Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Meet the Poor Republicans
NY Times ^ | May 15, 2005 | DAVID BROOKS

Posted on 05/14/2005 3:33:42 PM PDT by neverdem

Last week the Pew Research Center came out with a study of the American electorate that crystallized something I've been sensing for a long time: rich people are boring, but poor people are interesting.

The Pew data demonstrated that people at the top of the income scale are divided into stable, polar camps. There are the educated-class liberals - antiwar, pro-choice, anti-tax cuts - who make up about 19 percent of the electorate, according to Pew. And there are business-class conservatives - pro-war, pro-life, pro-tax cut - who make up 11 percent of voters.

These affluent people are pretty well represented by their parties, are not internally conflicted and are pretty much stuck in their ways.

But poorer voters are not like that. They're much more internally conflicted and not represented well by any party. You've got poor Republicans (over 10 percent of voters) who are hawkish on foreign policy and socially conservative, but like government programs and oppose tax cuts. You've got poor Democrats who oppose the war and tax cuts, but are socially conservative and hate immigration. These less-educated voters are more cross-pressured and more independent than educated voters. If you're looking for creative tension, for instability, for a new political movement, the lower middle class is probably where it's going to emerge.

Already, we've seen poorer folks move over in astonishing numbers to the G.O.P. George Bush won the white working class by 23 percentage points in this past election. Many people have wondered why so many lower-middle-class waitresses in Kansas and Hispanic warehouse workers in Texas now call themselves Republicans. The Pew data provide an answer: they agree with Horatio Alger.

These working-class folk like the G.O.P.'s social and foreign policies, but the big difference between poor Republicans and poor Democrats is that the former believe that individuals can make it on their own with hard work and good character.

According to the Pew study, 76 percent of poor Republicans believe most people can get ahead with hard work. Only 14 percent of poor Democrats believe that. Poor Republicans haven't made it yet, but they embrace what they take to be the Republican economic vision - that it is in their power to do so. Poor Democrats are more likely to believe they are in the grip of forces beyond their control.

The G.O.P. succeeds because it is seen as the party of optimistic individualism.

But when you look at how Republicans behave in office, you notice that they are often clueless when it comes to understanding the lower-class folks who put them there. They are good at responding to business-class types and social conservatives, but bad at responding to poor Republicans.

That's because on important issues, the poor Republicans differ from their richer brethren. Poor Republicans aspire to middle-class respectability, but they are suspicious of the rich and of big business. About 83 percent of poor Republicans say big business has too much power, according to Pew, compared with 26 percent of affluent Republicans. If the Ownership Society means owning a home, they're for it. If it means putting their retirement in the hands of Wall Street, they become queasy.

Remember, these Republicans are disproportionately young women with children. Nearly 70 percent have trouble paying their bills every month. They are optimistic about the future, but their fear of their lives falling apart stalks them at night.

Poorer Republicans support government programs that offer security, so long as they don't undermine the work ethic. Eighty percent believe government should do more to help the needy, even if it means going deeper into debt. Only 19 percent of affluent Republicans believe that.

President Bush has made a lot of traditional Republicans nervous with his big-government conservatism. He's increased the growth of nonsecurity domestic spending at a faster rate than Lyndon Johnson and twice as fast as Bill Clinton. But in so doing, he's probably laid down a welcome mat to precisely these poorer folks.

Even so, Republicans have barely thought about how to use government to offer practical encouragement to the would-be Horatio Alger heroes. They've barely explored their biggest growth market. If Republicans can't pass programs like KidSave, which would help poor families build assets for education or retirement, then Hillary Clinton, who is surprisingly popular with poor Republicans, will take their place.

E-mail: dabrooks@nytimes.com


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: District of Columbia; US: New York; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: alger; bush; bushvictory; davidbrooks; georgewbush; horatioalger; ownershipsociety; pew; pewresearchcenter; poor; poorvote; republicanparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-186 next last
To: All

I am the poorest republican here!!
*plays sobbing violin*

oh wait...I got a job, food in my belly, and a roof over my head...oh yah and a pick up truck(yeehaa)
Hell I am doing better than most of the free world and all of the not so free parts :)

perspective...its all bout it! :P


61 posted on 05/14/2005 5:17:37 PM PDT by Casaubon (Internet Research Ninja Masta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Sam the Sham

Your analysis is spot-on. I live in what is predominantly a blue-collar GOP town, and this is exactly the sentiment that exists. Trade and immigration are the hot issues in these areas.


62 posted on 05/14/2005 6:07:57 PM PDT by AZ_Cowboy ("Be ever vigilant, for you know not when the master is coming")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I LIVE in upstate NY...and Hillary the Bitch isn't popular with me!


