The Modernist Papers

It has been awhile since I’ve added an addition to my Modernist Papers. But this recent study by the PEW Research Center has intrigued my political mind.

With all this talk about Neo-Cons, and Progressives, and what not. Its becoming increasingly more difficult to align with anything. (maybe that is part of the design) “No, we’re not Liberals, we’re progressives!”
“No, those aren’t Republicans, they are Neo-Conservatives…”
Whatever.

Anyways, I was reading though this document, and its interesting how they re-classified the visible electorate:

From Daily Thoughts (Emphasis Mine)

Enterprisers: As in 1994 and 1999, this extremely partisan Republican group’s politics are driven by a belief in the free enterprise system and social values that reflect a conservative agenda. Enterprisers are also the strongest backers of an assertive foreign policy, which includes nearly unanimous support for the war in Iraq and strong support for such anti-terrorism efforts as the Patriot Act.

Social Conservatives: While supportive of an assertive foreign policy, this group is somewhat more religious than are Enterprisers. In policy terms, they break from the Enterprisers in their cynical views of business, modest support for environmental and other regulation, and strong anti-immigrant sentiment.

Pro-Government Conservatives: Pro-Government Conservatives stand out for their strong religious faith and conservative views on many moral issues. They also express broad support for a social safety net, which sets them apart from other GOP groups. Pro-Government Conservatives are skeptical about the effectiveness of the marketplace, favoring government regulation to protect the public interest and government assistance for the needy. They supported George W. Bush by roughly five-to-one.

Upbeats: Upbeats express positive views about the economy, government and society. Satisfied with their own financial situation and the direction the nation is heading, these voters support George W. Bush’s leadership in economic matters more than on moral or foreign policy issues. Combining highly favorable views of government with equally positive views of business and the marketplace, Upbeats believe that success is in people’s own hands, and that businesses make a positive contribution to society. This group also has a very favorable view of immigrants.

Disaffected: Disaffecteds are deeply cynical about government and unsatisfied with both their own economic situation and the overall state of the nation. Under heavy financial pressure personally, this group is deeply concerned about immigration and environmental policies, particularly to the extent that they affect jobs. Alienated from politics, Disaffecteds have little interest in keeping up with news about politics and government, and few participated in the last election.

Liberals: This group has nearly doubled in proportion since 1999. Liberal Democrats now comprise the largest share of Democrats. They are the most opposed to an assertive foreign policy, the most secular, and take the most liberal views on social issues such as homosexuality, abortion, and censorship. They differ from other Democratic groups in that they are strongly pro-environment and pro-immigration.

Conservative Democrats: Religious orientation and conservative views set this group apart from other Democratic-leaning groups on many social and political issues. Conservative Democrats’ views are moderate with respect to key policy issues such as foreign policy, regulation of the environment and the role of government in providing a social safety net. Their neutrality on assistance to the poor is linked, at least in part, to their belief in personal responsibility.

Disadvantaged Democrats: Least financially secure of all the groups, these voters are very anti-business, and strong supporters of government efforts to help the needy. Minorities account for a significant proportion of this group; nearly a third (32%) are black, roughly the same proportion as among Conservative Democrats. Levels of disapproval of George W. Bush job performance (91%) and candidate choice in 2004 (82% for Kerry) are comparable to those among Liberals.

Bystanders: These Americans choose not to participate in or pay attention to politics, or are not eligible to do so (non-citizens).

(Yeah, Red is Conservative, Blue is Liberal, Purple is a mix of the two [But it leans red])
Of the nine groups listed, 4 are Right leaning groups, Even disaffected leans slightly to the right, so make it four and a half. One is completely independant (Bystanders) and the other 3 lean left.

Pew even offers a Quiz to determine where your profile fits.

I myself am an Enterpriser
This statement sums it up for me, regarding Enterprisers:

2004 ELECTION: Bush 92%, Kerry 1%. Bush’s most reliable supporters (just 4% of Enterprisers did not vote)

Personally, I’m not a big fan of renaming everything, even if it is just an intellectual exercise.

I mentioned in The Modernist #1 about how politicans and elections should focus on the non-voter. This report suggests there isn’t such a group. The Disaffecteds and the Bystanders are only 19% of the population, according to this report.

Another oddity, is the Liberal group, it is the largest type at 17%, and it hardly segmented. (Which kind of reminds me of something I hinted at in The Modernist #4 – Liberals dislike disagreement in the camp on single issues, conservatives don’t mind it as much. Its a policy vs. philosophy comparison again.)

But one insight I can read into this is the Karl Rove effect.
Karl Rove, like this study, didn’t believe in an independant/undecided voter. He politiced to his Base. The Religious-conservative base; who were pretty much disenfranchised after Reagan left office. And George Bush found his second victory through that strategy. The base isn’t fully active yet, its still asleep after 4 years of George H.W. Bush, and 8 years of Clinton. But its coming back…

The Congressional republicans have to learn the same thing. They are not playing to the Republican/Conservative Base, they are playing the middle.

The middle is for people who fear their policy will not be liked by the constituents. (That tells me Congress, liberal and conservative alike, are unaware of their constitutents) And it was this behavior that put the Religious Conservatives to sleep in the 1990s.

Hattip: Michelle Malkin