The day after the election, the talking heads were dumbfounded. The issue that tipped the election in George Bush's favor wasn't the war on terror. That was the third place issue. Bush did prevail on that matter, to the tune of 86% to 14%. It was no surprise that the economy was a major issue, but it come in at second place, just one point above terrorism. It was no surprise that this was Kerry's issue. On the economy, Kerry prevailed over Bush 80% to 18%. Healthcare and education were also Kerry winners, but they were way down the list at fifth and seventh place respectively.
No, the issue which caused Bush to prevail was "moral values." On moral values, Bush prevailed 79% to 18%. Given that married men and women as a group, preferred Bush 56% to 43%, and that those who attended religious services weekly preferred Bush 60% to 39%, and that Bush not only has never been shy about his own religious experience and has actively courted religious citizens, it is no wonder that Bush was propelled into a second term by voters who listed their top concern of the election "moral values."
But how to read this? What are the "moral values" that voters were concerned about? In what way did these nebulous "moral values" move voters to prefer Bush over Kerry by such margins that these voters decided the election? And why were the media pundits caught with "deer-in-the-headlight" expressions Thursday morning?
In looking at the election in broad terms, one notices that eleven states had voter referenda on the issue of gay marriage. Eleven states voted by overwhelming margins to ban gay marriage in their states, some of the states voting these bans into their state constitutions. One also notices the timing of Chief Justice William Rehnquist's critical bout with cancer. News of this broke mere days before the election. It seems clear that at least two of the issues comprising the amorphous term "moral values" had to do with issues of marriage and the makeup of the Supreme Court, and the latter issue comprises issues surrounding marriage, abortion and religious freedoms.
In other words, it seems clear to me that the moral values to which these exit polls refer are these: the upholding and support of traditional structures of marriage, the fight for the life and rights of the unborn, and the fight against judicial suppression of the freedom of religious expression. In the last several months, all these "moral value" issues have played out in our nation: the passage of the partial birth abortion ban and its subsequent annulment by the courts, the fight to remove the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, and the forcing by judicial fiat of gay marriage on a populace that doesn't approve of it. The moral values of life, marriage, and freedom of religion, it seems to me, were the keys to Bush's reelection.
Life issues encompass the various matters related to the beginnings and endings of life: advocating for the rights of the unborn, prohibiting embryonic stem cell research, and resisting euthanasia. Life issues did not encompass support for abortion-on-demand and a woman's right to choose it, because those who advocate for that in large part cast their votes for Kerry.
Another of the moral values these voters found to be important enough to put Bush back in office was the upholding and protection of traditional marriage and family. Although Bush supporters may have been disappointed with their president that he did not fight for the marriage amendment to the Constitution as he seemed to indicate he would, it's not as though Bush hadn't done anything else for traditional families, not the least of which was tax relief. These moral issues voters, though, put the country and Bush on notice: marriage is only between a man and woman. Period.
But moral issues voters also know that these twin concerns are being attacked by judges who are intent on pushing not merely a secular values system on the nation, but an anti-religious one. I am absolutely certain that Rehnquist's health was one of the major catalysts for getting out the moral issues voters. This was their wakeup call. If they wanted to entertain any hope of seeing the values they live their lives by protected, they needed a president in office who had pledged to appoint judges who interpreted the Constitution strictly.
It's not as though the rest of the country didn't vote their values, or that they don't have any. But clearly, their values differ from the moral values voters either in content or in importance. I have friends who are pro-life but anti-Iraq-war. Some of them may well have pulled the lever for Kerry. Why? Did they not really believe in supporting the unborn? No. They had to prioritize their values, and when it came to voting, they put their war concerns over concerns about abortion. It's not as though moral values voters are the only ones who believe in traditional marriage, but there are voters who believe traditional marriage is the norm yet still pulled the lever for Kerry. Why? They prioritized a different value over their valuing of traditional marriage. Maybe that value was a libertarian tolerance of different moral values. Maybe that value was civil rights. Who knows.
The point though is this: moral values voters decided, when push came to shove, they were going to place their moral values as the priority upon which to vote. And in that, they showed the single moral value which differentiates them from the rest of the nation: moral values come before anything else.
And that last is why the rest of the nation, and the so-called "liberal media elite," had such expressions of utter bewilderment. They have moral values, too, different though they may be on some of these issues. But their moral values are ranked differently. And one of those rankings put moral values themselves further down the list than other concerns.
In other words, it's not merely the content of the moral values that differed, but rather the value of moral values themselves. Those who ranked moral values as central to this election not only outnumber those who didn't, they also rank moral values--of protecting the life of the unborn, of promoting and supporting traditional marriage and family, of valuing and protecting religious expression inthe public square--as central to life. And that, that, is the issue that tipped this election.
Posted by Clifton at November 5, 2004 05:55 AM | TrackBack