A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics
|
|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics | |
|
November 13, 2006Early Analysis: Is the "Gay" Marriage between Evangelicals and the Republicans OverBy now I'm sure you've all heard that the Democrats did ok on election night. Out there in Christendom the question is: Did the Dems make gains with "value voters"? There are plenty of thoughts on this. Here's a nice summary of the issues (done just after the election). The nexus of religion and politics is the most persistent and controversial storyline in American public life since Ronald Reagan was elected president in 1980 with massive support from the newly mobilized “religious right.” Democratic victories in the 2006 midterm elections may open a new era by redefining the relationship between religious faith and political policies and campaigns. Some other tidbits (below): While the national voting patterns of religious Americans were not significantly different from the last midterm elections, Democrats turned the tide among white evangelicals and Catholics in both states, according to John Green, a senior fellow at the Pew Center on Religion and Public Life Jim Dobson is po'd at the GOP. Values Voters are not going to carry the water for And Jim Wallis gloats (a bit) This is the way forward: a grand new alliance between liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, one that can end partisan gridlock and involves working together for real solutions to pressing problems. So who cares? Well if you believe this analysis of the electorate then we're talking about up to a third of the electorate. Posted by c3 at November 13, 2006 11:21 PMComments
Jon Swift argues that there's still time for Republicans to save the institution of marriage. He's calling for them to pass the Defense of Britney's Marriage Act: When Republicans tried to pass the Federal Marriage Amendment last summer, their aim was to protect the institution of marriage, which is the basic building block of our society, from being destroyed by gay marriage. But if Republicans really want to save the institution of holy matrimony, they should start by saving Britney's marriage. There is one more lame-duck session of Congress left before the Democrats take over so this may be our last chance to stop this divorce and the copy-cat divorces that are sure to follow. I can only pray that Congress acts in time to pass this absolutely necessary piece of legislation. The future of Western civilization itself hangs in the balance. Posted by: nicrivera at November 14, 2006 12:11 AMI hear Rush and Newt are on the committee. Posted by: Marcus at November 14, 2006 02:00 AMNo relationship ever stays the same size, it's always either growing or shrinking. IMO, so long as abortion is there as a wedge social issue, it serves to keep most socons in the GOP. This does not mean that the religious folks on the left won't find common cause with those on the right from time to time. Such as war, the environment, social programs for the poor and the elderly. Most socons currently have a choice between the GOP and the wilderness. However, only a foolish politician would assume that they can count on the undying devotion of any group. Times change, and priorities along with them, and wedge issues along with them. The more momentus the times in the eyes of the people (war, economic upheaval, disaster, serious government malfunctioning or malfeasance), the less likely abortion floats to the top as one of a handful of crucial issues. The abortion debate is old enough and familiar enought to most Americans that it feels like an abstraction, at least comparatively speaking (I don't want to get sidetracked into a debate about whether it's an abstract versus concrete issue, obviously lives and nascent lives are at stake for anyone in the midst of an unwanted pregnancy). That means that its importance swells when we have the relative luxury of time to debate it seriously once again, because more concrete pressing matters are under control. And hey, what's a "values" voter? If you asked 1000 people whether or not their personal values affected how they voted, wouldn't 1000 people say that they did? The more amorphous the construct, the less predictive utility it has. I'm not convinced the folks trying to measure such stuff know what they are measuring or are able to consistently gauge the same thing. Even if you ask the exact same question every year for 20 years, that doesn't gauarantee you are gauging the same thing, because if peoples views change, the meaning of the question itself can change. People may answer the question that they believe they are being asked, or the one that they think should be asked. Posted by: bk at November 14, 2006 11:12 AMBrian; And hey, what's a "values" voter? Someone who has the same values of the pollster (or the group underwriting the poll). Posted by: c3 at November 14, 2006 01:40 PM would that be a "back door" pollster? Posted by: Marcus at November 15, 2006 04:47 PMI've always felt that the gay marriage issue was the backup issue for when abortion was not a federal issue anymore. Granted, my skepticism has always been high on the GOP's embracing of religion. I have always felt it was more of a Machiavellian idea to get votes then actually caring about implementing these ideas. (Disclaimer: I am not saying this about all the GOP. I am talking about leadership and political strategists. There are genuine politicians who do believe in these issues) What I wonder now is if the Evangelicals are starting to think about GOP actions in the same way. Maybe throwing a bone won't be enough now. I doubt they go vote Democrat; but I could see them not voting. Posted by: Jim M at November 15, 2006 10:15 PMHi, there is great site! Thanks a lot for you job. Hi, there is great site! Thanks a lot for you job. Hi, there is great site! Thanks a lot for you google job. Hi, there is great site! Thanks a lot for you google job. Hi, there is great site! Thanks a lot for you google job. |
Archives
February 2008
January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Three Quotes
The Choice, Based on Iraq Policy Even More Of A Surprise Castro Bows Out Kosovo Declares Independence Will Obama Take McCain's Funding Dare? Global Poverty Act Preservation Friday Band Taking on Obama Electoral Results Came Out As Expected?!?
|
