The Myth of the 'Values Voters'

Reason ^ | January 2007 | David Weigel

[Luis Gonzalez]

"So how come the libertarian Republicans fared the worst?"

Republican Incumbents Who Lost in the House:

Jim Ryun (KS) - ACU rating 98
J.D. Hayworth (AZ) - ACU rating 98
Richard Pombo (CA) - ACU rating 97
Chris Chocola (IN) - ACU rating 95
Gil Gutknecht (MN) - ACU rating 94
Charles Taylor (NC) - ACU rating 92
Mike Sodrel (IN) - ACU rating 92
Melissa Hart (PA) - ACU rating 91
John Hostettler (IN) - ACU rating 90
Don Sherwood (PA) - ACU rating 87
Anne Northup (KY) - ACU rating 86
Clay Shaw (NC) ACU rating 82
John Sweeney (NY) ACU rating 77
Jeb Bradley (NH) ACU rating 71
Charles Bass (NH) ACU rating 71
Curt Weldon (PA) ACU rating 70
Sue Kelly (NY) ACU rating 65
Mike Fitzpatrick (PA) ACU rating 60
Nancy Johnson (CT) ACU rating 47
Jim Leach (IA) ACU rating 43



Vacated Republican seats lost

DeLay (TX) ACU rating 95
Beuprez (COL) ACU rating 93
Green (WI) ACU rating 88
Nussle (IA) ACU rating 86
Ney (OH) ACU rating 86
Foley (FLA) ACU rating 78
Koly (AZ) ACU rating 74
Boelert (NY) ACU rating 40


Democrat Incumbent seats lost

None.


+++

Republican Incumbents Who Lost in the Senate:

Burns (MT) - ACU rating 91
Allen (VA) - ACU rating 92
Santorum (PA) - ACU rating 88
Talent (MO) - ACU rating 93
DeWine (OH) - ACU rating 80
Chafee (RI) - ACU rating 37


Democrat Incumbent seats lost

None.

Those are some rather impressive American Conservative Union ratings for libertarian Republicans.

[dangus]

True. I should've referred to them as those opposed to the Republican Party's social policies.

[ndt]

"Even values voters expect an agenda, I imagine."

No doubt, and as voting citizens they deserve a party that listens to them. Honestly I can't see how the value voters could be much happier with the GOP then the libertarians.

Despite the historical alliances, the value voters and the libertarians really do not have that much in common.

In the end, you cant serve two masters and I wonder if this is not a watershed moment for the GOP Constitution and Libertarian parties.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"More likely, especially in marginal races, the shift was brought about by a portion of multi-millions of Legal and Illegal Aliens VOTING."

Denial is not a river in Egypt.

[fragrant abuse]

I agree. I'm so sick of these political theatrics.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Come to the dark side.

[sageb1]

"they erred in not articulating"

They erred in not articulating anything. Period. Republicans, at least those who are conservative, wrongly assume that truth and what is right is apparent to most. They forget that most of the American public no longer knows right from wrong because we now have 2 generations of moral relativists.

I read an opinion piece this week on President Bush being the worst president in American history. What the Associated Press journalist who wrote the piece will refuse to recognize is that President Bush has overseen the worst, most ignorant, nastiest citizenry in American history.

I don't agree with the President on some issues, but in considering the mentality of the voters themselves, I really fear for this country.

[CitizenUSA]

ndt wrote: "So forgive me if the "democrats are going to be worse" mantra falls a little flat."

I think that's an excellent point. I'm old enough to remember this country under Democrat control. However, many voters were children or not even born during the reign of Tip O'Neill. And, we older voters COULD be mistaken. The Democrats might do a good job, but I'm highly skeptical. The point is, the argument that "Democrats are going to be worse" is not one that means much to many voters. The Republicans needed to give voters something worth voting for than simply claiming the other party was worse.

[neverdem]

Thanks for the ratings & links.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"The Republicans needed to give voters something worth voting for than simply claiming the other party was worse."

Uh...it appears to have worked rather well for the Democrats.

[DaveyB]

..."It (trying to save Terry Schiavo) was one of the worst political miscalculations of the decade." ...

I guess the libertarians have no interest in stopping murder. Protecting Schiavo was not supposed to be a political calculation, it was supposed to be stopping a murder - some call that good government, you can call it political if you like. The worst part was how half-a$$ed the republicans acted in the Schiavo matter!

[CitizenUSA]

ndt wrote: "Despite the historical alliances, the value voters and the libertarians really do not have that much in common."

Not true at all! As a religious fundamentalist who associates with other, very conservative Christians, I can tell you we share a great deal with the libertarians. Our differences are very minor. Please don't fall into the MSM depiction of religious fundamentalists as people who want to use the power of the federal government to force everyone to submit to our religion. I'm sure a very, very small minority of Christians would try it, but the vast majority of us believe in letting you make religious decisions for yourself. That gay-bashing church everyone constantly hears about in the news is NOT representative of 99.99% or more of Christians (they aren't even Christian in my book). If you doubt me, attend some Bible-believing churches and see for yourself if they put their faith in government over God.

[Dolphy]

I don't agree with the President on some issues, but in considering the mentality of the voters themselves, I really fear for this country.

I do too.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Well, I for one am so glad that there haven't been any more Terri Schiavo type cases in the nation since Terri died, or at least I think that no one has had their life support pulled since then, 'cause surely all those politicians and media people would have been all over those cases too just like they did in Terri's case.

Right?

/sarcasm

[CitizenUSA]

Dolphy wrote: "The real question, the one lost between the socialists who look forward to making life and death decisions and the religious zealots, was is how the government decided Schiavo's wishes."

The religious "zealots" were also aware of the issue of how the government decided to follow Schiavo's wishes. Just because we feel it's morally wrong to murder someone (that's what it was if she didn't want to be killed), doesn't mean we don't also understand the political implications of "right to die" cases. We DO have the capability to think beyond simply quoting the Bible.

Getting back to the article...what difference does it make if I wanted to save Terri because I thought killing her was morally wrong, and you wanted to save her because of the political implications?

[arderkrag]

I agree. I am a Libertarian - the 100%, card carrying, stay-off-my-lawn type. I vote a Libertarian/Republican ticket, and likely always will. Democrats have none of my values in common with me. I should know, my sister is a card carrying-Democrat.

[arderkrag]

They didn't, RINOs did, on the whole. In fact, libertarians now occupy more seats in local municipalities than we ever have. Moderate principles lose elections, that's the way things work - No one wants a candidate who can't decide where they are. And RINOs are in no way adherent to Libertarian priciples. Economically strong and socially strong conservatism wins elections.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

And here I thought Liberaltarians were only 2% of the electorate.

LOL you thought wrong.

Social issues should be fought at the state/local level. The 2008 election is all about economic & foreign policy conservatism. The GOP needs to return back to it's Calvin Coolidge economic roots and McKinley's muscular foreign-policy pro-American approach.

[Clint N. Suhks]

The 2008 election is all about economic & foreign policy conservatism.

Oh really?

Gonna leave Conservatives behind?

Good luck Ross.

[elmer fudd]

As a religious conservative, I'm perfectly happy to support tax cuts and budget cuts.

Speaking as a 'l'ibertarian, I would have a lot more reason to support the Republican party if we had ever seen any of those phantom budget cuts. Ironically from a budget perspective we seemed to do the best with a Republican congress and a democrat in the White House. Not that I'd want to go back to the days of the assault weapons ban and selling our nuclear secrets to the Chinese, but it would be very nice to see more welfare reform and spending cuts.

I think that's the real reason the Republicans lost. After decades of promising to cut the size of government, when they finally controlled both houses of congress and the presidency they did exactly the opposite and expanded it like European socialists.