Conservatives downplaying this election’s importance need to wake up
November 6, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – You can count on two things to happen during every election: people insisting it’s the most important one of our lifetimes, and people lecturing us not to insist it’s the most important one of our lifetimes. Obviously, whether 2018 really turns out to be the single most consequential vote in American history can only be answered after the fact, but some people who should really know better are pushing back too far in the other direction.
“I'm being told that today's election is the most consequential in history and we will never recover if it goes one way and not the other. Of course this same thing has been said about literally every election ever in history but I'm sure it's true this time,” our friend Matt Walsh quipped on Twitter. PJ Media’s Jim Treacher mocked the idea that “Election 2018 Will Decide the Future of America or Something.”
At the Washington Examiner, RedState’s Kimberly Ross says that “labeling this one as the ‘most important of our lifetime’ is more about stoking fear in the hearts of the electorate than speaking truth.” No matter what happens “there are other election days yet to come.”
National Review’s Jonah Goldberg went the furthest, arguing that while he wants a GOP Senate to keep confirming judges, “not much of consequence is going to become law no matter what happens tomorrow” in the House of Representatives.
Of course, it depends on the representative. If it was Steve King or Duncan Hunter, I’d definitely leave it blank or write-in someone else. If it was Mike Gallagher in Wisconsin or Barbara Comstock in Virginia or Mike Coffman in Colorado, I’d vote for them. But if it’s a Rep you don’t care about much one way or the other or one who only cares about screaming on cable TV, I see no serious principled argument against leaving the ballot blank or writing in someone else.
That last one didn’t sit well with Gosnell’s Nick Searcy, who got Goldberg to double down on how he “really [doesn’t] care about the House and you’re being spun if you think you should,” and Nancy Pelosi “can’t do anything” if she becomes Speaker.
But he’s cool with Maxine Waters chairing committees or something.— Nick Searcy, INTERNATIONAL FILM & TELEVISION STAR (@yesnicksearcy) November 6, 2018
Power means nothing. It’s why Democrats want it so bad, I guess. https://t.co/GgheIZRUMI— Nick Searcy, INTERNATIONAL FILM & TELEVISION STAR (@yesnicksearcy) November 6, 2018
I don’t get not caring about the House. That is where you’re coming from, right? You don’t mind if Pelosi sets the agenda? Weird, “conservative.” https://t.co/dUAoNN2prP— Nick Searcy, INTERNATIONAL FILM & TELEVISION STAR (@yesnicksearcy) November 6, 2018
To be fair, none of the people I’ve just quoted (except maybe Goldberg) are saying the election isn’t important. Walsh in particular just wrote a great piece urging Americans to keep Brett Kavanaugh’s experience over the last few months in mind as they go to the polls. But just because today may not literally be the most consequential election ever doesn’t mean it isn’t hugely important, or that minimizing the consequences isn’t dangerous.
First, you can count on the impeachment talk to kick into high gear if Pelosi takes over. No, they won’t be able to actually oust Trump from office (spoiler alert: they’d hate President Mike Pence even more), but endless hearings and press conferences dominating the headlines would be the Mueller circus on steroids, forcing Trump and conservatives to spend an unprecedented amount of time playing defense against smears instead of pursuing the agenda they were elected for.
Yes, the Senate’s ability to confirm Trump’s judges is probably safe, but whether the president has to continue appeasing Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski instead of picking more proven originalists will be hugely consequential for the judiciary and everything it affects. And while the House hasn’t been the primary obstacle to pro-life results, another two years of Planned Parenthood budgets and no major pro-life laws would not only squander the opportunity presented by Trump’s entire first term, but impact whether he gets a second.
There are only so many times you can tell voters to wait for the next election to get the policies they voted for last time. There’s only so much more that can be done by executive action before the lack of legislative results weighs on voters’ enthusiasm. If a Trump unable to show lasting, transformative wins loses re-election to a left-wing president, everything changes.
And by everything, I don’t just mean budgets and legislation, though that should be bad enough. I mean the return of federal agencies weaponized against dissenting citizens. Activist judges, seated for decades to come, who will take even more decisions away from the ballot box. The feds suing states that protect children from restrooms to the womb. Exploiting immigrants to transform them into a permanent voting bloc, to stack future elections for generations to come.
No, today’s election might not literally be the most important one of our lifetimes. But the stakes are high, and treating every election as if it could be our last is a better recipe for taking our future seriously than incessant calls to calm down.
View CommentsClick to view or comment.