Since the unofficial “start” of the 2008 presidential campaign, “they” have spent a lot of time talking about Bill, Elizabeth, Ann, Michele and all of the Giulianis. The media and fundamentalist groups have been telling us how the candidate’s spouse can help or hinder the campaign of each potential 2009 resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Multiple marriages, infidelities, children (good and bad), each holding a value of liability and asset, measurements of American marriage morality. It’s bunk.
In a “non-scientific poll,” AOL is asking about the impact of the presidential marital status. More than 75,000 Americans have responded and they don’t care. The “traditional marriage” has been redefined.
Sixty-one percent believe that Bill is an asset for Hillary while 37 percent believe he is a liability. Fifty-nine percent do not care about the candidate’s marital status and a whopping 91 percent would vote for a candidate who has been married multiple times, so Rudy is still in the race.
Having taught statistics, I understand the inaccuracy of “raw number” polling. I can also say that from past polls and responses, the AOL community is proportionately right, left and middle-of-the-road, religious and secular. However, this poll says volumes about the changes in American family ethics.
Why let the media and fundamental groups dictate American morality? The people have spoken. Now, can we focus on the issues?