Election shows Democrats need to speak the language of morality

During our own Adlai Stevenson '21's 1956 presidential campaign, a woman called out to him, "You have the vote of every thinking person!" Stevenson replied with typical wit: "That's not enough, madam, we need a majority!" He went on to lose to Dwight Eisenhower in a landslide.

Stevenson would have felt right at home in my dinner table conversions. Since the election, my Democratic friends and I have continued to ask ourselves how a man like George W. Bush could possibly appeal to most Americans. To us, Bush seems like a swaggering cowboy with a message so simplistic and one-dimensional that we wonder if it was deliberately designed to appeal to children. Anyone who could take such a vision seriously, particularly considering Bush's failures both in Iraq and at home, must be crazy. And so we, like so many other Democrats, relieve our frustration by bemoaning the stupidity of conservatives.

The problem is that this attitude, in addition to unfairly ignoring some pretty silly liberals, is contributing to our persistent electoral defeats. It accentuates the tendency of ordinary Americans to see coastal Democrats as out of touch, effete elitists. There was once a time when most people saw the Democrats as the party of the ordinary working stiff. But no longer. Now year after year, blue-collar workers, all over America, vote for tax cuts for millionaires, even while bemoaning liberal "elitism." They vote this way because the Republicans appeal to them in the most straightforward, black and white manner possible. Meanwhile, Democrats speak in shaded abstractions. And the Republicans are right: One tone appeals to an educated elite; the other does not.

This trend can be seen in the election data. For the first time, the Democratic nominee actually carried college graduates this year. Among the subset with postgraduate degrees, Kerry held a substantial margin. Meanwhile, among those who had never even finished high-school — who benefit most from government programs — Kerry won by one point margin, while high-school grads, and those with some college, went heavily for the president. Just let that sink in. The sliver of the electorate that will benefit least from the Bush economic agenda gave Kerry the most votes, while the sliver that will benefit most gave Kerry an edge of one point.

It hasn't always been this way. A generation ago, white collar workers were reliably Republican; blue collar workers pulled the lever for Democrats. Surprise! The Democrats tended to come out on top. They controlled the House uninterrupted for 40 years.

But now, the rules of the game have changed. Now it is the social conservative — who sees life in black and white — who forms the Republican base, while the social progressive, who sees life in shades of gray, who routinely votes Democrat. Unfortunately for my party, there are just more people in the former party than in the latter.

Of course, it was not just social conservatism that swept the Republicans to another term in power. Bush's record was far too poor for that. It was the memory of Sept. 11 and the fear of terrorism that pushed Bush over the top. But Bush's ability to capitalize on terrorism for electoral gain was very much rooted in traditional values. Bush and Kerry might have been equally effective in coping with terrorism. But Bush's unwavering — I would say unthinking — resolve made him seem to be far stronger to the majority of Americans.

The Republicans were also successful because they completely abandoned any sense of fiscal responsibility, which sadly is good electoral politics, if bad economic policy. Dick Cheney was right: Deficits really don't matter — to the voters, anyway.

So now what? How can Democrats remain true to their ideals while appealing to values voters? I guess a start would be to find candidates who can speak the language of black and white, like Bush does; candidates who can frame the debate not only in rational terms, but in moral terms. But will this be enough? The truth is, I don't know. Even with the loss of jobs, the war in Iraq, Halliburton and the rest, we were unable to win this time around. John Kerry had his weaknesses, but he also out-debated Bush at every turn. It may very well that America will not wake up until the police begin to haul women into jail for the grave crime of abortion. Michael Brier is a history major from Needham, Mass. He can be reached at mbroache@princeton.edu.