Rabbi Steven Pruzanski proposed his explanation “Why Romney Didn’t Get Enough Votes to Win“.

He insists:

1. “… Romney did not lose because of the effects of Hurricane Sandy that devastated this area, nor did he lose because he ran a poor campaign, nor did he lose because the Republicans could have chosen better candidates, nor did he lose because Obama benefited from a slight uptick in the economy due to the business cycle.”

2. “Romney lost because the conservative virtues – the traditional American virtues – of liberty, hard work, free enterprise, private initiative and aspirations to moral greatness – no longer inspire or animate a majority of the electorate…  it is impossible to compete against free stuff.” – concludes the Rabbi.

We couldn’t accept even a one Short Run related above cited argument (we cited them  as para (1)).

GOP could find better candidate, able to inspire voters’ majority by conservative revolution ideas to defend ancient liberties instead of “obama-lite” “nice for all” (and really nice man) like Romney;

GOP run poor campaign, taking pause before debates, poor targeted, appeasing worst enemies like feminists (who wouldn’t vote GOP anyway);

GOP paused again their campaign during Hurricane Sandy instead to present, to celebrate, to glorify advantages of private charity initiatives vs. governmental failures  giving the liberals chance …

We are totally agree the long run related arguments of Rabbi Pruzanski (see para (2)).

Conservatives could win elections from time to time – no doubt about it. They could even succeed in natural economic growth encouragement.

So, increasing national cake would just kindle, encourage the special interests groups’ passion to redivide / redistribute this big nice cake.  Interesants, bureaucrats, leftists (“liberals”) could easily rebuild and widen winning coalition for this cake redistribution under Universal Suffrage. Therefore, immoral coalition for Free Stuff couldn’t be defeated finally (in Long Run). The problem of government-dependent voters’ conflict of interests couldn’t be resolved under Universal Suffrage.

That’s why we are insisting (see our book for details) : it’s a time to repeal Universal Suffrage and break social spendings, all kind of welfare, first and foremost. Charity is developed enough to help the needy. So the Civil Society’s responsibility is to “disarm” current budget funded free stuff benefectors.