Keep your eye on Civitas Review and our home page for a complete report of verbatim responses from NC voters. You won’t want to miss it!
During the month of May, Civitas conducted a statewide poll in an attempt to asses the general mood of North Carolina voters regarding the upcoming presidential election. The question that was posed was: Which presidential candidate will you be voting for? Can you please tell me why you are voting this way?
Here are some of the interesting quotes from the poll.
“The current president doesn’t care about our Constitution. He does what he wants. He pledged to uphold it, but he is trying to be a king. He only upholds what he wants to uphold. He has not upheld the Constitution. For example, he attacked Arizona for immigration law. He is trying to take the power of the state away.”
This is an astute observation. By some of the president’s decisions, it does appear he has little regard for our Constitution or federalism. For example, the president made recess appointments of three people to the National Labor Relations Board and appointed Richard Cordray to lead the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, when Congress was obviously not in recess. The House of Representatives had not consented to a Senate recess, so the Senate had not officially entered recess; therefore, recess appointments could not be made, constitutionally speaking. Obama took matters into his own hands, skirted constitutional requirements, and charged ahead with his appointments anyway. The Chief Executive’s duty is to uphold and defend the Constitution, not to disregard it.
Regarding Arizona, the president did rebuke the state and infringed upon her sovereignty. In our federal republic, each state retains significant amounts of sovereignty, with the ability to create and enforce its own laws (10th Amendment, anyone?). Arizona implemented a very good and strict immigration law and had the prerogative to do so. The president had no right to attack Arizona and castigate its immigration law. This was a significant breach of federalism that voters should ponder and not soon forget.
This is a response from a self-described Independent.
“Romney is a flake and will say anything to get elected.”
When election and campaign season comes around (Who am I kidding? Election and campaign season exists in perpetuity!), a frequent charge is made that politicians will say anything to get elected. I can’t completely disagree with that assertion. Politicians often pander instead of remaining principled in their quest of elected office. The pursuit for power often causes people to make broad and ambiguous promises that are impossible to keep. Does “Hope and Change” sound familiar? Nonetheless, the sentiment of this poll participant is somewhat accurate; Romney has been somewhat “flaky.” There is no doubt that he has flip-flopped on some issues when it was politically expedient to do so. Voters need to watch out for this type of behavior on both sides of the political aisle because it is prevalent. Voters should do their research, weigh the gravity of the electoral situation, and then act upon that knowledge.
An Obama supporter from Chatham County said:
“I disagree most strongly with the alternative [Romney]. I believe that Romney will cause a depression. I do not believe that spending cuts are the answer to the problems facing America.”
It appears that we have some Keynesian thinkers in Chatham County. A key component to Keynesian economic theory is the idea that governments can spend their way to prosperity. Therefore, if spending is reduced, economic depression ensues. This theory has, unfortunately, engulfed modern economic thought and pervades economic policies everywhere, hence why government spending is so enormous these days.
The poll participant is partially correct; cuts in spending are not the sole answer to the problem. However, they play a significant role, and to the dismay of conservatives, the importance of wise spending cuts are often downplayed or maligned by liberals. No, cutting spending will not solve all of our problems, but it would definitely place us on the right track.
A Republican responded:
“I don’t like the insurance Obama is doing and the spending of money. We are in great debt and our great grandchildren will have to pay it back. That concerns me a great deal.”
It is reassuring to know that some people still consider future generations when voting for political candidates. After all, our massive debts will have to be paid at some point; we can only “kick the can down the road” for so long before our debtors demand their rightful repayment. It is the future generations who will bear the brunt of this repayment, and the costs will encompass more than mere dollars and cents; they will include reductions in the standard of living, and the prospect of a perpetually weakened economy.
Our country must tackle this issue, lest future generations become weighted down with an insurmountable burden of debt. Under president Obama, our debt has spiraled out of control. Spending and borrowing have become mainstays, and our economy has faltered as a result. Our current level of spending is unsustainable and extremely toxic for economic growth for future generations.
An Obama supporter stated:
“I have hope that things will change. He, Obama, has good intentions and wants to get things done.”
I will admit, this quote made me chuckle. This Obama devotee is still hoping that things will be changing. It has been a tough term for Obama, so it makes sense that a supporter would hope that things change. The irony of it all struck me as amusing. “Hope and Change!,” repeated with joy and enthusiasm was all we heard four years ago. A new era was supposedly about to be ushered in; a political panacea in the form of Barack Obama had emerged and, by the force of his personality and with history on his side, he would end partisanship as we knew it. We would all unite to embrace hope and change.
It can be safely stated that the president has not lived up to the platitudes he uttered in his rock star-like campaign. Obama’s platform turned out to be just another political pipe-dream. In fact, his presidency has turned out to be somewhat of a disaster if you measure it against his campaign’s platitudes. Our country is rather hopeless right now and partisanship, I would submit, has increased, not decreased. However, there is a general sentiment on the horizon is that the country is, in fact, looking for a change – in presidents. One can hope.
This response was from a Republican:
“I would like to see a Republican back in office but Romney isn’t my first choice.”
I fear that many Republicans who are conservatives share this sentiment: “I will vote for Mitt Romney because four more years of Obama would be disastrous, but he was not my first choice.” Looking back at the Republican primary, we can see that moderate and establishment Republicans were backing Romney. He’s safe, predictable, and who could argue with his business experience, right? He had an essence of inevitability about him; 2012 was his time to shine in the GOP spotlight.
But it was a longer than usual primary season for Republicans. While Romney more or less progressed at a steady pace, tumultuous ups and downs plagued the rest of the field. Candidates all rocketed to the top of the field only to be pushed aside and replaced quickly. The conservative base couldn’t decide on a candidate around which to rally, they just knew that they weren’t too excited about Romney. He has never been a conservative’s first choice. So, conservatives are once again presented with a dilemma much like they were in 2008: vote for a lukewarm conservative or an outright socialist. The right choice is obvious, but there’s a slight feeling of regret in the air, a feeling that conservatives have missed a chance to nominate a true conservative.