You said that.....
The last election did have a little to do with terrorism and Iraq, but I still think the real divider was gay marriage and abortion. God forbid you love someone or have a uterus in this country. I say that although "Values" was largely touted by the Corporate media directly following the elections (see Fox News jump on Moral Values here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,137535,00.html ), further more cogent analysis and evaluation showed that it was really combined Foreign Policy issues that determined who ended up in the White House.
"What one issue mattered most to you in deciding how you voted for president?" Open-ended. Multiple responses accepted. Asked of Bush and Kerry voters. Form 1 (N=569).
27% Iraq/The war
14% Economy/Jobs
9% Moral values
9% Terrorism/Security
5% Honesty/Integrity
5% Other Bush
4% Other Kerry
4% Health care
3% Abortion
3% Direction of the country
2% Candidate's religiosity, morals
2% Strength/Leadership
2% Foreign policy
2% Gay marriage/Marriage
2% Don't change course
15% Unsure/Nothing/Everything
"Which ONE issue mattered most to you in deciding how you voted for president . . . ?" Respondents read list of options below. Options rotated. Asked of Bush and Kerry voters. Form 2 (N=567).
ALL VOTERS/ BUSH VOTERS/ KERRY VOTERS
Voters
% % %
Moral values
27 44 7
Iraq
22 11 34
Economy/Jobs
21 7 36
Terrorism
14 24 3
Health care
4 1 8
Education
4 2 6
Taxes
3 4 2
Other (vol.)
4 5 3
Unsure
1 2 1
http://www.pollingreport.com/2004.htmAdd terrorism and War in Iraq and see if it adds up to more than "Values". Go to the link and read the following 2 pages article in full and you will better understand the manufactured myth of "value voters" vs. the reality of "Poll wording" and mass propaganda. The Anatomy of a Myth
How did one exit poll answer become the story of how Bush won? Good question. The Big Political Idea of the '04 election goes something like this: "Moral values" turned out to be the most important issue to voters, not the economy or the Iraq war or terrorism. President Bush won because a legion of "values voters" -- whose growing numbers escaped the attention of an inattentive media -- preferred him. The Democrats are doomed until they can woo the voters who belong to this new political force.
It's a neat theory -- but wrong. How it came to be regarded as the real story of Bush's victory is a fascinating and sobering example of journalism's quest for freshness and surprise.
Here's the simple fact: The evidence that moral values determined the election rests on a single dodgy exit poll question. And it's not at all clear that more voters are preoccupied with moral values now than were fretting about "family values" on Election Day 1996, when exit pollsters included that phrase in a question about "priorities for the new administration." But in the often arid and repetitive arena of American political ideas, fun new contestants can be hard to disqualify. The myth of the moral values election is proving hard to snuff out.
snip
If the national exit poll had been worded differently, moral values would not have been the top issue and this argument wouldn't be happening.
If, for example, one of the choices on the exit poll list combined "terrorism" and "Iraq," it probably would have been the top concern and nobody would be talking about moral values.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34783-2004Dec4.html Even the conservative Think tank Org, The CATO Institute figured the phenomenon of poll labeling to push an agenda.
Did gay marriage boost Bush? Some analysts jumped to the conclusion that the 11 state initiatives to ban gay marriage helped Bush win by drawing more Christian conservatives to the polls. It's true that states with such initiatives voted for Bush at higher rates than other states, but that's mostly because the bans were proposed in conservative states. In fact, Bush's share of the vote rose just slightly less in the marriage-ban states than in the other states. Note also that 60 percent of respondents in the exit poll said that they supported either gay marriage or civil unions. And the youngest voters— the future electorate—supported marriage much more strongly than older voters.
Was it a "moral values" election? A broader claim grew out of the exit polls showing that more voters chose "moral values" than anything else as their most important issue. But that claim also fails careful analysis. Yes, 22 percent of exit-poll respondents chose "moral values" as their top concern, compared with "economy/jobs" at 20 percent, terrorism at 19 percent, Iraq at 15 percent, health care at 8 percent, and taxes at 5 percent. But "moral values" was in first place because of the poll design. If Iraq and terrorism were combined, they would have had 34 percent. A single item for "economy, jobs, and taxes" would have had 25 percent. In addition, of course, it's not clear what "moral values" means. The Los Angeles Times exit poll, which asks the question a different way, found that 40 percent of voters surveyed selected "moral/ethical values" as one of their two most important issues in 2004—the same percentage as in 1996, when they reelected Bill Clinton.
It's terrorism, stupid. The most important number in the exit polls was this: 60 percent of respondents said they trusted Bush to handle terrorism, while only 40 percent trusted Kerry. You can't win a post-9/11 election if only 40 percent of voters trust you to protect them against terrorists; people may not be happy with the war in Iraq, but they thought terrorism was the bigger issue.
http://www.cato.org/research/articles/boaz-050201.html--------------------
And although I like your style, I do believe that a Clark/Warner ticket would be more appropriate under this nation's circumstances. Let Clark, the elder, work the International issues and re-evaluate the Porky Defense Budget priorities as Commander in Chief, and let Mark Warner, the younger, use his bi-partisan moderate corporate appeal to some real negotiating with the Senate to get some domestic things done with the excess "defense pork" that Clark could free up...this while Warner bones up on this Foreign policy creds as VP for when he runs for Prez. :)
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
