From the tone of your question, unless I have misread the tone, I don’t see you as being an uncompromising extremist. Your tone and the way you articulate your position tells me your faith is deep, but you are not the zealot of which I speak.
In conclusion, I suggest you live your life in accordance with your beliefs and allow others the same regard.
With kindest regards,
Those that advocate all those things ARE the Tea Party.
FACT: Government spending under Obama (even with the stimulus plan) has increased an average of 1.4% per year. This is the LOWEST increase of any president since Harry Truman.
But of course facts don’t matter.
Bucky:
I would respectfully disagree that “Those that advocate all those things ARE the Tea party. I agree that there is a vocal minority that gets all the publicity, but there are good and descent people within the TP that will agree with the overall need and will listen to the different methods to attain an appropriate result which benefits us all.
Those, of whom you speak, are angry and are being controlled by their emotions. The first thing I learned during my 22 year career in the Army is that emotions are the enemy of sound decision making. They fail to realize that their rants are counter productive (although it does feel good to rant!)
They fail to realize that the President, regardless of who he/she may be, can not, constitutionally, spend a dime that has not been allocated by Congress. I will not address their motivation, but their argument is without foundational facts. The more rabid they arre, the more likely Republicans will lose more and more influence. It’s their choice! For me, I will not vote for anyone I believe doesn’t put the National interests ahead of party interest. I truly believe we would all be better off is we each took that view. Unfortunately, that won’t happen!
Joe you are a thoughtful and reasonable writer. Thanks for posting and raising important issues. And thank you for your many years of service to our country.
Really???!!! Give me a break. Obama has spent more in 3 years than any president ever!!!
Courtesy of Marketwatch-
•In fiscal 2010 (the first Obama budget) spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.
• In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.
•In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.
•Finally in fiscal 2013 — the final budget of Obama’s term — spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO’s latest budget outlook.
Buckey, just how ignorant are you? There hasn’t been a budget for the federal government since Obama took office.
In the four years Obama was in office, he only submitted two budgets to Congress. The two budgets he submitted of the four he should have submitted received a total of ZERO votes in Congress. That’s NOTHING, NADA, ZILCH. He gets virtually 100 percent of the black vote, and he can’t get even one goddam vote from anyone in the Congressional Black Caucus.
It’s obvious every Democrat in Congress thinks Obama is a loon. Given that obvious conclusion, can you please tell us why they put him on the ballot again?
If you want to put some facts in your post, here’s a link to the actual spending and revenue for the government.
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
It may be in contradiction to the information you receive in your indoctrination sessions.
Really???!!! Give me a break. Obama has spent more in 3 years than any president ever!!!
Yes really. Here is a link to an article from Forbes Magazine – not exactly a librul rag.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/
“ Nothing is so firmly believed as what we least know. ”
— Michel de Montaigne
Here’s a link to the actual numbers. It says something opposite of what you promote:
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
And, again, you are misleading your audience. The president cannot spend one dime Congress doesn’t authorize… according to the Constitution. The president is restricted in his authority solely to the Executive Branch of government, which has been given only the finds Congress authorized.
Let’s take a look at the history of Congress, the deficit, and the debt:
In January, 2007, the Democrats took full control of all the purse strings of the government. at that time, the deficit was a declining 0.16 (that’s zero point one six) trillion dollars). The total debt was 5 trillion dollars. Since the Democrats took full control of all the purse strings of the government, the deficit exploded one thousand five hundred percent, and the debt more than tripled to the 16 trillion dollars it is today.
To compound the insanity, the Democrats have not produced a budget since Obama took office. Without a budget, there is not even a hope of ending the trend of an esploding public debt.
The Democrats’ solution is to increase the taxes on those they call “rich”.
The fact is, the earnings of those they call “rich” does not even equal the deficit even if you taxed them at 100 percent and made them destitute.
We need fiscal sanity. Since the Democrats took full control of all the purse strings of givernment, they have demonstrated beyond any doubt they cannot provide this.
