Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Most Voters Still Don’t Think GOP Cares About the Middle Class — At Least Not As Much as Democrats
Recall the exit polls from the 2012 presidential election. Mitt Romney had a slight edge over President Obama on the economy and the budget. By eight points, voters said they preferred a smaller government with fewer services. Among those who wanted someone with a vision for the future, Romney won by nine points. Voters who said unemployment was America’s biggest problem sided with Romney.
Just knowing the above data might lead one to conclude Romney must be sitting in the Oval Office right now. But not after viewing this data: Only 47% of voters had a favorable view of Romney vs. 53% for Obama. By 53-43%, voters thought Obama was more “in touch” with people like them than Romney. By a whopping 81-18%, people looking for empathy in a candidate mostly backed Obama. Finally, voters saying rising prices were the biggest problem went for Obama. (Indeed, rising prices pretty much tied with unemployment as the most important economic issue for voters.) These are people for whom affording a middle-class life — including education and healthcare — was a struggle. This is the middle-class stagnation data point.
Now here are some results from a new Pew survey:
The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center, conducted Feb. 18-22, 2015 among 1,504 adults, finds that both parties are viewed by majorities as having strong principles. Somewhat more say this about the GOP (63%) than the Democratic Party (57%). About six-in-ten say the Democratic Party “cares about the middle class” (60%) and “is tolerant and open to all groups of people” (59%). By comparison, 43% say the GOP cares about the middle class, and 35% say it is tolerant and open to all. … The gap is much narrower when it comes to opinions about whether each party “has good policy ideas.” About half (52%) say the Democratic Party has good policy ideas while nearly as many (48%) say the same about the GOP. … And the Republican Party fares much better on issues than image. Despite the majority view that the GOP lacks empathy for the middle class, about as many Americans say the Republican Party (44%) as the Democratic Party (41%) can do better in dealing with the economy. On immigration the public also is divided: 45% say the Democrats can do better, while 43% prefer the GOP. The only issue on which Democrats have an edge is on health care (47% to 40%). … The GOP is also now seen by more as the party better able to handle taxes (47% vs. 36%); in January 2014, neither party had an advantage on this issue (41% each). … The two parties continue to run about even in views of which party is better able to handle the overall economy (44% say the Republican Party, 41% the Democratic Party) …
So, again, the GOP is competitive on key issues. But it is also seen as far less open and caring that the Democrats. To me, this looks like the 2016 presidential race may be on a similar trajectory as 2012. People are hesitant to vote for leaders they consider capable if they view those leaders as lacking understanding and empathy of their everyday, real-world concerns. That’s the admission ticket. The political and policy solution for Republicans isn’t to mimic the Dem agenda or their rhetoric. Instead, they should promote the smart, effective conservative reforms — on education, healthcare, taxes — that would strengthen the middle, while also promoting economic growth and upward mobility. This interview with economist and GOP economic adviser Glenn Hubbard gives some hint the party is starting to figure it out:
Published in GeneralFew conservative economists have been as influential over the last decade as Glenn Hubbard. He was an architect of President George W. Bush’s tax cuts and of Mitt Romney’s 2012 economic plan. He has preached the importance of permanent, fundamental policy changes — such as reducing tax rates and simplifying the tax code — for improving America’s long-run economic growth prospects. Hubbard still believes in those type of reforms, but he has taken to arguing that Republicans need more to their economic message. As the 2016 campaign begins, Hubbard believes Republicans have to worry more about encouraging people to work — given that we have an economy with a shrinking number of workers — and about economy opportunity, which has been stagnant over the last half-century.
Feeeelings! Nothing more than… feeeelings!
I’ll never understand the American voter. When we go to buy a Coke, sticky notes, or an iPhone, we don’t ask how much empathy the CEO has for us. We just want a good product. But with the leader of the free world, we suddenly want empathy more than we want results.
The takeaway is two fold:
1. The GOP presidential candidates need to improve their message.
2. Single men need to put down the video games, go out, find women and marry them. Single women generally buy into Barack Obama’s empathy baloney. Married women, not so much.
First, a fundamental question. I have asked this elsewhere. It is NOT a rhetorical question.
Do we still believe in individual liberty, private property, sanctity of contracts, free market capitalism, and limited government? Do we still believe that these ideas will bring about the best outcomes for America and the American people?
Because if we do, those fundamental beliefs lead to one set of policies: low and flatter taxes, less government spending ( not to be confused with slowing the growth of government spending ), minimal government interference in markets etc.
