Politics That Knows No Bounds

Patheos’s political question of the week is “For whom will you vote, and why?” The e-mail that went out to all of the relevant bloggers explained, “The challenge is to make a case for your preferred candidate in light of your most deeply held convictions.”

Normally, I’d blow this one right off because most of my deeply held convictions have nothing to do with politics. Indeed, that is the thing I react most violently against in American politics today: it knows no bounds.

The government grows ever larger and it dominates more of our time, our anxieties, our decisions. This is not healthy. Nor is it sustainable.

Democrats in DC truly believe the right solution to almost every problem is more government, even when that government threatens to trample religious liberties underfoot — as the Obama administration is set to do in a second term with its implementation of Obamacare. Some would assign to Obama and company base motives, but I truly believe they are incapable of seeing the issues any other way. A better, Buckleyan term for it would be invincible ignorance.

I am not a Republican but one of the reasons I end up voting that way more often than not is that the GOP has made some effort to restrain politics to its rightful place. It’s best to vote for Republicans with both eyes open, however, and selectively.

The other day I filled out my ballot here in Washington state, which has not the remotest chance of casting its Electoral College votes for Romney. This means my vote is really just a statement of preference. And so, as in the last election cycle, I voted for my dad, Bob Lott. (The last time I voted for a Republican for president was in 2000.)

The Bob Lott vote was no joke, though if I voted in a swing state like Virginia, I would have at least considered voting for Romney. Not because I trust him politically, mind you, but because Obama has been so awful on so many issues of great import — from spending to Obamacare to now just flat out lying about what happened in Libya. It might be nice if somebody showed him the door.

Many of my other votes for statewide races and for Congress went to Republicans, with one very obvious exception. Brad Owen is Democrat, but something of a throwback who recognizes that politics ought to have limits. He’s Washington State’s Lieutenant Governor who has served with distinction in that constitutionally small office since 1996.

As the world’s most living expert on the vice presidents, I never take lightly the possibility that the number two will have to step into a larger role. My political disagreements with the lieutenant governor are considerable, but everything we’ve seen of the man over the past 16 years leads me to believe Owen would make a fine governor, should the need arise.

Content Director’s Note: This post is a part of our Election Month at Patheos feature. Patheos was designed to present the world’s most compelling conversations on life’s most important questions. Please join the Facebook following for our new News and Politics Channel — and check back throughout the month for more commentary on Election 2012. Please use hashtag #PatheosElection on Twitter.

Reminder: Free Mitt, Obama and US Religion E-book

Hate to flog this again but, well, actually no I don’t. Yesterday, I announced the release of the short e-book Mitt Romney’s Mormon-Christian Coalition, written by yours truly and published for free through the sponsorship of the conservative weekly Human Events.

I’ll have more to say about the substance of that book this week, but for now here’s the link to the page where you can sign up to have it sent to you immediately and for no dollars and zero cents. Download it, digest it and tell Jeremy Lott’s Diary what you thought of it in comments.

Free Jeremy Lott E-book on Mitt, Obama & Mormonism

Your diarist wrote it up as a “special report” for Human Events. The e-book in pdf format is about 7,500 words long, laid out for easy reading, and is absolutely free. Please get your copy right here and then post in comments what you thought of it.

Republicans vs. Good News

In a post at Politix, I look at how conservatives and Republicans reacted to the new jobs report. In two words: not well:

Former GE CEO Jack Welch tweated that the jobs numbers were “unbelievable.” He charged, “these Chicago guys will do anything…can’t debate so change numbers.” So many right-of-center critics followed Welch’s lead that Redstate’s Erick Erickson cautioned, “I don’t think it is healthy for conservatives to scream that both the polls and the jobs report are cooked.”

[Read more...]

Presidential Creepiness, Bipartisan Edition

Your diarist has long complained about the Obama campaign’s creepy sounding e-mails. So it’s only fair to note that I just got two e-mails in a row from Mitt Romney with the subject line “Fly with me.”

Choose Your Own Electoral College

Real Clear Politics has this handy choose-your own electoral college map where you can game out the various scenarios. Just plugged in what I consider to be the most likely state-by-state outcomes. Here are the results:

Obama-Biden: 264 votes

Romney-Ryan: 274 votes

In putting this scenario together I used two all-important assumptions to try to keep it real: 1) don’t assume anything absurd; and 2) don’t assume that Romney runs the table.

RCP has designated 10 states as toss-ups. I predicted that Obama will nail down three of those — Colorado, Michigan and Ohio — and that Romney will pick up 7. The Romney states are Nevada, Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, New Hampshire, Wisconsin and Iowa.

It might not turn out exactly like that, of course. Romney could win his native Michigan; Obama could win Virginia if Virgil Goode siphons off enough votes from Republicans. Paul Ryan could help the GOP nail down Wisconsin but not demographically similar Iowa.

But there, folks, is my best guess. What’s yours?

Mormon, Quaker; Potato, Potato Vodka

Yesterday, your diarist wrapped up the first draft of a 7,500-word report. This involved, among other things, getting knee deep in Mitt Romney’s political and policy shifts. Along the way, it occurred to me that Romney is the answer to the question, “What if Nixon didn’t drink?”

Richard Nixon