We need a Speaker of the House that will be forceful and force Congress and the government back to some sense of fiscal sanity. This will save our existence. If this isn’t done, we have no chance to survive as the nation we are now.
The next Speaker should be Paul Ryan. He’s the only voice of reason in our government.
George W took office with a record surplus, which he quickly turned into a record deficit. Then he signed into law (51-50 vote in the Senate with Cheney casting the deciding vote) a 1.3 trillion dollar tax cut, geared almost entirely to the wealthiest Americans. 1.3 trillion is nearly double the size of Obama’s stimulus package, which included 300 billion in additional tax cuts. Then Obama extended the Bush tax cuts. How much more can we cut taxes?
Check out this video on your guy Ryan. He’s a Keynesian when its politically convenient.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt4xM042CH4
Let’s look at the events in history:
Dot-com bust;
The Islamist jihad declares a gglobal war on the United States.
You seem to be ignorant of those events, and the fact that the dot-com bust caused a decreased revenue, and the fact that the war the Arab Islamists started by murdering 3000 Americans here in the United States had a cost.
You also ignore the inconvenient fact that the Republicans turned over to the Democrats in January, 2007, a declining 0.16 (that’s zero point one six) trillion dollar deficit during a war, and a total debt of 5 trillion dollars.
What did the Democrats do since?
Did you say the Democrats increased the deficit one thousand five hundred percent?
Did you say the Democrats more than tripled the total debt to the 16+ trillioin dollards it is today?
Did you say the Democrats eliminated using a budget to plan government expenditures?
I appreciate your party line mantra expressions. You should probably include some facts in your statements, too.
Amnesty Is Not Immigration Reform!
Sign the petition at:
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/amnesty-not-immigration-reform/33SNW1gj
I agree with the gist of the article. In fact, few Americans of any stripe believe in running up permanent government debt. The debate is over timing and method used to balance the budget.
The Tea Party should be the party of rigorous science if it is to avoid stagnation and attract more young members. It requires continual re-examination of policies and positions for accuracy, and a willingness to follow the truth wherever it leads, regardless of its implications for policy.
I also agree with those who say Tea Party members have not been well served by conservative media, whose corporatist ties slant their message in ways that have little to do with a true conservative message. In school we looked at climate change, specifically, who in the scientific community is for or against it. The measurable truth was that support is nearly unanimous in every reputable scientific organization in the world (ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change). Yet conservative media would have us believe that all these academic groups are corrupt and conspiratorial, while making no mention of the motives of the fossil fuel corporations, which pay enormous sums to conservative media to broadcast a constant drumbeat of climate change denial, so constant that we start assuming it must be false, rather than distorted.
The Tea Party audience is large enough to demand credible conservative media whose job is to report the objective truth, not massage the facts to fit an ideological straight jacket.
Yep…just because the president is a socialist as was his buddies Martin Luther King and Malcom X, we dont have to take it lying down. This is not the America that is free and we can’t let all these radicals get their way. There was a time when these people kew their place. GOd Blesss
Obama isn’t a socialist. He’s a Marxist communist. There’s a difference.
huh
It is a paradox that there is a thought Americans are still instinctively center-right, and half of this center-right population votes for a government that has no concept of things like a budget or controlled spending/borrowing.
Either Americans are not in reality center-right, or at least half the country has been duped into believing a system of lies.
One, or the other is true.
The election was lost on policy. The Ryan Plan did not balance the budget. The vote was on that plan to keep corporate welfare alive. It is time to investigate how a war in Iraq and the bill is Ok. We were lied to, the contractors make big profits and we were left the bill. This is not a Republican/Democrat issue this is an American Issue.
The illegal alien issue isn’t that complicated. I’d suggest this solution:
All illegal aliens that have averaged working 30 hours a week for the past 6 months are given a H1b work visa. All others are deported. ALL.
Then, we stop paying people to not do the work the illegal aliens are here doing.
Or, we can just stop paying people to not do that work, and they will take care of the illegal alien problem for us. I prefer to keep the illegal aliens that are working.
No special path to citizenship is implied. The path to citizenship remains unchanged, just like it was for every other alien that became an American citizen.