I have grave misgivings about a Romney presidency. While I am in full agreement with Steve Kates and most Catallaxy readers about the appalling Obama presidency, I fear that Romney is the most protectionist Republican candidate in history. Perhaps even the most protectionist presidential candidate in history. His pronouncements have been exclusively about an insular US, fear of China, and “protecting jobs”. Where is the vision for an open economy? In truth Romney is a died in the wool mercantalist.
A Romney administration promises cuts in Government spending – which I applaud – but probably a less efficient tax system. Most fundamentally, a Romney administration would put up the shutters and move to a ‘self sufficient’ United States. That would be a disaster for the US and a disaster for the world.
Anyone who has read my musings will recognise a pretty conservative and right-wing leaning. But I have a lexicographical preference for free trade and a free market.
I fear that Romney will make the US market less free than he would inherit from Obama. Perhaps the BBC poll that Steve cites is right for the wrong reasons: supporting Obama because he is less bad than the alternative?
From Steve’s perspective it is probably fortunate I don’t get to vote. But can anyone – please – give me one reason to vote for Romney rather than against Obama? In my recent post I wrote
Obama does not deserve a second term
That is true, but does Romney deserve a first term? I suspect not.
If I were voting, it would be for a write-in candidate. But it doesn’t really matter, as I still think Obama will win with around 332 electoral votes against Romney’s 206. When the GOP chose Romney, they voted for an Obama victory.