Posted on 05/01/2004 10:58:11 AM PDT by RWR8189
THE BUSH CAMPAIGN has performed well since John Kerry wrapped up the Democratic presidential nomination on March 2. But not nearly well enough. The Bush TV ads have been crisp and clever and have put Kerry on the defensive. Speeches by the president and the vice president and a host of Republican officeholders have added to Kerry's distress. But there's a giant hole in the Bush campaign. Social and cultural issues, important to so many Americans who don't call themselves Republicans, have been all but ignored.
These issues--especially gay marriage--may cause discomfort when raised among elites inside the Washington-New York-Los Angeles axis. Country club Republicans may wince when social issues are broached. Everyone else in America, however, talks easily and without embarrassment about gay marriage and abortion and public indecency. And they often decide how to vote on the basis of these issues--ones where a large majority of Americans agree wholeheartedly with Bush and not with John Kerry.
Here's one issue: gay marriage. Bush seems to think it's political slumming to mention it. But promising to preserve traditional marriage is not a descent into bigotry and intolerance. Nor is it a cynical bow to Bush's base, which is already solid on the issue and knows the president supports a constitutional amendment barring gay marriage. All he needs to do is reaffirm in his speeches that, if reelected, he will work to preserve marriage. He can also point out that he's not attacking anyone, either, but merely defending an age-old institution from attack.
Why say that? Because it's both true and politically helpful. An improved situation in Iraq and a growing economy won't guarantee Bush's reelection. Most voters have made up their minds on those issues. But Democrats and swing voters are deeply split on gay marriage. It's an issue on which Bush may be able to crack open the Democratic base and attract a majority of independents. But first these voters need to know Bush's position and that he's serious about it.
For now, they don't. His standard speech concentrates on taxes, Iraq, and terrorism. Sure, Bush has endorsed a constitutional amendment protecting traditional marriage, but he rarely alludes to it, and thus tens of millions of voters don't know his position contrasts sharply with Kerry's. If he tells them, Bush will find he has a receptive audience. Pollsters know this. Bush's top political advisers know this. Democratic strategists know this, which is why Kerry also never talks about gay marriage.
Prime turf for the issue is Ohio, a state Bush won in 2000 and cannot afford to lose this year. Ohio's economy is troubled, and Midwestern states have never been overly enthusiastic about foreign wars--bad news for the president's chances. But marriage is a powerful issue in the state. In the presidential primary last winter, an exit poll found a majority of Democrats oppose gay marriage. More recently, a private poll discovered that when swing voters in Ohio were told of Bush's and Kerry's positions on gay marriage, 43 percent said they'd be inclined to vote for Bush, and 26 percent for Kerry (who opposes a constitutional amendment). Among undecided voters, 51 percent said they'd side with Bush, 8 percent with Kerry --an astonishing six-to-one advantage for Bush.
In Minnesota, which Bush lost narrowly in 2000, Democrats fear he'll win this year if a gay marriage referendum gets on the ballot in November. The house of representatives has authorized a referendum on a state constitutional amendment preserving traditional marriage, but Democrats are blocking it in the senate, which they control by two votes. They're concerned turnout would spike with a referendum and that many casual voters, including Democrats, would vote for the amendment and also for Bush. The president spoke in Minnesota last week without mentioning marriage.
Gay marriage is a strong issue among Latinos, who normally vote 65 percent to 35 percent Democratic. That's what they did in 2000, when Bush lost the popular vote. But they are more opposed to gay marriage and legalized abortion than Anglos. They know Bush is pro-life and Kerry pro-abortion, but there's no evidence they know the difference between the candidates on marriage.
Bush may think he's being high-minded by not citing gay marriage and other social and cultural issues. But he's not, and the longer he waits to talk about them, the more he risks looking desperate or cynical when he finally does. These are legitimate issues, fully worthy of discussion in a presidential contest. The sooner the better.
--Fred Barnes, for the Editors
For President Bush to take the advise of Fred or Mort(?) well---.
Now Hume or Krauthamer -----
Exactly - you took the words right off of my keyboard!
Absolutely. The President knows that in six months, a lot is going to happen on this issue, and very little of it will reflect well on Kerry, no matter whether a particular voter is for or against gay marriage. Kerry has to deal with this in his home state in just a couple of weeks, and he's going to confront it head-on at his convention.
President Bush has already let the country know where he stands, and just has to keep pounding away on the stuff that people need to hear him more clearly on.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.