Posted on 11/23/2004 8:00:03 PM PST by quidnunc
Thank goodness for pollster Brad Coker and his Mason-Dixon research organization.
Their late polls may rescue us from a wrong-headed interpretation of the 2004 election results.
Coker offers an alternative to Warren Mitofsky’s flawed exit-poll-driven conclusion that moral values were the driving force behind this election.
Yes, the fact that moral values were more frequently mentioned in this year’s exit poll is significant, but it’s not as significant as it’s being touted to be. Although morality was a plurality winner in the exit poll’s “most important issue” sweepstakes, barely one in five voters (22 percent) said values were the top issue this time.
Based on that slender finding about the rising importance of moral values, Democrats are acting oddly. Some are shouting that religious-right “jihadists” terrorized the election. Others are running out to purchase choir robes for the next round of voting. Others are looking to liberal seminarians for new, more “Democratic” definitions of moral values.
But all these actions are based on a faulty conclusion. This election, at its core, was not about moral values. It was about national security.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Even now the libs are trying to steal the values issues. Good, let them go after a mirage.
A know a lot of us Christians aren't going to like it, (in fact, I jut read Maggie Gallagher's article this morning defending the Bush-won-because-of-moral-issues-and-he-would-be-toast-if-he-ran-on-WOT-and-Iraq-alone line), but I agree with Hill that it is probably closer to the truth.
I have always known the libs were off track for thinking it was moral values. But that's okay let em go off the rails. Again.
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.