June 28, 2007
The Nine Per-cent Solution
I frequently quote this paper from Pew Research. I'm a pragmatist. In the lingo of Ryan Sagar's "Elephant in the Room," Frank Meyers's fusionist marriage must be saved. It is the best chance of keeping the United States from adoption European-style Socialism.
When libertarians say they can't work with those conservatives or vice versa, I'll start quoting Pew. I did this in a thread recently and the quotees have questioned the poll results for bias in questions and method. I'm not a gospel believer in polls, but the datum I quote most frequently, about 9% being libertarians, seems to match what I see in my countrymen. And Sager would say I am living in a densely libertarian part of the country,
People were sorted into the four categories based on the combination of socially liberal (or conservative) and economically liberal (or conservative) answers they gave. To be included in one of the four groups, a person needed to provide at least two answers consistent with either the social or economic dimension and at least one consistent answer in the other dimension - while also giving no more than one inconsistent answer in each dimension.In other words, liberals tended to give consistently liberal responses to the six questions we chose, while conservatives gave consistently conservative responses. Populists, by contrast, gave conservative responses to the social issue questions but liberal responses to the economics questions. Libertarians took the opposite approach, giving conservative responses to the economic questions and liberal responses in the social issue sphere.
Based on this process, almost six-in-ten Americans fall into one of the four ideological groups; 18% are liberals, 15% are conservatives, 16% are populists, and 9% are libertarians.
Perry Eidelbus said "All it takes is enough people to get a majority of states' electoral votes by getting a plurality (a majority in some jurisdictions) of the vote in each." I say with 9%, that's a tall order.
Politics Posted by jk at June 28, 2007 5:28 PM
But, again, it all depends on the questions asked, so I'd have to see how they compare with similar quizzes I've taken. Also, what about the 40% that don't fit into any parties? That's a *lot* of people.
In the end, it comes down to who truly wants government out of their lives, and those who want government meddling in everyone's lives because that's how they make a living: politicians and bureaucrats, welfare recipients, union bosses, and those who want a high minimum wage.
Ask this question: "Is limited government merely the means, or the end goal?" A lot of Americans are too stupid to understand the difference. But as I say, storm's comin'. People then will learn.
Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at June 29, 2007 3:42 PMIf you follow the link they give the exact questions and the scoring method. The 42% gave answers that were not consistent enough to categorize them as "ideologues."
I'd've scored Libertarian. Depending on the barometric pressure, I may have voted either way on "Worry government too involved in promoting morality." But by their scoring, I'd be in the illustrious nine with either.
I challenge you to say that your view of the electorate differs widely from these results. Do you really look on the great expanse of the unwashed, American electorate and see a plurality for laissez faire?
Posted by: jk at June 29, 2007 4:30 PMStorm's indeed comin’. I fear we're going to elect Democrats in 2008 with a mandate to nationalize 17% of GDP. Grab an umbrella and galoshes...
Posted by: jk at June 29, 2007 4:35 PMActually, we're already being taxed at 17% of GDP, which is about average for the last few decades. Krugman wants a full third.
The paper talks about the difficulty of finding ideologues, but the authors don't even know their own search. Ideology IS a yea or nay response to "Do you want government to guarantee health insurance for everyone?" A true question is, "Are you willing to pay higher taxes so government can guarantee health insurance for everyone?" Or more accurately, "Are you willing to pay higher taxes, wait months for operations, and possibly be denied lifesaving treatment so that government can guarantee health care to all?"
Should homosexuality be "accepted"? I don't know what they mean by "accepted." Legalized? Tolerated? Embraced? Does it mean businesses should be *forced* to hire homosexuals against their will? I'm a moral conservative, personally, so I think homosexuality is wrong, but I leave other people to their own conscience. I couldn't give a proper answer to the question without more clarification.
Also, stem cell research. A true libertarian recognizes that it's a red herring, that the true issue is whether government should fund it. A true libertarian therefore opposes stem cell research funded by government, based on the principle of government non-intervention into the economy, but would not oppose stem cell research itself. A conservative would oppose the research on moral grounds but wouldn't inherently oppose funding for any sort of research. A liberal is just liberal with other people's money, so why not. As the authors define the term, populists are basically just liberals who are conservative only for their own lives and generous with other people's money.
I could go on. But one last thing: 63% of the "libertarians" opposed making Bush's tax cuts permanent? Does that sound right to you?
I don't see a plurality of the entire population, but there are enough people out there who aren't voting, who can be awakened, and who can offset the rest. Only a third of the population, according to memory, has been voting in presidential elections. That's a lot of people who stay home out of laziness or because they don't think they can make a difference. I'm generally optimistic but am pessimistic on people voting in a government that will restore freedom. But I think there's got to be a chance, because of the awful alternative.
Posted by: Perry Eidelbus at July 2, 2007 5:22 PMBy 17% I meant taking the entire health care sector from private to public, a 'la HillaryCare.
You’re complaining about the general view questions. I think the questions actually used for classification are clear and seem indicative of the groups' beliefs: "Favor government guaranteeing health insurance for all" Yes/No. Somebody who votes "Yes" to that is N-O-T a libertarian. Favor legalizing gay/lesbian marriage. Oppose banning books with "dangerous ideas" from school libraries. Favor private retirement accounts for Social Security. These seem clear.
If I question the results, it might overstate libertarians. I get a perfect score. No real libertarians I know would let me in their club unless I brought beer.
I had not noticed that only 37% favor making the Bush tax cuts permanent. That seems an anomality but I have little doubt that the other 63% don't recognize the legality of the 16th Amendment or cannot support the Bush tax plans because all taxes should be abolished. Which brings me to my pragmatic argument. While they're passing out pamphlets for repealing the 16th Amendment (with their 9% majority) the liberal-populist axis will easily rescind those "tax cuts for the rich."
Posted by: jk at July 2, 2007 6:28 PM | What do you think? [5]