Values Voters

[Ebowed]

In 2004, exit polling indicated that a key issue among voters was that the candidate they had selected "shares [their] values."  Back in those days, bloviating about your moral superiority was generally a good sign that you had supported George W. Bush.  Will the GOP finally lose its monopoly on values voters in these troubled times?

Do you have values?  Who will you be voting for?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Almost every voter ends up voting for the candidate who "shares their values" (or, more often, professes to share their values), even those who mention other reasons.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Well, everyone has values.  Some people just have different values than others.

But on the assumption that you mean the "family values" voters, I selected Other.  I think many of them will not vote for President this year.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

All voters have values, and most people vote on them. It's just that those values are conflicting.

My highest value, other than my faith (which I refuse to impose on others), is individualism, followed by family, or maybe family is more important. I am likely voting Libertarian in this election but would have picked Clinton over Trump. I voted McCain in '08, voted Romney in '12, and reluctantly voted Rauner in '14 even though I really thought Quinn was doing a good job. I would have voted for literally any of the other Republican candidates who made the first debate.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

"Values voters" included a lot of people who were about my age (born early '70s) who were complete hypocrites. There really never were that many, but they're voting Trump.

[cMac36]

These people tend to be (older) Whites.  2004 electorate was 77% White.  2016 will be 70-71%.  

Short answer is it doesn't matter.  Right-wing evangelical kingpins have lost much of their power even within the Republican party.

Self-identified "White born-again evangelicals" will vote Trump by large margin.

[RI]

Almost every voter ends up voting for the candidate who "shares their values"

Except when, of course, none of the candidates share your values.

[An American Tail: Fubart Goes West]

Outside of Utah, Trump. Not sure about Utah though.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

These people tend to be (older) Whites.  2004 electorate was 77% White.  2016 will be 70-71%.  

Short answer is it doesn't matter.  Right-wing evangelical kingpins have lost much of their power even within the Republican party.

Self-identified "White born-again evangelicals" will vote Trump by large margin.

Who does indeed share their values. Including "not going to church" and "hypocrisy".

[Progressive]

People with values i.e., those who support marriage equality, a woman's right to choose, etc. will probably vote Clinton. So, Clinton.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

People with values i.e., those who support marriage equality, a woman's right to choose, etc. will probably vote Clinton. So, Clinton.

TIL people who don't share jro660's values don't have any.

People who describe themselves as 'values voters' will go for Trump, more's the pity, but people with values will probably go for Clinton because the nation will probably go for Clinton.

[Progressive]

People with values i.e., those who support marriage equality, a woman's right to choose, etc. will probably vote Clinton. So, Clinton.

TIL people who don't share jro660's values don't have any.

People who describe themselves as 'values voters' will go for Trump, more's the pity, but people with values will probably go for Clinton because the nation will probably go for Clinton.

I'm more mocking the idea that people who are considered "values voters" have conservative stances on issues.

[Badger]

"Values voters" don't care about extramarital affairs, inactive church attendance, or lack of charitable giving. Such self-identified voters want right wing social policies enacted and don't care if their candidate is as personally decedent as a Borgia.

[Roemerista]

I do not think I could ever vote for a candidate that has been divorced.

[nclib]

I hate how "values voters" is often used interchangeably with "conservative Christian voters".

That said, people who say "moral values" is their top priority in voting, will go Trump, though far less than other Republicans in recent years.

[Fuzzy Bear]

"Values voters" don't care about extramarital affairs, inactive church attendance, or lack of charitable giving. Such self-identified voters want right wing social policies enacted and don't care if their candidate is as personally decedent as a Borgia.

It is sad, but true.  Lots of Christian conservatives (too many, in my view) have dumped their wives and have had affairs with staffers.  

On the other hand, there are real-life issues of religious freedom (Hobby Lobby, the cake-baker thing) and conscience (abortion) that are impacted by Federal Court appointments that a President makes.  Religious folks aren't usually going to get a Presidential candidate they'd want as their Pastor; they have to do the best they can.

I've voted for a lot of Democrats; I'm a former pro-life Democrat who's registered as a Republican due to not wanting to be disenfranchised at the local level.  Neither party represents my views real well.  I've said this over and over, but Donald Trump is the Presidential candidate I agree with the most, issue by issue, in a long time, Republican or Democrat.  His penchant for unnecessary urination contests is kind of unsettling, however, and makes me wonder if he would, if elected, be able to get anything done.  So I'm going to do the best I can this year, just like folks on both sides of the aisle.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

I do not think I could ever vote for a candidate that has been divorced.

So no Ronald Reagan for you?

[IceSpear]

"Values voters" don't care about extramarital affairs, inactive church attendance, or lack of charitable giving. Such self-identified voters want right wing social policies enacted and don't care if their candidate is as personally decedent as a Borgia.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Almost every voter ends up voting for the candidate who "shares their values"

Except when, of course, none of the candidates share your values.

They'll pick the one whose "values" they find least objectionable.