In my last post I referenced a 2010 exit poll which found that people’s views on abortion had little impact on their selection of political candidates. Other data from the poll, however, may shed some light on why people vote for the parties and candidates that they do.
In the comments section of a previous post (Opposed to abortion? Your politics may say otherwise) I put forth my opinion that many pro-lifers vote for Democrats out of financial concerns. Contrary to my theory, however, they did not find that one’s vote had much to do with one’s present economic circumstances. Indeed, it didn’t even have much to do with their religious affiliation (or lack of one)[1], age[2], gender,[3] or level of education[4] either.
Those who made less than 30,000 per year were statistically no more likely to vote for a Democrat than those who made $200,000 or more (46%/48%). Those who are voting Democrat, then, are not necessarily voting Democrat for economic reasons. People of all common financial levels actually voted for Republicans slightly more often than they voted for Democrats.
The only significant factors associated with the way one voted was:
- Declared party affiliation (declared Democrats voted for a Democrat 85% of the time; declared Republicans voted for Republicans 84% of the time; declared independents and those of other parties voted Republican 57% of the time)
- Their view of President Obama’s performance (73% of those who approved voted Democrat, while 74% of those who disapproved voted Republican)
- Race (60% of whites voted Republican, 85% of blacks voted Democrat, 54% of Latinos voted Democrat, while Asians were split 50/50)
On the surface, it appears that the way people vote has more to do with their ethnicity and party affiliation than anything else. If so, then tradition—not issues—may be the best explanation for why people vote for the party and candidates they do. With the exception of a small minority, we can basically expect for those who have always voted Democrat to always vote Democrat, and for those who have always voted Republican to always vote Republican regardless of the issues and regardless of political performance on the part of their party and candidate. Political affiliation seems to be inherited more than it is purposely chosen. It is a tradition rather than a thought-out process involving a serious look at how well a party and their candidates match our personal values. Christians, it’s time to take a hard look at the issues, and choose our party affiliation and candidates accordingly. Our vote must be based on the issues, not tradition. Our vote must be aligned with our declared values, not our longstanding declared political party.
[1]Whatever one’s religious affiliation, 45-49% of those in each category voted Democrat while 51-55% voted Republican.
[2]Regarding age, 54% of 18-29 year olds voted for Democrats, and 42% of those aged 65+ voted for Democrat. For 30-64 year olds, 54% voted Republican.
[3]Regarding gender, 56% of males and 51% of women voted Republican.
[4]Whatever one’s level of education, 45-48% voted Democrat while 52-55% voted Republican. Indeed, those without a high school diploma were just as likely to vote Democrat as those who have done post-graduate work.
September 7, 2012 at 7:09 am
Tradition is what we all succumb to. Politics is no different from religion. Most people in America are Christian because of tradition. You are a Christian because you’re parents raised you to be a Christian, just like you are usually a Rep or Dem because one of your parents indoctrinated you to that affiliation. Tradition has always ruled over logic and reason. I myself am a Libertarian Deist, far removed from my parents traditions. I never vote according to party, and never will. Mostly because I disagree with both parties.
But I agree with you, no one should vote for the D or the R, but for the policies they support. Unfortunately, most people vote with a blind eye and follow blindly without research, without logical discourse, and without a strong agreement with their policies. People need to quit following blindly and take the time to know who it is you’re supporting and what exactly their policies entail. Energy and motivation seem to be lacking in this county nowadays. It is so much easier to just agree with tradition than to get off your butt and do some field work.
LikeLike
September 7, 2012 at 9:35 am
Jason,
While my parents introduced me to Christianity, that is not why I am a Christian today. I am a Christian because I have experienced the God of Christianity for myself, and because I have rationally examined and tested the Christian religion to see whether it is true, and concluded that it was.
As for political parties, only in a dream world will we ever find a party that we agree with on everything. Political parties are imperfect, and to be effective, they often have to compromise on certain issues. But we still have to choose one, so we look at their platforms and choose one or the other based on which one supports more of our interests (or our most important interests). We’re looking for the greatest good, not the ideal.
Jason
LikeLike
September 7, 2012 at 4:08 pm
Jason,
I was more referring to the the fact that there are millions of Christians over here, and millions of Muslims over there. Most people stay in the religion they are born into, statistically. The same can be said about someone’s political affiliation.
