Moral conviction and political engagement

The 2004 presidential election led to considerable discussion about whether moral values motivated people to vote, and if so, whether it led to a conservative electoral advantage. The results of two studies—one conducted in the context of the 2000 presidential election, the other in the context of the 2004 presidential election—indicated that stronger moral convictions associated with candidates themselves and attitudes on issues of the day uniquely predicted self-reported voting behavior and intentions to vote even when control-ling for a host of alternative explanations (e.g., attitude strength, strength of party identi-fication). In addition, we found strong support for the hypothesis that moral convictions equally motivated political engagement for those on the political right and left and little support for the notion that a combination of morality and politics is something more characteristic of the political right than it is of the political left. KEY WORDS: Moral conviction, moral values, electoral politics, political engagement, political participation The 2004 presidential election brought the potential importance of “moral values ” into the spotlight. Results of exit polls indicated that a plurality of voters selected moral values as what mattered most in deciding how they voted in the election relative to other choice alternatives.1 Even more provocative was the finding that of those who mentioned moral values, 80 % voted for President Bush (Media Matters, 2004). Media commentators and pundits were quick to get excited about these findings. For example, Dan Rather (CBS anchor) reported: “moral values—we’ll give you a look at the surprise issue that trumped the war, terror, an