Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
For all the talk about the "values voter," Pew Research has some interesting data from their latest poll:
With voters continuing to focus on economic issues, Barack Obama holds a slim 49% to 45% advantage over Mitt Romney in the latest Pew Research Center survey of nearly 2,400 registered voters nationwide. Obama’s lead has narrowed since last month, when he had a 12-point advantage, though it is comparable to margins from earlier this year.
More than eight-in-ten voters say the economy (86%) and jobs (84%) are very important issues in deciding who to vote for this fall. Roughly three-quarters also cite the federal budget deficit (74%), health care (74%) and education (72%) as top voting priorities. Near the bottom of the list are some of the hot-button social issues. Just 28% say that gay marriage is a very important issue, and 34% rate birth control as a top issue.
Not really surprising, with 8+% unemployment. But the list is still worth looking at:
As Ricochet's resident squish, I have to say that this ranking is pretty close to my own. I'd move taxes up, along with immigration and Iran. I'd move Medicare down (unless dismantling it counts as "high ranking concern") and I'd drop gun control to way down the list. You can't really measure my lack of interest -- or agitation, in either direction -- for birth control or gay marriage, unless you've got a very powerful microscope.
If these rankings hold, though, how is that bad for Romney?
- Comment (44)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
Comments:
May '11
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
Rob Long:
If these rankings hold, though, how is that bad for Romney? · · 1 minute ago
Depends on how bad the economy is and Obama and Romney's respective numbers on the economy. I recently saw a poll somewhere that had people believing Romney more credible on the economy by a ten-twelve point margin. Of course, it all depends on who believes what is important. If those 34% who believe birth control is important are mostly just limousine liberals in San Francisco, it's no big deal; if it's an important swing constituency (say, Catholics in Pennsylvania), it could very well be crucial. It also depends what specifically these people believe about the issue; if they mostly feel strongly that employers should be forced to pay for birth control, it helps Obama; if they believe in economic and religious liberty, it's probably good for Romney.
Apr '11
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
Only if the values voters only come to vote when gay marriage, abortion, and such things are on the ballot. The thing is though I bet they care about the economy too and they probably think more like Romney than Obama on economic matters...
Their problem is they are loosing the culture and you and I with our apathetic feelings on social issues don't come out to help them vote for their causes when they need our help because we don't care about the outcome. They on the other hand also care about our economic problems....maybe we owe them a bit more solidarity? (just to show we are team players)
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
I can't quite tell where "religious freedom" is on that graph. Are my eyes failing me? I know it's one of the most important electoral issues out there this year but I can't quite make it out. Can someone help me out?
Sep '11
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
When are they going to focus these polls on "likely voters" as opposed to "registered voters"? I'd bet that some of the results change.
Jun '10
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
If I was a gas water heater, I'd worry only about getting enough gas, water, and electricity, but I'm not a gas water heater. I'm a human being and a child of God. And as such, if I'm in conflict with my Heavenly Father (on "social issues,") then no amount of prosperity will make me either happy or healthy. But if I'm in tune with God, as best I can be, then all my other problems become much easier to bear, and easier to help others bear. So, first things first. Don't expect to be at peace while surrounded by the evil of abortion, for example.
Mar '11
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
Or even better, which issues are important to the "persuadable" swing voters Rob keeps harping about? I would imagine that the social issues drop completely off the map for that cohort.
May '10
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
I'm with Mollie on this one. Pew is manipulating quite a lot with its list. That list is far too tame to describe what I consider to be at stake. I mistrust the poll and resent the dumbing down of the issues into some inane grocery list.
Far more interesting and useful would be gauging the country's appetite for European-style statist solutions to the nation's problems.
As I fought my way through the bong smoke, and past the greasy drumming hippies and red-faced union thugs clogging the downtown streets of San Francisco today at lunchtime as they shouted their incoherent fury at the forces of capitalism, it struck me that we are back to the 1972 election, except McGovern has the incumbent's advantage and his chances look a lot better somehow with Archie Bunker finally locking arms with Meathead.
Edited on April 25, 2012 at 12:12amJun '10
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
I, for one, would rate abortion and gay marriage higher on the list. But both are largely irrelevant in the presidential race.
