Some conservative commentators led by Ann Coulter who are arguing that it's better to accept a hypothetical 4 years of Hillary Clinton or Obama than 4 years of McCain.
Here's how Coulter breezily puts it;
If Hillary is elected president, we'll have a four-year disaster, with Republicans ferociously opposing her, followed by Republicans zooming back into power, as we did in 1980 and 1994, and 2000.
Just that easy.
This "Only 4 Years" nonsense is wishful thinking from the same people who were sure Hillary Clinton would never get this far. Hillary won two Senate terms in New York and her husband served two Presidential terms. The odds are that once Hillary is in office, she'll be there for eight years and her VP will be an incumbent in the next race with good odds of turning 8 years into 16. Only one Democratic incumbent has lost an election in the 20th century and that was Jimmy Carter and he was running against Ronald Reagan.
But let's take that 4 years for granted. What can a President do in 4 years? Let's ask Jimmy Carter.
Carter's term lasted only 4 years and ended 27 years ago. There have been 4 Presidents since him. And yet today many of our problems can be traced back to the Carter Administration.
Within only 4 years Carter surrendered the Panama Canal and did his best to remove US troops from South Korea. Had he succeeded there would likely be no South Korea today and Kim Jong Il would have had all of South Korea's resources at his disposal.
The Carter Administration weakened the Shah and opened the door for his overthrow. With the Shah overthrown, the Carter Administration favored the Ayatollah Khomeni under Brzezinski's green belt policy (Brez is back as Obama's foreign policy advisor) and his failure to react usefully to the hostage crisis solidified Khomeni's power. The Iranian threat today and the rise of Shia terrorism can all be traced back to the Carter Administration.
Brzezinski and Carter also began backing and funding Islamic terrorists in Pakistan via ISI. Indirectly this led to the growth of Islamic terrorism operating out of Pakistan, that continues to be a second home for Al Queda.
Look at another intervention by a Federal Judge in a terrorist case on the side of the terrorist and then look up his or her biography and you'll find that the odds are the judge was a Carter or Clinton appointee. Those same judges have given terrorists a free ride and cultivated a welcoming atmosphere for their lawyers and remain a serious stumbling block on the War on Terror.
Carter pressured Rhodesia into removing the country's elected leader Bishop Abel Muzorewa and were instrumental in replacing him with Mugabe, who had been excluded from the election. Today Mugabe continues to rule as a brutal tyrant who has engaged in ethnic cleansing and whose misrule has caused starvation.
With a single stroke of a pen in signing the International Covenant on Human Rights, Carter bound the US to the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights. (This once again demonstrates how much irrevocable damage a President can do in 4 years or even 4 days.) The Covenant applies down to the individual level and forbids any activity meant to interfere with its own statutes.
The precedent for Global Warming agitation was set by Carter, before there even was a Global Warming, when Carter used the Presidential soapbox to warn people to turn off their lights and carpool to save energy. When Al Gore travels the world telling people they need to turn off their lights and drive a bicycle, he's following a pattern put into place by Carter.
I could go on for pages and pages but mostly of you already know this. All this happened despite the fact that Carter faced a hostile Congress even within his own party, was widely unpopular with the public and attempted to present a conservative facade to the nation. If you want to gauge the full extent of a President Hillary Clinton or President B. Hussein Obama nightmare, multiply Carter's 4 years and keep multiplying.
When you're not happy with the election, turning in your weapons and welcoming the enemy to march in and take over in the hopes of radicalizing your own population to throw them out is not a sane or responsible strategy. I'm sure a Clinton or Obama administration would be a gold mine for Ann Coulter's book sales and a global disaster that would cost countless lives, jobs and freedoms.
It's supposed to be the left that thinks in terms of undermining their own to radicalize the population. And if you think their strategy is so great, look back at the last eight years and at the Democratic party ripping itself apart between the True Believers and the Power Brokers heading toward a brokered convention. Does anyone really want that for the Republican party?
Coulter may breezily wave her hands and treat 4 years of President Hillary Clinton or President B. Hussein Obama as nothing, but imagine the price our children will be paying for that kind of folly. But we don't have to imagine, all we have to do is tote up the consequences of the Carter administration in only 4 years.
Just 4 years.