63 posted on 05/14/2005 8:21:04 PM PDT by Livfreeordi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sam the Sham

I think you underestimate the intelligence of the poor republican and I also believe that the NY Times is full of it. In fact, I bet most poor republicans would agree that the economy benefits from these tax cuts to the wealthy.


64 posted on 05/14/2005 8:32:18 PM PDT by TBall
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Sam the Sham

Your reply has a flaw.

I was born a blue collar Democrat...realized at an early age that my values were those of a Republican..

..and I worked and studied hard..and became a professional..

a physician..

So..am I now a "rich" Republican..who doesn't know anything about or care about "poor" Republicans?

Nope... I WAS a poor Republican!

My values and beliefs now ..are the SAME ones I had when I was poor.

..and I didn't envy or hate the rich then.

I was one of the poor blue collar Repubvlican "optimistic individualists"..described in the article.

Guess what?

In the USA..if you are smart and are willing to work hard..you succeed.


65 posted on 05/14/2005 8:35:14 PM PDT by Livfreeordi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: kitchen; Lazamataz
Lazamataz, your post from a while ago was linked. It seems to be on the money.

The DELPHI Technique -- (Let's us Freepers Dominate Liberal Planning Groups)

BTW, Brooks is, at least he describes himself as a conservative, somewhere on the right side of the political spectrum.

66 posted on 05/14/2005 9:11:34 PM PDT by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: TBall

Because David Brooks is the liberal's "conservative," the William Safire replacement. He's always willing to tell you how the Republicans get it wrong. He's always willing to tell you how the Democrats are getting it right at the same time.

Not that he needs to do a whole lot of work figuring out the former, when there has been no Contract for America push by Bush or Congress, and the Democrats need only point fingers and say "they suck" to look better than the GOP to the average sheeple in the media.


67 posted on 05/14/2005 9:22:29 PM PDT by LibertarianInExile (<-- sick of faux-conservatives who want federal government intervention for 'conservative things.')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Livfreeordi

Glad you made the big time. However, your pulling your own chain if you think you're speaking for the working class, Republican or not. Amongst the working class there is a growing resentment towards both the haves and the have nots. The haves for their success and the have nots for their entitlements. Anyone who's arguing otherwise is living in a dream world.


68 posted on 05/14/2005 9:36:34 PM PDT by Melas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: cgbg; Carry_Okie

You just stumbled on the "consensus building" process.


69 posted on 05/14/2005 9:37:35 PM PDT by sauropod (De gustibus non est disputandum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TBall
I bet most poor republicans would agree that the economy benefits from these tax cuts to the wealthy.

If you had said, "some republicans would agree..." I might have agreed with you. Most? No way in hell. The vast majority of people aren't particular adept at big picture, long run thinking, regardless of party affilliation. The vast majority of people are only able to discern the immediate benefits.

70 posted on 05/14/2005 9:38:44 PM PDT by Melas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianInExile
Because David Brooks is the liberal's "conservative," the William Safire replacement. He's always willing to tell you how the Republicans get it wrong. He's always willing to tell you how the Democrats are getting it right at the same time.

Maybe I'm getting dense. Could you explain to me what I'm missing?

71 posted on 05/14/2005 9:52:19 PM PDT by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Sorry, meant to respond to poster #2. My apologies.


72 posted on 05/14/2005 10:03:47 PM PDT by LibertarianInExile (<-- sick of faux-conservatives who want federal government intervention for 'conservative things.')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Sam the Sham
Class is reality.

Social conservatives are mostly blue collar former New Deal Democrats. They were never laissez faire libertarian types. They don't believe businesses are run by Dagny Taggarts and Hank Reardens. They believe businesses are run by Kenneth Lays and Robert Vescos.


I probably would fall into that group, I call them "Pittsburgh Democrats (which I am on my father's side) had I been around in 1932, I would have been an FDR supporter or in the 1940's, a Truman supporter although I'm afraid I'm not much of a fan of Dagny or Hank either. I'm very conservative on most things but I tend to be moderate/centrist economically so I think I see myself more of a Populist.

