You may be right. IDK. I’m just summarizing what she said.
I have respected Ann for a long time. I found FR through her. So her support of Romney really bothers me. I’ve given it much thought. Here’s what I suspect.
I don’t think she has a clue how close to actual rebellion and revolution we really are. I think she’s examining the future through what she sees as a slow, methodical, incremental reversal of liberalism’s consequences. She believes the return to conservatism can be accomplished through the election of centrist moderates if those are our choices. She sees Romney as the only choice of the current slate who can attract Obama voters and begin the reversal.
She doesn’t understand the mood of fly-over country. She doesn’t see that we can’t and won’t accept that slow reversal. We’re fed up. We want nothing less than a total overhaul and a return to founding principles. And there’s the trouble because the liberals want the same in the opposite direction. Ann doesn’t seem to understand that we are no longer willing to go along to get along for small victories. And that’s sad because the liberals understand it perfectly.
God bless her. I hope she wakes the hell up ... and soon.
If not us, then who? If not now, then when? That’s where we are.
I think you’re probably right - they live in such a make believe, encapsulated world, they haven’t a clue about who or what we are out here in the real world.
The bottom line is if our election process is going to come down to which party can pick the best-looking candidate in the name of electability, we are screwed. Our only hope long-term is to nominate people of substance who can potentially talk the public out of that kind of senselessness.