STWR - Share The World's Resources

Don Monkerud ~ STWR Member

Senior columnist for WhatTheyThink.com

Why Bush Won

While the President declares that he has a "mandate" after a mere three percent margin in the popular vote, the Republican propaganda masters are bludgeoning the nation with "moral values" as the reason for Bush's victory.

Such assertions make good headlines-Americans tend to see issues in black and white, assuming that issues have simple solutions-but they tell us little about why people chose Bush over Kerry.

Polls should answer this question. The national campaigns spent $4 billion on the election and invested huge sums in polling voters' preferences. Unfortunately, polls support different positions, depending upon their configuration: Judgments based on the polls quickly follow.

David Brooks of the New York Times declared that liberals have lost touch with the country and there was "an upsurge of people with conservative policy views." Pat Buchanan declares that Bush won because he converted the election into "a triumphant and epic battle of the culture war."

Liberal Christian leaders contend that they need to find "a more moderate ground," while some Democratic leaders declare that the party needs "to become more spiritual and religious."

On the other hand, money-making evangelists and political operatives such as Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, and Ralph Reed, former executive director of the Christian Coalition, mobilized church goers to vote on the issues of abortion, school prayer and same-sex marriage. They claim this led to Bush's win-raising the question of taxing churches because of electioneering.

Returns from several major polls reveal that the moral high ground played less of a role in determining the winner than spin-masters claim, although these votes were essential to Bush's win. The same number of religiously motivated voters supported Bush as in 2000: ABC showed 12 percent of voters as conservative Christians in both races. So why did Bush win?

Mark Mellman, a pollster for the Kerry campaign, says, "Voters were not feeling sufficient pain to reject the incumbent." Bush's approval rating was not as strong as most re-elected incumbents, historically, but far higher than those who were defeated. Mellman found that voters were most concerned about health care, jobs and terrorism.

Each major issue played out in a different way. Health care was more about worry for the future than an immediate problem and, although Kerry spoke often about health care, the media ignored the issue to focus on the war. Concern over the war in Iraq revealed that 52 percent thought the invasion was a good idea and 50 percent thought it would make the U. S. safer. They objected because it became a mess.

Between conventions, the Swift Boat Veterans attacks undermined Kerry on the security issue. After an initial low-cost ad in a small area, the national media picked up the story and showed it repeatedly. Many more people saw the ad as a result. In the end, the ad undermined belief in Kerry's leadership, which played a large role in the list of reasons why people voted for Bush, according to Mellman.

"The Bush campaign had a strategy and they stuck to it," says Mellman. "They did little to develop a second-term agenda, and instead put all their efforts into tearing down Kerry-and they stuck to it."

Bush's approval wasn't high but Kerry could not capitalize on it, explained Morris Fiorina, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of The Cultural Wars. Bush was seen as moral, trustworthy and a strong and tough leader. "The Republicans did a good job of pinning the flip-flop label on Kerry," says Fiorina.

ABC News polls found that the election was primarily based on Bush's approval rating. Gary Langer, director of polling for ABC News, contends that no president has been re-elected, with the exception of Harry Truman, who had an approval rating below 50 percent. And no candidate lost re-election when consumer confidence was above average, as it is now.

"Why did Bush win?" asks Langer. "I would suggest one reason: 9/11. Voters say the country is safer now."

Instead of feeling disappointment at not winning the election, Kerry supporters should be patting themselves on the back. To mobilize such a large portion of the country against an incumbent is an accomplishment. If they can keep their forces together, they could well win the next time around. If anything, this election proves that you can't come out every four years and expect to make a difference-right-wing churches, corporate lobbyists and Karl Rove are on duty 24/7, 365 days a year.

For Republicans to be patting themselves on the back because of their superior moral values is likewise a big mistake. The country is not as conservative as they think, and they may not always be able to rely upon reactionary Christians and fear to win elections.

Copyright 2004

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Write comment