Gay marriage has devolved to a state by state issue and abortion, for the foreseeable future, is in the hands of the Supreme Court. Certainly the winner of the presidential race will play a role in picking future justices, but that's a long-term play and lacks the immediacy of 8+% unemployment.
The President can, however, play an important role in economic issues: that's why they're the ones that will be most important in the the presidential race.
Edited on April 25, 2012 at 12:16amDec '11
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
"Who really cares? " is almost a trick question. In life there are temporary solutions and long term solutions. For instance is a parent caring when he or she gives a child what they want to stop them crying or a parent who says, "No" and lets the child learn they must wait. I feel Democrats are the former. They can point at the "solutions" they have come up with but never realize the consequences of those actions. One example is the student loan crisis. Helping people go to college is wonderful but saddling them with $100,000 debts is not a beautiful thing. If conservatives can give concrete examples of liberal "solutions" such as Detroit, California, and education I don't see how we can lose. But if conservatives are portrayed as the anti-education and anti-poor party who does not care for the 99% we are doomed.
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
This election is Mitt Romney's to lose. Move from registered voters to likely voters and he is ahead. Move closer to November, and he will be in landslide territory if he knows how (this is the kicker) to take the issues that worry people and relate them to first principles. If he runs as a possible CEO, he will squander all of his advantages. If he runs as a man of principle against a man with bad and disastrous principles, he will win in the manner of Reagan in 1980.
So the real question is this: Will Romney imitate Dole and McCain and hope that it falls into his lap, or will he make this a referendum on the administrative entitlements state? Voters are attracted to strength, not to weakness.
Jan '11
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
The president doesn't decide social issues. If they're decided by government at all, they're decided by the Supreme Court, to which the president makes nominations. But, pro-life as I am, I don't want any president to nominate a judge to ramrod a decision to a particular result. Instead, we want the president to push nominees who follow a consistent, coherent, and reasonable legal approach - and at that point, we have to trust reason to do its work.
Social issues do play a role in choosing a president, but they're not nearly as immediate as the president's other jobs ... national defense, or implementing an economic policy. The social issues are mostly (not all, but mostly) dictated by the Supreme Court.
Of course, if things were as they really should be, the Supreme Court shouldn't play so large a role, either. Those issues should be decided as locally as possible, and shouldn't be hijacked by the hazy penumbras and emanations that 5 lawyers use to dictate morality when they feel the need to "enlighten" us about morality.
Apr '11
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
"Birth Control". If you follow the link, it's the issue with the biggest gender divide; 40% of women think it's a big issue, compared to, if I remember correctly, 43% on abortion, which is near parity on genders. Given that the biggest religious liberty issue this election is birth control, I don't blame them for having it as a single entry.
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
I'm pretty sure the left cares immensely about social issues, otherwise they wouldn't instigate confrontations with people of faith in general and the Catholic Church in particular, nor would they have launched the whole war on women theme, etc.
The result is that the right won't have to bring these issues up because the left will haul out that bit of weaponry ... and then shoot themselves in the foot as they did in their attack on "stay at home moms." A Hill poll, released yesterday, I think, concludes:
The economy will take front and center, and rightly so. But when the left picks a fight on cultural issues, it does so with a tin ear and becomes its own victim. May it always be so.
Apr '11
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
Mendel
Or even better, which issues are important to the "persuadable" swing voters Rob keeps harping about? I would imagine that the social issues drop completely off the map for that cohort. · 1 hour ago
In Ohio/ Pennsylvania? Heck, no. The suburban fiscal conservatives are already solid GOP votes. It's the pro-life union members who need to be won, and won despite a strongly anti-union message. Senator John Ashcroft electing Missouri is, likewise, more Romney friendly socially than fiscally.
In Virginia? Well, maybe, but Virginia's not a state that's going to be won by the persuadables so much as warring bases in the North and South. Is the base likely to turn out based on social issues? Could anyone out there give me a "Heck, yeah!"?
North Carolina's much like Virginia, while Nevada has elements of both the Mid-West and elements of the yuppified South. Florida, I've never really understood.
