New Pew Political Typology explains current Republican ascendancy

[John_Mace]

@panache45

I’m wondering what their rationale is for not including a libertarian (small-L) category. Are there too few of us to count?

Alas, I’m afraid that is true.

So now I’m a “Liberal.” Damn, if I’d only applied myself I could’ve achieved “Enterpriser.”

Thanks for my morning laugh!!

[Debaser]

@Kimstu

Hang on a sec—if one of the listed categories fits your beliefs quite closely, then why do you feel that the creators of the categories had a “bias” against your beliefs? What difference does it make that the category happens to be called “Enterpriser” rather than “Libertarian” if you, as a libertarian, are adequately represented by it?

My biggest objection is the typical one: I had to hold my nose while answering many of the questions. As Sam Stone pointed out there is no “right” answer for many of the questions if you have our viewpoint.

BTW, I’d say I’m libertarian leaning but am certainly not a subscriber to everything in their belief set. I was more feeling pity for the sadly underrepresented lib’s all over the board, than myself personally.

[John_Mace]

@Kimstu

Hang on a sec—if one of the listed categories fits your beliefs quite closely, then why do you feel that the creators of the categories had a “bias” against your beliefs? What difference does it make that the category happens to be called “Enterpriser” rather than “Libertarian” if you, as a libertarian, are adequately represented by it?

Enterprisers are hardly libertarians:

BASIC DESCRIPTION: 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.

Libertarians are NOT defenders of conservative social values, nor do they (we) generally support the war in Iraq. And how can liberatarians be “extremely partisan Republicans”?

[BrainGlutton]

@BobLibDem

In the end, Father Time is the Democrats’ ally. The pendulum falls to the left only when done rising to the right.

I keep encountering this argument as if it were premised on some obvious law of political physics. What, exactly, makes you think there is a “pendulum”?

[BrainGlutton]

@Debaser

Sam Stone nailed it as far as the test questions go. I was thinking the exact same thing for many of the questions. The test writer obviously had a huge pro-government bias. This is probably the reason there is no libertarian category.

I repeat: The questions in the “Where do you fit quiz?” are not the questions (at least, not the only questions) used to generate the typology. See post #14.

[BobLibDem]

@BrainGlutton

I keep encountering this argument as if it were premised on some obvious law of political physics. What, exactly, makes you think there is a “pendulum”?

I’d say there is a natural tendency for the party in power to push a bit too far, as Bush seems to be doing now. As the center of political gravity moves to the right, more people find themselves on the left of it and want to pull it back their way. I also think there’s a time period in which people think the party in power should be getting things done, and when that time is over and they aren’t happy, then change comes for the sake of change. The Gingrich revolution was propelled as much by the long term hold that the Dems had on Congress as it was by the Contract With America.

[rfgdxm]

@Sam Stone

I’m an ‘enterpriser’. But it’s curious that there’s really no ‘Libertarian’ category, and after seeing the questions, it’s easy to see why. They present a false dichotomy over and over again, that has at its base the automatic assumption that government is the only mechanism for righting various social ills.

Disadvantaged Democrat here, but you have a good point. I consider myself a moderate anarcho-syndicalist. While I do tend to like left wing Democrat ecomonic policies, like libertarins I have no fondness for government social intervention. Gay right? I consider being gay to be odd, but just feel other people’s sexuality is none of my (or the government’s) damn business. Drug? Legalize 'em. Foreign policy? The US should keep out of the affairs of other nations except when there is a clear security theat, and the government can do something about it.

[DoctorJ]

I highly doubt that a state that made abortion illegal would take the unnecessary and frankly ridiculous further step to make leaving the state to have an abortion in another state illegal. That pretty much defeats the point of leaving it up to the states, doesn’t it?

You’re kidding, right? At least in most of the Southern states I’ve lived in, they’d be on the same bill. Remember–these people don’t actually give a rip about state’s rights, as you can see whenever a state wants to do something they don’t like. They just want fewer abortions, by any means necessary, and this is a pretty obvious step in that direction.

The hidden assumption? That the choice is between encouraging and discouraging homosexuality. The belief that, “I don’t care one way or the other, but no one should get special treatment” is not represented. Also, the debate over gay marriage is not necessarily a debate about encouraging or discouraging homosexuality, but of protecting an existing institution.

I agree that most of the questions you mention exclude middles, but not this one. The choice is between accepting and discouraging, not encouraging and discouraging, which is a big distinction. Your response of “I don’t care one way or the other” implies acceptance; the bit about special treatment just isn’t relevant to the distinction.

[BrainGlutton]

@rfgdxm

I consider myself a moderate anarcho-syndicalist.

You know, I don’t think I’ve ever seen those terms conjoined before!