The voters are stupid because they watched the structural national debt grow and failed to demand that it stop.
Some actually believed the idea that cutting taxes somehow increases tax revenue. You know, the so-called "supply side" nonsense.
Others actually believed the budget can be balanced merely by cutting unspecified "fraud and waste", without any actual pain.
Too many are myopically selfish. Right now they are freaking out about raising the top marginal tax rate to 39%, screaming that it'll destroy the country, when in fact the top marginal rate has been higher for most of the past 100 years.
Most of them fail to notice that the deficit has
not in fact always continued to grow, and don't seem to distinguish between the govts that ran big deficits and those who ran small deficits.
See this chart, annual federal budget deficit as % of GDP.
http://traxel.com/deficit/deficit-percentage-50-years.png In some administrations, the deficit has been high. Very high during Reagan and Bush2, even though they supposedly presided over economic expansions, when the deficit should naturally tend to be lower. Also high during Carter and Bush1, more understandable since they presided during recessions, when the deficit should naturally tend to be higher. Fell and went into actual
surplus during Clinton, which is what
should happen during economic expansions.
The federal govt should tend to have a surplus during economic expansions, and a deficit during economic recessions. This is basically mechanical - tax revenues are naturally higher in expansions and lower in recessions. The result should allow the govt to play its "shock absorber" role - when the economy is in trouble, government spending helps cushion the downturn, and that money gets in effect paid back with increased tax collection when the economy is booming. That way, the government runs a balanced budget over the economic cycle.
But in two of the last three economic expansions (the 1980s and the 2000s) that has not happened. Deficits actually rose while the economy expanded, because the govt cut tax rates and increased spending. Only in the 1990s expansion did deficits actually decline, because the govt raised taxes and controlled spending.
Now, take 100 random voters in the US, how many do you think really understand the above? Let's even include those who may not agree w/ the above, but have carefully thought these issues through and arrived at a reasoned contrary opinion. I think it would be less than 20. The rest of them choose their govt based on he sounds like a patriotic American, he'd be a good guy to drink beer with, he's a good Christian, she looks hot and can butcher an elk, he's got a weird name, and other stupid irrelevancies.
That's why I think voters, as a group, are stupid. Not singling out any individual here, the fact that PPOT'ers here actually seek out discussion on these things makes them a "cut above" in my view.
See for more charts
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2004/biggest_deficit_in_history_yes_and_no.html