Crazy vs Bad

If I were to erase your memory of the last four years and tell you that Mitt Romney had won the Republican nomination and then the presidency in 2008, and then show you a bunch of newspaper reports carefully edited to say "Romney" instead of "Obama", what would you see?

Bailouts for the big banks, begun by Bush and continued by his successor. Extension of the tax cuts for the rich. Iraq being wound up on schedule; a big expansion of the war in Afghanistan, with drone strikes and incursions into Pakistan. An extra war in Libya, just with air strikes, but no congressional approval or even a request for approval. A more articulate foreign policy, but one that is just as aggressive. No serious progress on climate change, no big program to wean the US from oil, despite a huge disaster in the gulf. More surveillance of Americans, continued legal action to stop people even finding out they'd been spied on. Defense of the torturers and renditioners. The president even claimed the authority to have US citizens executed without trial. Romneycare is extended from Massachusetts to the entire country. The president's popularity is suffering from his inability to orchestrate a recovery from the recession he and his predecessor caused.

Criticism from the left. Supine Democrats rolling over and letting it all happen. But - and here's where you figure out that I've lied to you - mouth frothing hysteria from the Republicans, even as their agenda is smoothly implemented. That pretty much sums up US politics right now; the Republicans are accusing somebody who could easily be their own man of being a marxist atheist fascist muslim communist illuminatus.

In about a year I have to figure out who to vote for. I can't possibly vote for the Republicans while the US still suffers in the hole that they left it in; it would be supremely ironic if Obama lost the upcoming election because he was unable to sort out in four years the mess that the Republicans spent the previous eight years creating. Particularly since, far from learning from their mistakes, their response has been to head further into la-la land, and try as hard as they could to stop him doing anything (if things they used to agree with). Just look at their current crop of candidates - the only reason Romney is still in the race is because even (some) Republicans realize the others might be a bit too crazy to elect, but if it was just up to them he would have been out long ago.

The Democrats on the other hand have shown themselves incapable of the sort of serious reform that's needed; they are either too afraid of offending someone, or they're doing exactly what their corporate backers want them to do, take your pick.

And the US system of first past the post makes it incredibly difficult to get a third party up; people will be too worried about Naderizing their vote. If they vote for who they really want, the extremists on the other side will win.

Well, an Obama - Romney contest actually takes a lot of the sting out of that. You can either vote for the Republican Romney or the Democrat Romney. No big deal either way. Or you can vote for a third party and increase the chances - just a little bit - that next time it will be one of the main parties that suffers that exodus to the people everyone else is voting for. I won't be holding my breath, but I will think of my third-party vote as a tiny little investment in America's future. And if there's a preferential voting proposition anywhere in any system, I encourage you to vote for it and tell your friends.

On the other hand, the Republicans may just double down on the crazy. They have so many to choose from - Bachmann, Perry, Cain, Paul, Gingrich... If that happens, I think I will once again fall victim to the two-party effect, and vote Obama just to make sure I've done everything I could to keep the White House in sane hands. And hope that Obama's been waiting for his second term to get serious.

The sad thing is I don't yet know of any third-party candidates worth voting for. The most likely third runner is probably a bunch of disaffected tea-partiers running a rabid no-tax-but-double-defense candidate. Or perhaps Ron Paul, who at least has the advantage of a sane foreign policy even if his economics is nuts.

It has not escaped my attention that 2012 is when Heinlein had Nehemiah Scudder elected.