I originally linked to the post on The Flight 93 Election here which is a post you really ought to read. The writer, who goes under the pseudonym Publius Decius Mus, has now written a follow-up which is even better since because of the wide circulation of the original, has attracted an immense amount of criticism. This he titles, Restatement on Flight 93 where he picks up the various criticisms of the first article and replies to them one by one in ascending order of importance. This is where the article leads, but all of it should be read:
If Hillary wins, there will still be a country, in the sense of a geographic territory with a people, a government, and various institutions. Things will mostly look the same, just as—outwardly—Rome changed little on the ascension of Augustus. It will not be tyranny or Caesarism—not yet. But it will represent, in my view, an irreversible triumph for the administrative state. Consider that no president has been denied reelection since 1992. If we can’t beat the Democrats now, what makes anyone think we could in 2020, when they will have all the advantages of incumbency plus four more years of demographic change in their favor? And if we can’t win in 2016 or 2020, what reason is there to hope for 2024? Will the electorate be more Republican? More conservative? Will constitutional norms be stronger?
The country will go on, but it will not be a constitutional republic. It will be a blue state on a national scale. Only one party will really matter. A Republican may win now and again—once in a generation, perhaps—but only a neutered one who has “updated” all his positions so as to be more in tune with the new electorate. I.e., who has done exactly what the Left has for years been concern-trolling us to do: move left and become more like them. Yet another irony: the “conservatives” who object to Trump as too liberal are working to guarantee that only a Republican far more liberal than Trump could ever win the presidency again.
It is a depressing article but what do you know that makes what he describes seem anything other than the most likely outcome we face?