Take-away from US election: Obama's 'small' issues won big

There was no single grand message that was going to win over voters in 2012 – from President Obama or Mitt Romney. A big reason is because America is so diverse and divided, and will likely continue to be.

|
Carolyn Kaster/AP/file
President Obama pauses as he speaks at the election night victory party in Chicago Nov. 7. Op-ed contributor Dante Chinni writes: 'While Mr. Obama carried voters who said health care or foreign policy were their top issues, these can hardly be considered “small.” Foreign policy is a big issue by any measure and health care was considered a huge issue by both sides.'

In the weeks since the US presidential election, many analysts have tried to explain the results. One meme in particular has taken root: that President Obama won reelection with a campaign of “small” issues that divided America into different groups, while Mitt Romney lost with a broad attempt to unite America on the economy.

But the evidence is weak. Exit polls showed Mr. Romney narrowly carried the day on the economy. And while Mr. Obama carried voters who said health care or foreign policy were their top issues, these can hardly be considered “small.” Foreign policy is a big issue by any measure, and health care was considered a huge issue by both sides.

And as outgoing Pew Research Center director Andrew Kohut has noted, on several key social issues, Republicans stand on the wrong side of public opinion: 59 percent believe abortion should be legal, and 65 percent support a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants.

In other words, supporting those policies isn’t about dividing the nation into subgroups by supporting “women” (who are a majority of voters) or “Hispanics.” It is about supporting positions most Americans hold.

More to the point, what actually is a “small” issue? Supporting farm subsidies may be seen as pandering to the rural vote if you live in New York City, but it is a serious, directly crucial matter on the Great Plains. Such issues make rhetoric about government real.

And that brings us to a second point. There is good reason to believe that the divides people noticed in 2012 are going to grow deeper in coming elections.

I head up a journalism effort called Patchwork Nation, which uses demographic, economic, and social data to break the nation’s 3,100-plus counties into 12 types – from small rural Tractor Country counties to big urban Industrial Metropolises. When you look at the country this way, you understand that the wants and needs of all these communities are very diverse.

Programs and messages that appeal to voters in different places are necessarily going to be different. This has always been true on social issues, but it is increasingly true on economic ones – that’s why divisions will likely grow. In August 2012, the national unemployment rate was 8.1 percent. It was only 4.7 percent in Tractor Country counties. It was 9.4 percent in Industrial Metropolis counties.

Those are stark differences that will ultimately lead to calls for different solutions. There was a time when America had the resources to answer all those calls. But as the economic power of other countries grows, we have fewer resources than we once did.

That means we must prioritize and decide who gets what from federal, state, and local governments. There will be winners and losers and, yes, divisions.

If there is solace to be found, it may be in this: The American electorate has always been full of division – from the Know-Nothings and Progressives to the tea partyers and occupiers. That’s what happens when you have hundreds of millions of people across a huge mass of land between two oceans.

So, no, there was no single grand message that was going to win over voters in 2012 – from Obama or Romney. But there never has been. And we’re still here.

Dante Chinni is director of the Jefferson Institute’s Patchwork Nation project.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Take-away from US election: Obama's 'small' issues won big
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2012/1126/Take-away-from-US-election-Obama-s-small-issues-won-big
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe