This is something I've been thinking about for a while and I wonder if other people have noticed it too.
During the 2004 presidential election and the 2006 the Republican party has run strongly on a national security platform, especially calling to our attention the threat radical Muslim terrorists pose to our nation. John McCain is touting his own military service and foreign policy experience as major advantages in this election as well. However it seems curious though that the two places most directly affected by September 11 tend to vote Democratic. In 2004 Kerry won New York by almost 10% and the District of Columbia by 80%. DC and NYC also seem to be some of the most likely targets for future attacks.
So I wonder, do "blue state" voters think that the Democrats would be better suited to protect the nation? Or, do other issues out weigh national security issues in the minds of "blue state" voters? Should the rest of the nation take in to consideration the views of those most directly affected by attacks of 9/11 when voting on national security issues?
Comments (1)
Personally, I don't vote on national security issues. "National security" seems like a joke to me--any government-run program under the Bush administration does. But I don't consider myself a democrat, either. Who knows.