Republican trust in government.

[Londoner]

Republican voters claim to distrust government. They think Washington is a source of lies, corruption, and incompetence.

But the truth is: they trust their government leaders deeply. Look at the threads on this board.

They overwhelmingly Love their party's government leaders - whom they trust, defend, and protect.

You don't see nearly as many pro Obama threads. The Left opposed Lyndon Johnson, a sitting president prior to his lame duck status.

Republicans would never do this. They tend to trust their party's GOVERNMENT leaders deeply.

They love Reagan. They accepted - and still believe - the Washington narrative of the Cold War.

They trusted Bush. They accepted the Washington narrative of the War on Terror.

Watch how dutifully they fall in line behind Romney.

They never question spending when their party has the presidency - unless that president has entered lame duck status.

When Bush said he was going to rebuild the Arab world in America's image, nobody on the Right questioned whether Washington was competent enough to pull it off.

The Right trusts Government deeply.

Why?

 

[Londoner]

What will happen to the Tea Party once President Romney is sworn in?

Will they continue to question Washington spending, or will they become cheerleaders and defenders of the power which controls Washington?

 

[RightWingFerret]

when they say that congress has a 11/12% approval,,,,most of them are in dissaproval of the libs/dems in congress, and as well as how Obama is blocking every measure brought to him to create jobs.

 

[rdean]

Republicans see government as important to "enforce" their "religious" views. Policing women's vaginas. Arresting people who protest. Starting wars like Iraq.

Rebuilding the country. Education. Disaster relief. That's how Democrats see government. Republicans see those as a waste of money.

 

[Greenbeard]

What will happen to the Tea Party once President Romney is sworn in?

Perhaps they'll become Keynesians:

Back in April we made the argument that a Mitt Romney win would be better for the economy, based on fairly simple logic: A Mitt Romney victory would see higher government deficits, which is just what this struggling economy needs right now to regain full health.

If Obama wins, there's a good chance that we'll fly off the fiscal cliff, as the political gridlock will see spending cuts kick in, and perhaps even higher taxes.

If Romney wins, not only will taxes stay low, Republicans will drop their opposition to government spending and deficits. That's because parties in power always support higher deficits and spending. It's just what they do.

We'd love to hear someone say with a straight face that Republicans, if given full power, would seriously stick to their principles of limiting government. Opposing deficits is strictly the purview of the opposition party.

So the Keynesian choice is Romney.