It's all in the R

A friend of mine summed up the dilemma facing Republicans this year as well as anyone. He said most true conservatives, if they had a gun put to their head and were told to choose between Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum, would say, “Pull the trigger.”

The not-so-funny-thing, however, is that it’s not entirely a hypothetical scenario if you disregard the gun. It’s precisely the choice conservatives are being forced to make as they head to the polls in New Hampshire: Choose between one incredibly flawed, hopelessly unoriginal candidate or his ideological twin.

And, believe it or not, it’s a choice most conservatives are making.

I have a lot of conservative friends. For the past three or so years, I have listened to them go on about how Pres. Barack Obama is spending us into bankruptcy, weakening our national defense and destroying our capitalist system. It makes me laugh because many of these same people now support Romney or one of his mutations for the Republican nomination as if they were any different than Obama. As if they didn’t support the bailouts, the endless spending and the bloated defense budgets.

What I’ve learned from listening to these “conservatives” is that most Republicans will vote for any candidate the establishment churns out so long as he or she has an “R” next to his or her name. To hell with principles, consistency or voting records. If he or she is electable, that’s all that matters, because after all, beating Obama is the most important thing. Pay no attention to the fact that the current candidates are essentially Obama, and Obama is essentially Bush.

I believe many of these people secretly would like to support one of the un-anointed candidates, such as Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul or even the popular, two-term Libertarian governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson, but fear the effects such an endorsement would have on their standing within the Republican Party. As if being a “yes man” like John McCain is something that impresses people and wins their admiration.

For conservatives who pride themselves on open, and often public, admiration for America and its institutions, you’d think they would have more respect for perhaps the most important American institution of them all: Democratic elections. For a citizen of the United States, one of your most important responsibilities is voting every four years for the individual whom you believe to be best capable of leading this country as commander-in-chief.

Yet, rather than doing just that — voting for the candidate their conscience tells them is most suitable — many conservatives instead use elections as a means to reinforce their establishment credentials.

I cannot even begin to recount the number of times I’ve heard someone say, “Yeah, I like everything he stands for, but I just don’t think he is electable, so I’m going to vote for establishment candidate (fill in the blank).”

The people who vote based on electability rather than ability are irresponsible Americans who (dare I say it?) do not deserve the right to vote. As an American citizen, you owe it to your country to vote for the candidate who you believe is best suited for the position, regardless of where he or she stands in the polls or his or her party membership. A vote for any other reason is irresponsible as a U.S. citizen.

While I’m far from being optimistic that Republicans will abandon the presidential choices they’ve been given by the Republican establishment this year and rediscover their core principles, I’m looking forward to using the elections in New Hampshire and here at home to determine who the real conservatives are: The ones who wouldn’t take either option in that not-so-hypothetical scenario between Romney and Santorum.

­— nperrino@indiana.edu