I never seen the welfare state as a threat, it is generally a good thing although it has gotten too bloated and encouraged a lot of people to be slothful and lazy. It just needs to be cut out in many places, why should there be 50 programs when 2 or 3 would do and it should be geared to provide a hand-up, not a hand out so we can get more people to be "pulling the wagon" instead of riding in it while having a safety net in for people who cannot work for bonafide reasons (health, age, etc) as well as provide TEMPORARY relief to people out of work and/or to get them educated into a skill or trade. Well, the other side of the equation is we keep whizzing a lot of our jobs offshore, buts that's another discussion. Pure socialism/communism never works, one people want to own things and two, they are inefficient and make everyone poor except the party bosses. On the other hand, we have evolved way past laissez faire libertariaism as a society to where it still sounds good in theory but still falls short so maybe we need to take a look elsewhere, "third way" perhaps? I know I might get clobbered for that, but I've always been very socially, morally, religiously (Judeo-Christian), and militariliy conservative but less so economically. Sometimes I get both conservative and liberals mad at me, for different reasons as you can probably see, I must be doing something right. B-D
73 posted on 05/14/2005 10:37:17 PM PDT by Nowhere Man (Lutheran, Conservative, Neo-Victorian/Edwardian, Michael Savage in '08! - DeCAFTA-nate CAFTA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Sam the Sham; A. Pole
What the latte liberal in his arrogance fails to comprehend is that the blue collar parent does not see Karl Rove or "theocrats" or "*" or "Talibornigans" as the enemy. The blue collar parents daily struggle is to keep the street away from his/her children and if you give them a religious grounding when they are young, maybe when they are 13 they will still mind you and stay away from drugs and gangs and promiscuity. The secularist liberal is so incapable of respecting religion that he cannot see the world through the eyes of a blue collar parent.

Exact on the point as well. The Democrats have been hijacked by the "barking moonbats" who want homosexual marriage, rabid feminism, activist judges, free love types, blame America first types, well you get the idea, they do alienate the "New Dealers," "Reagan Democrats," "Pittsburgh Democrats," whatever you want to call them. Had they been active back in FDR's days, he would have tossed them overboard just as fast as Jerry Falwell would. It's a shame really, they ruined the Democratic Party which I think we do need as an alternative, sort of a balance to keep ourselves on our toes. Plus there are times I do see the Republicans as the party of special money interests (although I do know the Democrats have their share too) while the Democrats are in the interests of the "barking moonbats," so yes, there are times I do feel politically homeless. In short, I think the Republicans are leaving me, but I'd never go to the Democrats and certainly neve, ever vote for Hillary and her ilk.
74 posted on 05/14/2005 10:48:52 PM PDT by Nowhere Man (Lutheran, Conservative, Neo-Victorian/Edwardian, Michael Savage in '08! - DeCAFTA-nate CAFTA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Nowhere Man; Melas; AZ_Cowboy; A. Pole; neverdem; LibertarianInExile

This article is right on the money.

Both parties are the captives of their upper middle class constituencies. As a consequence they are indifferent to the economic interests and moral values respectively of blue collar voters. Indifference breeds resentment. In the Minutemen movement, a movement of blue collar Americans who think their government has sold them out, we are seeing the first thunderclaps of that resentment.

There is such a cryin need for a party that is nationalist economically and conservative on cultural values. Such a party could dominate American politics. And frankly, Nowhere Man, if Hillary could even pretend to be such a politician, she would win in a landslide and in the process rebuild the Democrats as the new majority party. That is what is at stake here.


75 posted on 05/15/2005 4:06:43 AM PDT by Sam the Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Sam the Sham

You live in DC! Just kidding.

The gap between the Porsche driving Georgetown democrat and the democrat in Capital Heights is another.

We do have a pseudo-royalty in this country who is far removed from the wealth that suffered to found this country. It is on both sides. The difference with the current bunch is that they have no higher calling other than their own pockets, ego and "Legacy."


76 posted on 05/15/2005 4:12:56 AM PDT by OpusatFR (I live in a swamp and reuse, recycle, refurbish, grow my own, ride a bike and vote gop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: TBall
Even if the cuts include the most wealthy, why does this writer think poor republicans oppose?

Social programs, public works, etc.

77 posted on 05/15/2005 4:15:37 AM PDT by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Bump for later.


78 posted on 05/15/2005 4:21:04 AM PDT by Springman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Melas
Amongst the working class there is a growing resentment towards both the haves and the have nots. The haves for their success and the have nots for their entitlements. Anyone who's arguing otherwise is living in a dream world.

So what is your solution? Use the power of the government to level the playing field?

That would mean taking from the haves (which never works) and taking from the have nots. Sounds like a successful election plan to me!

79 posted on 05/15/2005 4:35:50 AM PDT by listenhillary (If it ain't broke, it will be after the government tries to fix it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Livfreeordi
upward mobility

Your story is the key to Republican strategy and success.

The Democrat/Socialist/Leftist model depends on the blue collar worker (lumpenproletariat) remaining poor from generation to generation forever. Then they develop a dependence on government "services".

The Republican model depends on blue collar workers gaining more resources and wealth so they can take care of themselves and will vote Republican.

In other words, the Democrats are slimy scum and the Pubbies are the good guys. :-)
80 posted on 05/15/2005 4:40:37 AM PDT by cgbg (When do I wake up from this socialist nightmare?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 181-186 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson