Since the election, much has been offered to explain why Barack Obama won a second term and Mitt Romney was not elected. There have been a lot of theories ranging from Paul Ryan’s contention that the urban vote did in his ticket to the pundits that put forth the counter intuitive premise that Mitt Romney wasn’t conservative enough, which I suppose they must believe explains why centrists and some republicans voted for “socialist” Obama. I don’t understand that reasoning, but that’s OK.
I have my own theory as to why the President won re-election. It has to do with the very powerful talking points that conservatives usually rely on, many of which were mysteriously all but left out or glossed over weakly by the Romney campaign.
Gay Marriage
Most of the hot-button Republican issues are brilliant because they are non-issues. No better example exists for this than the issue of gay marriage. According to the right, the idea that when two people of the same sex are coupled it leads to the disintegration of marriage itself is obvious. There is precious little in the way of substantive evidence for this -that is to say there is no substantive evidence for such a claim. Marriage has been taking a beating for deacades with increasing divorce rates and couples opting to not marry at all. Same sex marriage had nothing to do with that.
The right’s theory is based purely on the Christian/Judeo ideal of marriage – one that I happen to ascribe to but that I feel is affected in no way by anyone else’s marriage. There doesn’t seem to be an issue where “partner rights” – insurance coverage, death benefits, etc. – are concerned because civil unions are OK with most conservatives. It’s the use of the word “marriage” that is the upsetting facet. Other than the moral/religious objections that many hold, which isn’t supposed to factor in because of the separation between church and state, banning gay marriage has no purpose.
In reality, the gay marriage issue is a non-issue. It is used for several reasons, the most important of which is that is garnishes evangelical votes. If you vote for a liberal, you’re voting for a sin – that is the message that many conservative voters get from the right’s insistence on arguing about who should be allowed to wed.
It’s also interesting to note that there is a real contradiction between wanting the government to permit certain marriages and prohibit others and the idea of “smaller government”. “It’s not a form of big government that costs much money which is probably why it gets a pass.
Gun Control
Obviously, the issue of gun control is much more tangible than gay marriage. Reasons for its usual inclusion in platform agendas, however, is very similar to that of same sex marriage. Despite what the extremists assert, the real gun debate has never, ever been about the government coming into our homes and taking our guns. The debate has never been about the basic right to possess firearms. The debate is about firepower. Whether or not a person agrees with gun control or sides with the NRA, there are no calls in mainstream Democratic circles to ban the majority of gun types. The difference of opinion comes where assault rifles and other such forms are concerned.
But the details are not why most Republicans talk about gun control. It stays on the list of important issues for the right because, again, it panders to a demographic. Does Rob Portman (R-OH) want to personally horde AK-47’s? Does Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) have a deep desire to buy Stag 3GL‘s for her family for Christmas? Well, I won’t say I know for sure but I doubt it. Nonetheless, both these senators have “A” ratings from the NRA for their gun control stance. The act fervently in favor of gun rights at least in part to please a large segment of the constituency.
That constituency, for their part, have a large number of individuals like my father. He owned an assortment of firearms and he was a life long NRA member. But while he did not like the idea of assault weapons (he used guns strictly for hunting) he was never outspoken about it because he, like so many others, had been convinced by the rhetoric that if you conceded on on gun you stood to lose all the guns.
Prayer in School
Again, this issue is hard to wrap your mind around because from a party that rants about loving the constitution. Advocating prayer in public schools flies in the face of separation of church and state. It’s also a real sticky wicket because so many of the conservative talking heads have issues with non-christian faith displays. But again, it works well because it is tied to people’s faith and it is intertwined with the falsehood that if we don’t allow prayer in public schools, soon we’ll lose our right to pray in private places.
Birth Control
At the risk of sounding repetitive, more conservative contradiction rears it’s head where birth control is concerned Isn’t it odd that the side which is fervently opposed to abortion is also in favor of limiting birth control? A recent study reported its findings that when birth control cost was not an issue, pregnancy rates dropped dramatically. While most logical folks’ response to this was something along the lines of, “No kidding,” conservatives are not likely to budge.
There is one school of thought that holds that abortion rights are such a great platform plank for conservatives that they would be lost without it. Especially these days when the Republican party is struggling for a hold on its demographic, imagine what the numbers might look like if abortion was totally illegal. Less women on their side than current lows, one less topic for strict conservatives to rally around. In the end, promising to do something might actually benefit the right more than actually doing it. If you were to ascribe to this theory, then limiting birth control makes sense.
Personally, I don’t think that is the case. Where birth control is concerned the issue is another way of taking the so called “moral high ground.” Just like with same sex marriage, if you abandon a birth control fight, you risk alienating your Christian supporters because many equate free birth control with promiscuity.
Also, once again, limiting birth control options and banning abortion does not make one think of “less government.”
—
So, why where these issues not trumpeted by Romney’s campaign? Maybe they assumes they no longer need to be. Maybe the thought was, “Romney’s a republican. Of course he’s pro-gun, pro-life, and against same sex marriage.” On the other hand, maybe there is, after all, something to the argument about Mitt Romney’s not being conservative enough. More accurately put might be to say that he did not appear conservative enough. By leaving these tried and true planks more or less out of his platform he didn’t play the game like the typical conservative.
Progressively Real 