My wife and I basically cancel out each other’s votes at the polls. I decided that she needed to drive herself years ago, so I didn’t have to see any Republican/Catholic/Whatever voting guide in her hand while we were standing there waiting to vote. I can remember standing in line some years back, and stage whispering to my infant son “Don’t look at what mommy is holding, it’s evil”. The rest of those in line found it pretty amusing, but it can be pretty tough to live with (and raise children with) someone who votes so much differently than you do.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I’ve voted for the odd Republican candidate, and I will again–and she’s voted for the odd Democrat. The problem is I find it hard to understand why she votes so differently than I do. Similar background, same city, same age, but such different voting history. Our views on most things really aren’t that different, but the way we translate those views to votes…well, not much similarity there.
The bottom line, I think, for her is this: All politicians are lying, conniving, special interest hacks who are going to make a mess of things, so why not vote for the swine that best (claim to) represent my views on key issues?
I have to say that I can understand that to an extent. My wife’s not blind, she’s not stupid, and she understands that there are an awful lot of things this administration is guilty of. And to be honest, I think that given another chance she might change her vote, considering what a mess we’re in. But this is the thing: I think that there are an awful lot of “Republicans” just like her. They grew up being fed the “fact” that Democrats were pro-abortion, anti-guns, pro-gay rights, pro this, anti that–when in reality, there are no clean divisions on these issues along party lines. (For the record, it’s the pro-abortion issue that is it for her). I can’t argue that abortion is “good”, it isn’t. I think that at face value, everyone alive could agree that abortion is “bad”. The problem with that statement is that it is way too black and white–for all the usual reasons. I wouldn’t vote to overturn Roe v Wade, though I feel so badly about all that destruction of human life (potential human life, whatever). I tend to see myself as a realist, though, and reality is this: We know how to perform abortions. Therefore, abortions will be performed. Therefore, to avoid further harm to the species, we need it to be legal and regulated. No coat hangers, people, and hopefully less teen suicides.
You see, my wife will not/cannot look past the principle of the issues to the effects on society. Abortion is wrong, casual drug use is wrong, prostitution is wrong, etc. She believes the rhetoric that states that legalization leads to more abortions, and follows that logic to the easy conclusion that making the act illegal will result in less destruction of human life. I actually believe that part of this is true–we probably do have more abortions due to the fact that it is legal. That “fact” (if it is indeed such) makes me feel sick, but I still wouldn’t change the legality of the act. Prevention, education, dissemination of information–as with all “social problems/ills”, time and money is best spent on the front end. Legalize prostitution, regulate it, and spend the money generated to teach people positive ways to avoid becoming involved. Legalize recreational drug use, regulate it, teach the little kids (and I mean little) how messed up people strung out on drugs really are. Leave Roe v Wade alone, and spend the millions and millions used to try and overturn it on prevention of unwanted pregnancies. Stop trying to litigate morality, give people the information they need to make informed choices in their lives.
Take the current administration. I think that there is a core issue here for many Republican “voters” who are not “political”, not part of the blind Republican base: If they admit that the administration they voted for is evil, they feel they have some culpability. My wife does not want to hear about what the administration is up to or how evil they are or anything else–agreeing to any of my views is tantamount to being guilty of something. When I rant about the corrupt trash in the white house at this point, she feels like I’m personally attacking her. On the other hand, if I keep my mouth shut about it, she attacks the administration herself from time to time. Talk about stress in a relationship…
Ok, I’m officially off topic. Like it or not, a large part of the voting Republican base is made up of people who want a “person of faith” to represent them. Like it or not, these same people do not want America “subsidizing abortion”, “legitimatizing prostitution”, etc. etc. Like it or not, we have to win at least some of them over to win a presidential election in this country. Oh, I have no doubt that if every eligible voter were forced to vote that the Democratic candidate would win almost all the time, but it doesn’t work that way. They have to actually get off their collective asses and get to the polls to pull that off, and we’re not going to see 100% turn out in any of our lifetimes.
We don’t have to go “Republican-lite”, but we do have to be firm, solid. The Republicans can afford to be wishy-washy, they can afford to switch mid-stream, they can do lots of things Democrats can’t. I believe the reason is this: The Republican base of actual voters is too solid for many of them to be swayed, and these people vote. Many of them want to be led, want to be told how to vote, how to think, how to live. They find comfort in giving over their persons to their leaders–they do what they are told, and then they have no further responsibility. They don’t have to think for themselves. Even better, because it’s all in the name of the church/God, they get to go to heaven for doing it. Democratic leaders, on the other hand, can’t afford to mix their messages and get elected–their base, by and large, isn’t as blind and accepting. Many of them will vote for third party candidates, for Republicans, or not at all, if they are turned off by the Democratic candidate. We need to be strong, have a focused message, stand for something and stay with it. I’m not saying a leader can’t change his mind–I am saying that they can’t try to play both sides of an issue. Possible Democratic voters are looking for integrity, a voice that is different than that of the Republicans. Someone who is not afraid to take a stand, take a risk, accept the possibility of pissing off a segment of the population for the greater good. Ross Perot garnered a pretty big chunk of the vote by basically saying “This is me, this is my plan, I believe in it, and I’m not backing down.” He pulled votes from all types of people, who vote in all different types of ways. He was not qualified to lead this country, but I think there is a lesson there that was not learned by either party–people want change, people want honesty, people want someone to stand up and be counted. The American public wants a leader–and I know that if my wife saw a Democrat who fit that bill she’d vote for them, no matter what their stance on abortion was. Hell, for that matter, if McCain had run last time I might have voted for him over Kerry.
I cannot continue with this discussion at this time–my children need me during the day. Feel free to comment away amongst yourselves–I will post again tonight and attempt to answer all comments directed my way.
I am not sure how we got to the whole abortion issue here, or why any of you care what I think about the whole thing, but apparently you do. So I will make the effort tonight–if you are available and wish to be part of the discussion then, please do so.
I am also going to separately post in answer to comments made about voters, which was actually what I posted about in the first place–because I feel strongly about what I said. Again, of course, you may comment all you like now and join in later if you wish.
Thank you for participating–I appreciate all the input. Much food for thought.
