Sunday, November 28, 2004
(6:15 AM) | Anonymous:
The People Have Spoke: the Real Message of 2004
What I took from the exit pollsArguments are sure to rage as to why John Kerry lost the race: he was too liberal, or too centrist. He was insufficiently idealistic, or charismatic, or lacked a "spiritual" message to attract that 22% of the electorate who supposedly voted their morals. Unfortunately, these arguments miss the real message of the 2004 presidential election. The key to understanding why Kerry lost, and why Bush won, can be gleaned from the fact that Bush swept the creationist vote. Not significant in absolute numbers, perhaps, but very significant in symbolic terms. The creationist is an individual, remember, who rejects science, the scientific method, the overwhelming consensus of the scientific community, and, indeed, the evidence before his very eyes. For the creationist, belief and conviction trump reality. Bush won because he mastered the technique of appealing to the voter who has the capacity to deny reality. And though he made a few feeble attempts, Kerry was simply outclassed in the reality-denial arena.
Bush also did very well among confused voters; those who mistakenly thought their candidate supported US participation in the International Criminal Court, the banning of land mines, and US participation in the Kyoto accords. Bush, likewise, won the votes of those who mistakenly believed that weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq; and those who mistakenly thought Saddam Hussein had been implicated in the 9/11 attack. Bush also did well with voters who were sure that the occupation of Iraq had progressed swimmingly, and that any news to the contrary was merely the product of a liberal conspiracy.
Voters who deem the mainstream news media "biased," and who therefore turn to Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly and Fox News for their information, went heavily for Bush.
The pro-life vote strongly favored Bush, somehow ignoring his direct involvement in the deaths of 100,000 Iraqis, mostly women and children, only a tiny minority of whom had ever raised a hand against America. Pro-lifers apparently distinguish between proactive and retroactive abortions, such that abortions you perform on fully living humans are not held against you.
Bush’s "I trust you with your money" message resonated with a large segment of the electorate, especially when it was clear to them that they were being trusted with their children’s money as well. Similarly, Bush’s anti-tax message was especially well-received in many western states; states that receive, on average, $1.30 in federal revenues for every $1.00 they contribute in federal taxes.
White males who asserted that white males, at least, have a "God-given right" to keep and bear assault weapons for self-protection and for hunting, went strongly for Bush. These supporters, however, have so far failed to address the question of why God doesn’t extend the same right to foreign visitors.
The evangelical voter, who is rabidly pro-Israel in the expectation that the Second Coming of Christ will be speeded by a Jewish occupation of the entire biblical Holy Land, also went for Bush. On the other hand, American Jews, the segment of the electorate likely to be the best informed on the Middle East and with the best grasp of Israel’s long term interests, voted for Kerry.
Running a campaign that promised to be strong against terrorism, Bush won resoundingly in states like Utah, Montana, Wyoming; states that will never, ever experience a terrorist attack–except, maybe, one perpetrated by homegrown terrorist like Timothy McVeigh. Bush resoundingly lost in New York City and Washington DC, areas that have been, and are likely to be, targets in the future.
Bush won the support of voters who expressed moral outrage over Janet Jackson’s bare breast or over semen stains on Monica Lewinski’s dress, but who experienced no moral misgivings over the shock and awe bombing of a largely civilian population.
Owners of Humvees and other gas guzzlers went for Bush, whole-heartedly embracing the Bush administration tacit assumptions that 4% of the world’s population has every right to consume 25% of its oil production; that dependence on foreign oil, a ballooning foreign trade deficit, and global warming in no way compromise our national security.
The faction of the population that bases its presidential choice on who would make the best dinner companion voted for Bush. It is worth noting in this context that Slobodan Milosevic, too, was enormously and personally popular among his Christian base; the same Slobodan Milosevic who is currently on trial for committing war crimes against Muslims.
Bush scored with blue collar voters, persuading them to vote against their own economic self interest. His victory makes it more likely that the blue collar family will lose its health care insurance over the next four years.
Rural areas--from whence young homosexuals flee in droves--voted solidly for Bush. The President’s strong stand against gay marriage undoubtedly played an important role in carrying the rural vote. Conversely, cities, where people have actual contact with actual gays and actually survive to talk about it, went for Kerry.
Pledging to uphold the sanctity of marriage as it now exists, Bush easily won the southern Bible belt, where the divorce rates are among the highest nationwide.
Bush lost the majority vote of newspaper editorial boards, even some traditionally Republican-leaning ones that had endorsed him four years earlier.
Bush won resoundingly among the high school dropout crowd. He lost just as resoundingly among those with post-college education.
In sum, George W. Bush did very well among the voters who deny, avoid or are ignorant of reality. The more you actually knew--rather than merely intuited--the more likely you were to vote for Kerry. By extension, Republicans like George W. Bush can hope to succeed only as long as the electorate can be kept ignorant, misinformed, focused on trivia and insulated from the consequences of its own short-sightedness and a growing international contempt.
Some people will suggest that this is cause for optimism. Others, like Karl Rove, will see it as the glide path to perpetual victory.
