Will social issues or foreign policy be more important in 2016?

[Blue3]

Will social issues or foreign policy be more important in 2016?

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

ITT: thinking there's such a thing as "social issues".

[IceSpear]

I don't think anyone ever prioritizes foreign policy unless there's a major war going on.

[Blue3]

I don't think anyone ever prioritizes foreign policy unless there's a major war going on.

If Hillary Clinton is the nominee, expect a lot of foreign policy -based attacks on her record.

Also, notice I'm intentionally keeping economic and healthcare issues out of this.

[Suburbia]

Foreign policy especially if Clinton is the nominee with the Benghazi and her foreign policy record. Social issues only if Pence, Santorum, Huckabee, Cruz is the GOP nominee. I see anti-immigrant zenophobia being an issue in this election especially with the primaries and the Savage, Rush talk-radio crowd driving it up.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

The arbitrary divide of "social" and "economic" issues is one of the dumbest aspects of American politics.

[TNF]

The arbitrary divide of "social" and "economic" issues is one of the dumbest aspects of American politics.

And the division of these from "foreign policy issues" is likewise stupid.

[bedstuy]

Republicans have no foreign policy so I don't see how it will matter.  I think you would need major foreign policy events to arise. 

Social issues will likely matter because there's a major contrast on those issues.  The Republican Party is the party of inchoate white grievances which include these often coded racial and class tension issues.  People are right to question whether those issues are just a smoke-screen.  Obviously, social issues are to an extent, a false narrative used by Republicans to create a false consciousness for the non-rich.  But, that doesn't mean we won't be subjected to an election campaign with the same culture war we've been having for years and years.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Considering Hilary is a hawk and so are the GOP except for Rand, it will have to be social issues.

But if Rand wins the nomination...

(Also, the hawkish wing of the GOP will still find a way to portray Hillary as "weak."

[ElectionsGuy]

Foreign policy should always be more important, but I wouldn't be surprised if the media talks about guns, marijuana, or gay marriage most of the time.

[Joe Republic]

Foreign policy should always be more important, but I wouldn't be surprised if the media talks about guns, marijuana, or gay marriage most of the time.

Is it so terrible that people tend to vote on issues that likely affect them personally, than issues that usually don't?

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

Is it so terrible that people tend to vote on issues that likely affect them personally, than issues that usually don't?

Foreign policy affects more people than gay marriage or drugs.  Many people have friends/loved ones in the military, for instance.  Others might be thinking about the foreigners (often civilians) who get killed because through wars also.

[bedstuy]

Is it so terrible that people tend to vote on issues that likely affect them personally, than issues that usually don't?

Foreign policy affects more people than gay marriage or drugs.  Many people have friends/loved ones in the military, for instance.  Others might be thinking about the foreigners (often civilians) who get killed because through wars also.

There are more gay people than soldiers, but that's not the issue anyway. 

The question is whether there's a real debate over the relevant issue.  What is the Republican foreign policy platform?

Torture and fewer rights for terrorist detainees, more saber rattling,  more military spending,  Benghazi something something, Islam something something.  That's about it.  You can't really have a debate when one side is represented by that inchoate, vague attitude.  The Republican side is less a set of policies and more an attitude looking for a new boogie man because they're bored with Al Qaeda. 

[Blue3]

For those saying social issues... Romney in 2012 largely tried to stay away from social issues, which now favor the Democrats. Why would this change by 2016?

[TJ in Oregon]

Social issues simply because for foreign policy to be more important, the two parties would have to actually disagree on them.

[Chunk Yogurt for President!]

There are more gay people than soldiers, but that's not the issue anyway.

True, but gay marriage isn't an issue that kills people.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's the establishment platform.  A growing number of Republicans are sick of the warmongering, and if Hillary wins the nomination and runs against someone like Rand Paul, things could get interesting.

[Lief 🗽]

A growing number of Republicans are sick of warmongering because it's Barack Obama who's currently commander in chief. Otherwise they're just fine with slaughtering the brown heathens.

Rand Paul is not going to be the Republican nominee unless he kisses the neocon ring.

[Mr. Illini]

Social issues unless Rand Paul wins the nomination.

As we have closed our major operations in Iraq and are now doing so in Afghanistan, foreign policy is becoming a smaller issue than it was in 2004, 2008, and to some degree 2012.

[whanztastic]

It's the economy.