Do voters really want change?

A good friend of mine who is probably the most politically astute person I know maintains that the most dangerous word in politics is “change”. That’s because she believes that despite all the hype at the beginning of each election cycle, the last thing voters really want is change.

---

Change is difficult in that it forces people to see and do things differently and pulls them out of their comfort level. When voters claim they want change during an election, what they are really saying is that they are unhappy with the individual who is running things at the present time. The kind of change they are actually talking about entails seeing someone different running things for a while Which brings us to Barack Obama, the “Magic Negro”, who is promising Americans that he will bring about “change” in Washington. While he has not been in any sense specific about the nature of the change he is promising, there are two things Americans can count on if Obama through some fluke makes it to the White House: The first is that very little will change in Washington as the way the denizens of that community do business is beyond the ability of any one person to change, particularly if this person is a newbie who basically just blew into town. The second is that the American people will be vehemently opposed to any change Obama will want to bring about. Barack Obama is among the top 10 most leftist Senators in the US Congress and unless Americans are prepared to accept the kind of policies one might find in places where maintaining low taxes and personal liberties aren’t all that important, any change Obama will want to initiate will be met by a great deal of resistance. Obama envisions himself as the catalyst that will turn the US government from its current role as the nominal servant of the people to the chief redistributors of America’s wealth and obedient servant of the UN. While that may play well among some of the world’s media elites, very few Americans would be happy with that kind of change. In fact, the kinds of changes Obama is likely to want to bring about would result in calls for his impeachment or worse. The chances of Obama being elected President of the United States are similar to those of a snowball’s chance at surviving in hell. That’s because the identity politics currently being waged by the Democrats appeals only to the most committed radicals within that party and aside from the anemic echo of JFK’s Camelot, the only thing Obama brings to the table is his negritude and a vague a promise of “change”. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, brings more to the table than mere womanhood. She’s promising to bring back Bill, which gives her a huge advantage over Obama. In the final analysis no one cares if a candidate is black or white, a man or a woman, young or old, handsome or homely. It’s pretty silly to think that someone might actually vote for a candidate based on race or gender. What voters are really interested in is what a candidate is likely to do, once elected. There is an old saying that cautions individuals to be careful what they wish for, as they may just get it. This saying is more relevant today than ever. I can’t imagine any of the Democratic candidates winding up in the White House, even with the Republicans’ lackluster slate of candidates. I am particularly dubious about Barack Obama. For him to ask voters for a chance to bring change involves a tremendous leap of faith.