As far as voting for the greatest good, I find that in most elections it feels more like you end up voting for the lesser of two evils. I’d like to think we have more than just 2 sides to choose from. But unfortunately that hasn’t been the case. Independents and 3rd party candidates have always seemed to support more of my interests. It is definitely an uphill battle voting that way, but it was always who supported more of my interests.
LikeLike
September 7, 2012 at 4:31 pm
Jason,
Yes, that is true. Most people do inherit both their religion and their politics from their family and/or culture.
The whole “greater good” or “lesser of two evils” debate seems more like a label debate than anything else, comparable to “half full” versus “half empty.” It’s a matter of perspective and attitude.
I wish we had more than two competitive parties as well. Some of the alterntive parties may represent our views better, but they don’t stand a chance of winning races, and a vote for them is usually a choice to throw one’s vote away.
Jason
LikeLike
September 8, 2012 at 8:18 pm
If one votes Democrat in this country they will split hell wide open.
LikeLike
September 8, 2012 at 8:19 pm
Course as I see it Jason is going to split hell wide open for his antichrist doctrines.
LikeLike
September 8, 2012 at 9:40 pm
By the way, all. The above poster “Aaron” (#5, and #6), is not the usual Aaron that posts here, i.e. me. I don’t know who it is, but to avoid confusion, please be assured, it’s not me. I’m not sure how I can prove that, unless Jason can check email addresses.
LikeLike
September 10, 2012 at 11:19 am
“I wish we had more than two competitive parties as well. Some of the alterntive parties may represent our views better, but they don’t stand a chance of winning races, and a vote for them is usually a choice to throw one’s vote away.”
I have to disagree Jason. It is this kind of thinking that is keeping the Replublicrats in office. I believe that by voting for Rep or Dem, THAT is when you throw your vote away. Seeing as how they are on the same side, they want you to feel that if you don’t vote for one or the other, your throwing your vote away. They keep this strategy so that they will always be in office. If everyone would realize that they are on the same team and we really aren’t given a choice, maybe they will wake up and vote 3rd party. Until we get a 3rd party into the mainstream to challenge the Republicrats, nothing will change. They keep this nation polarized on purpose, with the throw your vote away mentality to assure them a constant victory in every race. Unless America wakes up and votes with their principles, as you suggest in your abortion article, this nation is going down the drain.
How can you say we are throwing our vote away and also say… ” How can you vote for candidates who subscribe to a political platform that is so diametrically opposed to your moral values?” and not see the irony in that? I vote for my principles, and stand behind my principles. I will not sway just because the guy who I agree with might lose. If we all stand up and vote with our heart, instead of for a label, we will never see a change in this country, because it will not come out of either of these two parties, guaranteed.
LikeLike
September 19, 2012 at 1:59 pm
Jason W,
I hear what you are saying, and I have heard this point of view expressed before. To be honest, I am sympathetic to it. Indeed, if we never vote for other parties because we presume they can’t win, then they will never win. The only way we can change the political landscape is if we start voting for candidates from other parties.
As true as that is in a theoretical sense, it won’t work in the current political environment. What I am referring to is the imbalance of the number of political parties on each side (liberal and conservative). Correct me if I am wrong, but if you are liberal you basically have one party to choose from: Democrats. If you are conservative, however, you have multiple parties to choose from: Republicans, Tea Party, Constitution Party, etc. Let’s say that half of the country is politically conservative and half are politically liberal. When there are only two parties to choose from, all political races will be close. But if conservatives have multiple parties to choose from, and conservatives distribute their vote between these parties, they will lose every election. Democrats will always get 50% of the vote since that is the only option for liberals. Let’s assume that conservatives vote evenly between the Republicans, Tea Party, and Constitution Party. That would give each party about 17% of the popular vote. That means Democrats win every race. And if you are like me, and you see their platform, agenda, and policies as creating more evil and less good than Republicans’, that means that every election our fragmented vote will lead to increased evil in the land. And that is why I say we are throwing our vote away to vote for these 3rd party candidates. Voting for these parties does make a difference, but the difference is increased evil in the land—the very opposite of what we want.
For me to start voting for candidates from other parties, three things would have to happen: (1) There would have to arise at least one viable liberal political party that will split the vote of liberals; (2) Republicans drop moral conservatism from their platform, such as abortion and male-female marriage, and become morally indistinguishable from Democrats; (3) I find a political party that I can agree with on more issues—and more important issues—than the Republican Party.