Do we still believe these things or not?
Smaller government, reduced regulations, creative problem solving, and lower taxes are a sure route to prosperity and income security for millions of individual Americans.
Is it any surprise, given that even over here on Ricochet, the Larry Ludlow article on the Fed (“Ruling the Fed: Republicans Attacking Yellen Should Be Careful What They Wish for”) said absolutely nothing about what the Fed has done to the middle class?
Hi MarciN. “Smaller government, reduced regulations, creative problem solving, and lower taxes are a sure route to prosperity and income security for millions of individual Americans.”
Amen!
Why, then, do so many Republican presidential candidates seem unable to give full throated voice to that idea? Every time I hear “neo con”, “reformicon”, “compassionate conservative” …. pick your modifier to attatch to “conservative”…. I hear someone who doesn’t think real, actual conservativism works. Not since Reagan has a Presidential candidate given full support to those simple, hard earned truths. Recall … Reagan and those simple truths – boldly stated – won LANDSLIDES!!! He didn’t need a ‘modifier’ to his conservatism to win.
Propaganda works.
I guess this means Republicans aren’t interested in fixing the corrupt cronyism (govt subsidies, regulations that favor the entrenched) that makes the rich richer and destroys the middle class. I don’t see that on anybody’s agenda.
The poll is a crock. Of course the Democrats will always poll higher in a “cares about me” poll because they do care more.
The real polling question should be “Would you vote for a party that says they care about you, but whose policies don’t do a damn thing to better your life?”
Reagan appealed to lower and middle class voters by communicating in a clear straightforward manner. He made it easy to understand where he stood and seemed truthful about it.
W did the same thing, just not anywhere near as well.
Both won twice.
McCain? no. HW? no, Romney? no Dole? no
This is not rocket science folks. Talk to the regular folks, not at them or down to them. Do it a lot. And get a guy who acts like one of them. No admirals son, senators son, governors son or guy who has been in Washington so long he is listed as a monument.
Oh, yeah. If your candidate does not know in their gut what the middle class needs to have happen, you will lose. (Goodbye, Jeb).
Someone who knows what $4.00 gas does to a paycheck to paycheck family.
Someone who knows what off the books labor does to skilled construction and other trades.
Someone who sees regulations applied to their business but not the guys operating out of a pickup truck who can underbid all jobs and disappear when they mess it up.
Someone who knows the frustration of trying to find out if their kids are getting any education at all in the public school they must attend.
Someone who actually has seen a parent trying to deal with a common core math problem with their bright but now turned off kid.
Someone who knows what is actually happening to health insurance for paycheck to paycheck families that had it before Obamacare and are trying to maintain what they used to have for their children.
Someone who knows the impact of the housing bubble on the futures of paycheck to paycheck families who are trying to keep what they have.
Someone who knows that college is being priced right out of reach for paycheck to paycheck families.
Someone who knows the policy of subsidize the stock market, destroy interest rates on savings has done to the paycheck to paycheck families ability to have any retirement plans at all.
Someone with a clue.
We’re far better off under Republicans who don’t care about anybody than under Democrats who do. However, that doesn’t mean Republicans shouldn’t care greatly about things like income inequality and the disappearing middle class.
One problem is people who equate “caring” with government programs, subsidies, and taxes. It seems that both Democrats and Republicans are prone to that confusion.
“Compassionate conservative” was a stupendously stupid rhetorical move on the part of the Bush I never voted for, because it implied that Republicans weren’t already compassionate, and that Democrats were. Democrats aren’t. When is the last time anybody has seen a compassionate progressive?
Bingo! Let’s say that both sides agree that “caring” means government programs to help people. Well, there should be two other things that enter into the equation:
1) Do these programs really work?
2) Is there a way out of said programs by getting jobs?
To me, real caring would mean incorporating an exit path from these programs . . .
If we were only left with people who could truly not care for themselves, I’ll bet they’re so few in number that even (gasp!) private charity could take care of them without a single dime from the government. But we’ll never know, at least not any time soon . . .
Yeah, you better come up with some “policies” to transfer more wealth to the imaginary “middle class”, in the hope of winning votes.
I think I just described “reform conservatism” in one sentence.
Democrats don’t care about fixing problems. They care about assuaging their feelings.
I wanted to comment here, but the first 13 comments said it all. So I’ll just add: Ditto. Like.