{"id":424,"date":"2015-06-04T06:32:52","date_gmt":"2015-06-04T06:32:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/conservativehistorian.com\/?p=424"},"modified":"2019-09-19T21:51:09","modified_gmt":"2019-09-19T21:51:09","slug":"john-locke","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativehistorian.com\/john-locke\/","title":{"rendered":"Will Liberals Always Win Because they Give Away Free Stuff?"},"content":{"rendered":"
One of the great statements of despair of Conservatives is that it is so hard to win because liberals will always promise to use government – or as Thatcher would have thought of it – other people’s money – to provide incentives to voters. \u00a0History proves this thought process is inaccurate.<\/p>\n
Carter wanted to give stuff away more than Reagan certainly did.<\/p>\n
So did Mondale.<\/p>\n
Gore wanted to give away more stuff than W Bush.<\/p>\n
So did Kerry.<\/p>\n
For that matter one of the biggest givers of stuff in our history, Lyndon Johnson, who pioneered the \u201cGreat Society\u201d in which two of three of our largest governement programs were created \u2013 Medicare and Medicaid.\u00a0 Yet his popularity was in such an ebb due to Vietnam and other failed policies\u00a0that he DID NOT EVEN RUN IN 1968.\u00a0 \u00a0Then the guy who did run, Hubert Humphrey lost, then one of the guys who wanted to give away more stuff than Johnson, McGovern, lost in one of the greatest debacles in election history.\u00a0 And who beat him, and Humphey \u2013 Richard M Nixon, the loser in the 1960 presidential election.<\/p>\n
Of course it is always going to be easier to run as a liberal in a democracy.\u00a0 Our roles will always be harder.\u00a0 But take the case of 2012. \u00a0Romney lost for a bunch of additional reasons but his ability to provide largesse to the electorate was but one of many issue:<\/p>\n
And with all of this, and the liberal media, and the liberal education establishment, and the liberal academy, and Hollywood and Obama\u00a0being the first African American president, and on and on \u2013 Romney only lost by 3 points \u2013 some 300,000 votes in the swing states and he would have been president.<\/p>\n
These were the reasons that Romney lost. \u00a0Too often Conservatives go down the road of trying to be quasi liberals. \u00a0Please keep in mind that Hoover did not necessarily lose because he was too much like Coolidge. \u00a0He was busy trying to be like Roosevelt. \u00a0The way to lose is to try to give stuff away and for Conservatives that will fail because they will never give as much as the liberals.<\/p>\n
The way to win? \u00a0Try educating the voters, especially Hispanic voters, the legal, citizen Hispanic voters, and women, and Asians and yes, African Americans about the value of a true opportunity economy, about safety from external harm, about law and order, about the power of a family unit, about the satisfaction of building it yourself, about the value of not depending on a bureaucrat, about the power of depending on oneself. \u00a0About all of the values we hold dear. \u00a0That is the STUFF we should be giving to the voters.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/p>\n