How can I say we are throwing away our vote when casting it for 3rd party candidates, and yet also ask people how they can vote for a party whose platform is diametrically opposed to one’s moral values? Two reasons. First, because I can see how the Democratic Party is opposed to Christian moral values, but I don’t see how the Republican Party is opposed to Christian moral values writ large. Secondly, I didn’t ask how people can vote for a party that is less-than-ideal. But in the case of the Democratic Party, it’s worse than less-than-ideal—It is outright hostile to our moral values. My ultimate concern is to promote as much good as possible. That requires a mix of idealism and practicality. And right now, to achieve the greatest good requires that we vote Republican since they are the only political party who stands a chance of winning elections who is also fighting for moral justice in this nation. If a “conscience” vote has the result of increasing evil in the land, then voting our conscience may not be the best approach if we are truly concerned with preventing evil and promoting good.
Jason
LikeLike
September 20, 2012 at 6:33 am
I see your point, especially since this is what is going to happen this coming election. The republicans, instead of trying to gain the libertarian vote, shunned Ron Paul from speaking at the convention. Now they will vote for Gary Johnson, instead of trying to incorporate some of their ideas and gain thier votes. Gary Johnson is now going to get enough votes for Obama to stay in office. I hate to think what Obama is going to do to this nation in four more years. But I have to say, I will still vote for Gary Johnson, because to me, he is the only viable candidate.
LikeLike
September 20, 2012 at 3:23 pm
Jason W,
I don’t understand your way of reasoning. You acknowledge that Obama is the worst candidate, and you admit that if the conservatives split their vote between Romney and Johnson that Obama will win, and yet you say you are going to vote for Johnson. Why? If getting the worst result will come from voting for Johnson, why do it? That makes no sense. You are ensuring your worst nightmare.
Jason
LikeLike
September 20, 2012 at 8:14 pm
But I am not backing down from my principles. My hope would be a Rand Paul run for office in four years. Besides that, there are not much differences between Romney and Obama. I don’t think much would change either way. So voting for Romney doesn’t seem like it is helping much, when both will continue to take this nation in the wrong direction.
LikeLike
September 23, 2012 at 7:12 am
If you live in a state that’s not a swing state (eg, California, New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, Utah), you don’t need to worry about “throwing away your vote.” Vote for the person you truly want.
LikeLike
September 25, 2012 at 11:15 am
Jason W, when it comes to politics, there is an element of practicality that we must account for. Our goal in voting is not to make a statement about our belief system, but to bring about the greatest good possible. Voting for Rand may make a statement about your beliefs and principles, but it may also result in the worst candidate assuming office. I would urge you to rethink your approach to voting.
Jason
LikeLike
September 25, 2012 at 11:31 am
And exactly how would Romney be any different?
LikeLike
September 25, 2012 at 11:40 am
The Republicans and Democrats are as polarized on the issues as ever. Take almost any issue and you will find two completely different approaches and positions: abortion, same-sex marriage, Israel, economy, taxes, health reform, etc.
I would ask you in what way they are the same!
Jason
LikeLike
September 25, 2012 at 1:20 pm
In thought they are different, lol. Yes they have different rhetoric when using their sound bites, I’ll grant you that. But a quick look at the past will show the similarities in both parties. Bush was all about wars, Obama has had even more wars than Bush. Oil prices and gas prices soared during the Bush era, they went even higher with Obama. Both Obama and Romney believe in Keynesian economics, which is almost single handedly destroying this nation. Both believe in the federal reserve, which is the reason for most of our problems right now, again a Keynesian mistake. Both believe in bailouts(Keynesian), stimulus(Keynesian), and never ending spending. Both do not believe in decreasing spending, just in cutting future spending. Neither will fix the economy, neither will stop the wars, neither will stop taking our freedoms away with SOPA, PIPA, Patriot Act, NDAA, etc. The only ways they are different are in rhetoric, but as you should know, what they say to get into office is always a lot different than what they do when they get into office.
LikeLike
November 3, 2014 at 8:08 am
As a Christian myself, I could never see myself voting for a Palin or Romney.
LikeLike
November 17, 2015 at 7:32 am
==============================================================================================================================================================================================================================
LikeLike