Are you counting? My wife and I are two.

Among our reasons is that, unlike John McCain, Barack Obama does not seem scary to us. Though politically liberal he seems temperamentally moderate, safe and sane. Also among our reasons is that we feel that Mr. McCain is in denial regarding the nature and severity of America’s health-care financing crisis (even though we do not especially agree with Mr. Obama’s prescriptions). However, our real reason to support Mr. Obama regards the National Question, which is deadly serious to us.

According to Edwin S. Rubenstein, by the time of the 2012 election an actual majority of U.S. births will be nonwhite. Sliding racial demographics are probably not the only cause of our extraordinary national decline, for you and I each know enough recent immigrants to acknowledge that any U.S. citizen of any race can be a good American; but British statesman Enoch Powell was entirely right to observe that, when it comes to demographics, “numbers are of the essence.” There was absolutely nothing wrong with the United States’ demographic profile in 1960, Christian and 89 percent white, a uniquely successful profile that did not need altering. Yet, were one to judge by our immigration policies since 1960, one would think that we envied Brazil.

My wife and I believe that the sole available, effective political vehicle for traditional U.S. nationalism today is the Republican party. Moreover, we believe that the Republican party is a very good vehicle for this purpose—much better than the British Conservative party, the French UMP or even the German Christian Democratic party. However, the span of years remaining to us to save the United States from the fate of a Brazil grows short. We simply cannot spare the time for four or eight years of a McCain presidency followed by four or eight years, or more, of Democratic presidencies. We cannot let the McCainiacs hijack the Republican party now. We vitally need this party. We cannot do without it.

On current demographic trends, the decennial Congressional reapportionment of 2012 will favor traditional white America, for, as in 2002, representation will follow white flight from the coastal cities to the heartland. However, it will be the last reapportionment to do so, as by 2022 the dominant dynamic will be reapportionment to track the growth of the new ethnic minorities. An Obama presidency in 2009 may mean additional Republican governors and legislatures in 2011 to control the redistricting. This gives U.S. nationalists in 2012 a real chance—maybe our last real chance—to save the nation within the framework of our existing Constitution.

We blew it in the Republican Revolution of 1994. We could have saved the nation then, but we did not enough of us (including this writer) fully realize the significance of the chance. We dare not deliver this last chance into the hands of the McCainiacs and their unwitting leader Mr. McCain now.

Besides, Mr. Obama might surprise us. His politics are wrong, but he has the right stuff to be a good president. He just might be.

Things are trending our way, Daniel. Chris Cannon’s stunning primary loss in Provo, Utah, a week or two ago to an underfunded political unknown is a sign of the trend. Though I am a Pat Buchanan not a Ron Paul Republican, Ron Paul’s surprising showing in 2008 is another sign. Alaska is small and far away, but Gov. Sarah Palin’s wresting of the Alaska Republican party from the clutches of the Murkowskis is yet another. The corrupt Republican establishment has lost its clammy grip on the party. The ball is loose on the field, as it were. Mr. McCain must not be allowed to fall on it.

Mr. McCain represents too big a risk on too small a return. My wife and I shall probably vote Obama. I think that that makes us Obamacons.

Howard

Of course it disappoints *me* that he isn’t the candidate I thought he was, but my disappointment is tempered by the fact that I still consider his platform better than anything this country has seen in 30 years. And, for libertarians, he’s still sort of obviously better than McCain. For the incrementalists, that’s good enough.

And the point that needs making re: the fiscally moderate/fiscally conservative/socially conservative voters is the same point as ever: the war is deeply unpopular and McCain still supports it. There is no real way to capture un-support for the war with fiscal/social labels. My guess is there are a great many people frustrated with the war (and the Bush administration in general) who look at the two candidates and come to the staggeringly obvious conclusion that McCain is horrific and Obama is substantially less terrible.