Spotlight Analysis: Press - Politics, values and the war over the war

Politics, values and the war over the war
By: Josh Gotbaum
October 2, 2007

The Iraq war has been the No. 1 issue for American voters for almost two years. Their view of the war and the Bush administration’s handling of it has grown increasingly negative. But will the war decide their vote?

Don’t bet on it. Voters tell pollsters, entirely honestly, which issues they think are important: Iraq, the economy, immigration and health care. But when they go into the voting booth, it’s a different story.

In the 2006 congressional elections, most people opposed the war — but 18 percent of those who did voted Republican, anyway. Why? Many did because they value patriotism more than policy. For them, it’s unpatriotic to criticize the president, even when he’s making a mistake.

That values can trump issues shouldn’t be a surprise. (Though to us “policy wonks,” it’s intensely frustrating.) As campaigns have become more sophisticated, it’s becoming clearer that many vote their values. Most people don’t have the time or the patience to analyze even the most important issues. But they do know who they are — as members of a family, community, neighborhood or church — and what’s important to them. And that, in many cases, is how they judge a political party or a political candidate.

Businesses have studied people for decades, looking for clues about what we buy and why. They learned long ago that a product that fits an image and a lifestyle goes a lot further than one that just does the job. Some politicos don’t want to admit it, but people as voters aren’t all that different from people as consumers.

A powerful example of this was George W. Bush’s victory in 2004. Even three years ago, a majority of voters thought the Iraq war was going badly and that most troops should be brought home within the year. A majority said their views were closer to those of Democratic nominee John F. Kerry, not only on the Iraq war but also on many other issues they considered important: jobs/economy, health care and education (terrorism was an exception).
Despite this, they voted for Bush. Even more amazing, they did so even though they thought he had done a poor job as president.

Bush was reelected because a majority thought, “This is a guy like me, with values like mine.” They liked him because he was a straight shooter — even though he usually missed the target.
Last year’s elections weren’t much different: Thirty-five percent of voters surveyed said that the war was extremely important to their vote. But for a considerably larger group, as Karl Rove has now admitted, the important issue was corruption. In fact, more voters pointed to corruption as driving their vote than to the Iraq war, the war on terrorism or the economy.

And that’s the rub for 2008: Even if the Republican nominee doesn’t distance himself from the Bush administration’s disastrous handling of the war — personally, I think he will, and talk about “new strategy” as Nixon did successfully in 1968 — there are plenty of people who make up their minds for other reasons. Some who voted Democratic in 2006 because of the corruption of the Republicans in Congress and the administration might come to a different decision when there’s no Republican majority in the Congress and no W at the top of the ticket.

For Democrats to ensure success in 2008, whether in the White House, the statehouse or the Congress, we have to recognize voters really are diverse, that one size doesn’t fit all. Some voters judge candidates on issues — though which issues varies considerably from person to person. But many — regardless of their views on the war — will judge the candidates from the prism of their own values and lifestyles.

Which values and lifestyles? Here, too, one size doesn’t fit all. For some, especially the Democratic base, their core values focus on a sense of economic opportunity. For others, it’s a sense of community; they will look to candidates who can make sure that the next Hurricane Katrina is handled with more competence and compassion. For still others, it’s a dedication to family or patriotism or living up to the dictates of one’s faith. Each of these affects voters’ political judgments, in many cases more than the war or particular issues. And each voter will judge the candidates and the parties through the prism of their own personal values.

Many politicos across the political spectrum think voters will penalize Republicans for their party-line support of the Iraq war and will force a change by electing Democrats next year. I certainly hope so. The administration’s diversion of our antiterrorist efforts to the Iraq war has cost the nation very dearly.

But, like Kerry, a candidate can be right on the war and still lose. To win and sustain a majority that can do something about the war and the other issues facing the nation, we need to pay attention, not just to what people say but to what they value and hope for. Otherwise, it could be a long four years.

Josh Gotbaum was assistant secretary of defense in the Clinton administration and is chairman of Spotlight Analysis, a political consulting firm in Washington.