A Wall Street Journal column today discusses the “Romney Divide”, something that is likely to be a growing topic of conversation. Interestingly, this has only been raised since it has become clear that he will be the Republican nominee, but we will set that aside for now.
Mitt Romney wins with college graduates and those with higher incomes. Since these people are found in bunches in big metropolitan areas, not surprisingly, that is where Romney is winning. He won in Michigan because of the Detroit suburbs and it was Cleveland carrying him to victory in Ohio. But just as there is a clear profile of where Mitt Romney does well, there is a clear profile as to where he does not.
In short, it is basically any state in the middle of the country without a large metropolitan area. So he lost in Iowa, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and somewhat surprisingly even Missouri. He loses in the south as well. The conventional wisdom is rushing to chalk this up to his failure to connect with blue collar voters, to make it about class, but I think that is both too simple and a mistake.
The winner in the aforementioned states has largely been Rick Santorum. The same media floating class as the cause of the divide is also the same media who tells us that Rick Santorum only talks about social issues. So logically, if Romney is losing in the middle of the country and Santorum is winning, would it not be because of values?
That is the correct answer. What we are facing in America is not a class divide based on wages, but a values divide. The problem is that the people covering the story are so driven by materialism this possibility never occurred to them. But I have lived among both camps.
Four years ago, I was living in rural southwestern Michigan. I worked with people who made good incomes, but had a sense of practicality, of humility about them. It was family first. It was about having mom at home, lower home prices, short commutes without headaches, and a different pace of life.
About 18 months ago, I moved with my family to Naperville, Illinois. We have not changed, but we are surrounded by a different group of people. Even among stay at home moms who could choose to do something else there is a need to project “angst” or the notion that you are something more. We are surrounded by dual income couples and everything that comes with that: Stress, less attention to children, affluence, varying commitments to faith.
These are broad sketches to be sure, but it is a very quantifiable phenomenon. The moral relativism I wrote of the other day is concentrated in the Republican party in these affluent, big city circles. These are the folks who want to keep social issues out of the public square. They don’t want to tell anyone else how to live their lives because frankly, they don’t think it matters. They will impart their values to their kids and choose to ignore the fact the world may be crumbling down around them.
They do this because it is easy. They have a good life, a nice house, a nice car, and they don’t want to have to take the time to become a social activist. Even voting for a candidate with values has become too taxing. But let me be crystal clear, this is not about class. Because there are people in the states that Santorum is winning who have nice homes, drive nice cars, but are voting based on values. Maybe they have stronger faith, maybe they feel compelled to do right by the nation, maybe they want their kids to grow up in a better world, or maybe they even understand that without morals and values we cannot sustain economic growth. Whatever the attitude, it is about commitment on social issues.
So how does Mitt Romney solve the “Romney Divide”? The answer is with stronger positions on social issues, a stronger commitment to personal freedom. This is where his wishy-washy record of moral relativism hurts him the most. Long-term, the GOP needs to heed the message. If the battle is over the apathetic affluent, the Democrats will win every time. The Democrats offer the more carefree lifestyle and no guilt. The GOP has to make it a fight over values.
But longer-term, this is more than a fight over political demographics or electoral votes, this is a battle for the soul of our nation. Our nation is going further and further down a path that is contrary to Natural Law. There will be a correction. We can either willfully make the correction or one will be made for us. Naturally, one that is made for us would involve an economic collapse that would cause all to understand the linkage between social ills and economic ills.
I, like all of us, would prefer to avoid this foreseeable consequence. So we must work to reach our neighbors, our friends, even those in the pews next to us on Sunday. Gone is the day when we can take for granted that just because someone is at church on a given Sunday that they are living their faith the other 6 days.
We need an American renewal. A re-evangelization of this country, a return to Judeo-Christian values. We need a government that makes plenty of room for the family. Only then, can we return to sustainable economic prosperity. The first step is understanding the Romney divide is about values, not class.
No comments:
Post a Comment