We need Mid-Western Catholic churches pumping out religious liberty minded women to win this.
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
Dan
Rob Long:
If these rankings hold, though, how is that bad for Romney? · · 1 minute ago
Depends on how bad the economy is and Obama and Romney's respective numbers on the economy. I recently saw a poll somewhere that had people believing Romney more credible on the economy by a ten-twelve point margin. Of course, it all depends on who believes what is important. If those 34% who believe birth control is important are mostly just limousine liberals in San Francisco, it's no big deal; if it's an important swing constituency (say, Catholics in Pennsylvania), it could very well be crucial. It also depends what specifically these people believe about the issue; if they mostly feel strongly that employers should be forced to pay for birth control, it helps Obama; if they believe in economic and religious liberty, it's probably good for Romney. · 2 hours ago
Good point.
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
Trace Urdan: I'm with Mollie on this one. Pew is manipulating quite a lot with its list. That list is far too tame to describe what I consider to be at stake. I mistrust the poll and resent the dumbing down of the issues into some inane grocery list.
Far more interesting and useful would be gauging the country's appetite for European-style statist solutions to the nation's problems.
As I fought my way through the bong smoke, and past the greasy drumming hippies and red-faced union thugs clogging the downtown streets of San Francisco today at lunchtime as they shouted their incoherent fury at the forces of capitalism, it struck me that we are back to the 1972 election, except McGovern has the incumbent's advantage and his chances look a lot better somehow with Archie Bunker finally locking arms with Meathead. · 1 hour ago
Edited 1 hour ago
Trace! I love this! I have a perfect image of you walking the street, in your Don Draper suit, snarling at the hobos and yippies.
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
I think this is an almost perfectly succinct summary of what the media is calling the "values voter." It's also really persuasive. I wish the liberals could hear that, and respect it.
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
Paul A. Rahe: This election is Mitt Romney's to lose. Move from registered voters to likely voters and he is ahead. Move closer to November, and he will be in landslide territory if he knows how (this is the kicker) to take the issues that worry people and relate them to first principles. If he runs as a possible CEO, he will squander all of his advantages. If he runs as a man of principle against a man with bad and disastrous principles, he will win in the manner of Reagan in 1980.
So the real question is this: Will Romney imitate Dole and McCain and hope that it falls into his lap, or will he make this a referendum on the administrative entitlements state? Voters are attracted to strength, not to weakness. · 1 hour ago
That's the real question, isn't it, Paul? Will Romney run on big change, or will he try to play it safe? If the latter, then even if he wins he'll be hamstrung and stymied throughout his term.
Mar '11
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
James Of England
In Ohio/ Pennsylvania? Heck, no. The suburban fiscal conservatives are already solid GOP votes. It's the pro-life union members who need to be won, and won despite a strongly anti-union message. Senator John Ashcroft electing Missouri is, likewise, more Romney friendly socially than fiscally.
Thanks, James, for again providing some granular examples to my general ponderings. The devil truly is in the details when the Electoral College gets involved.
But I have to wonder: will Reagan Democrat-type voters in the Midwest really be persuaded by social issues when the candidate looks like the anonymous suit that closed all the plants?
Mar '11
Re: Who Really Cares About Social Issues?
Paul A. Rahe:
Will Romney imitate Dole and McCain and hope that it falls into his lap, or will he make this a referendum on the administrative entitlements state? Voters are attracted to strength, not to weakness.
This call for a big Romney reform package has been growing on Ricochet, and I have to object. Romney is often an awkward candidate, and he campaigns best when he plays to his own personal strengths.
And while Romney certainly seems to have many strengths, championing big bold ideas does not seem to belong to his quiver (please correct me if I'm wrong, James).
Voters may be attracted to strength, but are also repulsed by obvious fakers.
Rob Long
Will Romney run onbig change, or will he try to play it safe? If the latter, then even if he wins he'll be hamstrung and stymied throughout his term.
Any Republican president gunning for big changes in the next term would be hamstrung because there is nowhere near enough public support yet. Bush ran and won in 2004 on Social Security reform, but without public acquiesence that mandate and $3.50 was barely enough to buy him a non-alcoholic beer.