If George W. Bush wasn’t catering to the right wing with social issues, would this election be as tight as this?
Oh yeah. I think Karl Rove decided to make gay marriage an issue around last January to distract people from the economy and Iraq. I mean, the gay marriage amendment got press out of nowhere.
That is not exactly what I meant.
The election so far is pretty much a toss up. Depending on which poll you look at it could go either way. I know a number of people who voted for Bush last time who have decided not to vote for him this time in part because of the social issues. What I am wondering is do these issues actually buy him any votes he wouldn’t have gotten otherwise, or would it be sewn up for him if he left them alone.
What it comes down to is whether he would gain more support from generally libertarian leaning people than he would lose from the far right if he, say, came out in favor of gay marriage (or, at the least, a national civil union policy).
I would tend to say he would have a net loss of support, especially once you start getting involved with the more touchy social issues like abortion. I think he also appears farther to the right in the public perception of his non-social policies than he did four years ago, so his ability to attract from the middle would be somewhat more limited in that respect anyways.
Incidentally, I think Bush coming out in favor of, say, gay marriage would have been even more of a distraction from the Iraq situation than the current gay marriage debate - imagine how hard he’d be getting flamed by the far right, how some elements of the moderate left would all of a sudden have no clue about him, and just generally how many mixed messages some significant social liberalism would send given all of his other policies 
-K.
I can say that it’s the conservative social issues that will never make me never even consider voting for Bush (or probably any Republican). Until the party slips out from under the grip of the religious right, there’s no chance I’ll ever be a swing voter.
So, to answer the OP, I bet there’s a lot of folks like me who might at least consider voting for Bush if it weren’t for these issues, and Bush is losing some percentage of these people as a result.
It is also NO coincidence that gay marriage is appearing on the ballot in several battleground states. Ohio is one of those states. I’m guessing Rove and the Republicans decided to try to bring this issue because they were worried that people who had lost their jobs during the Bush recession might be tempted to vote for a challenger. Most of these people are social conservatives.
However, there is a bit of a danger here. Most people don’t wake up in the morning worried about gay marriage. They are far more concerned about jobs, the economy, and the terror threat.
I meant “…it’s the conservative social issues that will make me never even consider…”
It’s a good question. Keeping in mind that George Bush could say nothing on the subject of either gay rights or abortion, and, if asked, say things like
Hypothetical Bush from an Alternate Universe:
He could say similar things about being a devout Christian and seeing Christian values reflected in law. And most of the social-conservative folks who indicate they’ll vote Bush would vote Bush if he said that kind of thing.
But he doesn’t do those things. So he picks up the votes of the really reactionary religious far-right who’d sit on their hands this fall if he hadn’t pandered to them, at the expense of those who will either sit out voting for him or actively vote against him for precisely these social-conservative policies and tone he’s set. Net gain or net loss for Bush?
I hope, for the sake of our country, that appeals of this nature = net loss. Please.
I was wondering about this too… why so much attention to the conservative vote?
I imagine that anyone that considers themselves from the Religious Right or very religious would not think of voting for Kerry. Still Bush keeps pressing abortion and gay marriage in order to please these “key” voters… so Bush pleases these anti-gay and anti-abortion crowd that are very likely to vote for him anyway ! Wierd. Any reason ?
Trying to slap a constitutional amendement on Gay marriage was way over the line though... and I bet that cost Bush many votes. Answering the OP... the race would be tight anyway... but its become way more tight than it would have been otherwise if Bush hadn't come across so strongly on these issues.I understood what you meant in the OP, I just disagree. I think the ultra-conservative positions are, on balance, helping.
First, they’re helping because they are a distraction from the economy and Iraq (well, gay marriage is, anyway).
Second, they help because people that are one-issue voters tend to be social issue voters. That is, someone against gay marriage is much more likely to be a one-issue voter than someone who thinks the deficit is too big, or that the tax cuts were a payback to rich supporters. They also get out the vote - if there’s a gay marriage referendum on the ballot, I disagree with dalej42 - that’s going to drive a lot more anti-gays to the polls than moderates.
I think theyre hurting him. That and Iraq. He’s an incumbent pres, the months after 9/11 his popularity was sky high; he ~should~ be doing far better than neck and neck. Iraq hurts him worse, but yes he is hurt by his over the top social BS.
I don’t see this, though. There’s no way the reactionary religious far right are gonna sit on their hands and not vote for Bush if it means a Kerry victory. Likewise, even though I am a gay woman and would like to get married, there’s no way I’m going to withhold my vote from Kerry and enable a Bush victory, no matter how much I’d like to personally kick Kerry in the ass for the lame position he’s taking. In other words, Kerry’s campaign is smart not to pander to me. Most people will pick the lesser of 2 evils, especially if “not choosing” means the bigger evil prevails.
Also, I like John McCain a lot. But there’s no way I’d swing and vote for him because of his position on abortion and other social issues.
That said, I think Kerry has the position he does on gay marriage because it is politically expedient to do so. I don’t think he gives a rat’s ass if I get married, really, any more than most people do. Bush, on the other hand, is a true believer. I think he really believes that stem cells are babies, and that it’s just to execute retarded people and that something I do in my personal life could erode the institution of marriage as we know it. I don’t, however, find this noble. I find it scary.