Nov. 24, 2008
America Is Still A Conservative Nation
Weekly Standard: Despite Obama's Election, Exit Polls Show Conservatives Still Outnumber Liberals
-
Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota takes part in a session in Miami on Wednesday, Nov. 12, 2008, of the annual Republican Governors Association Conference. (AP Photo/John Watson-Riley)
One question surfaces repeatedly as the pundits obsess over the exit polls. Have Americans lurched to the Left in any meaningful way? If so, are they likely to sign long-term leases in Hotel Obama, or are they simply on loan until they experience the consequences of modern-day liberalism?
Some insist it’s the latter. The Washington Post’s E.J. Dionne calls Obama’s election a “clear repudiation of conservative economic ideas,” while Peggy Noonan believes we’re experiencing “a new liberal moment.”
Hey, not so fast!
Let’s obsess a little more over those exit polls. Several commentators have noted the president-elect’s success in winning the hearts (if not the minds) of 20 percent of self-described conservatives while McCain, in contrast, wooed only 10 percent of liberals.
But the more salient finding is that conservatives continue to outnumber their liberal neighbors by the comfortable margin of 34 percent to 22 percent. This nearly matches the edge conservatives enjoyed in the 2004 election (34 percent to 21 percent) and - drum roll, please - is measurably better than the 29 percent to 20 percent conservative advantage in 2000, when George W. Bush was first sworn in.
How many of our liberal friends are willing to acknowledge that, despite spending millions on hateful Moveon.org and Soros-funded campaigns that portray conservatives as war criminals, as haters of the poor, as greedy, ignorant, intolerant, and incompetent, Americans have grown more conservative over the past eight years?
If we also obsess over the state exit polls, conservatives will be relieved to learn that they still outnumber liberals in 42 states. With the exception of Massachusetts (where liberals carry the day by 11 points, 32 percent to 21 percent) and Vermont (where they enjoy an eight-point edge), the liberals’ advantage where it does exist is actually quite modest. We’re talking about six points in New York, four in Hawaii, three in Maryland and Rhode Island, two in Connecticut and a tie in New Jersey - not exactly overwhelming endorsements of EU-style socialism. Even in that den of Left Coast liberalism - California - conservatives hold a modest five-point advantage over their liberal brethren.
Elsewhere, the conservative advantage is daunting. We outnumber them by 10 points or better in 32 states; in 21 of those states, the margin is a seemingly insurmountable 2 to 1 or greater. To Senate watchers, conservative dominance in 21 states translates into one thing: When these 42 senators (including 9 moderate Democrats) receive mail, phone calls, and e-mails from their constituents, they’re unlikely to be hearing pleas for higher taxes, more government spending, and a hollowed-out military. On the contrary, there’s an ideological foundation sufficient to sustain a Senate filibuster on virtually any liberal policy initiative.
In the House, the ranks of the moderate Blue Dog coalition grew as well, where more than 50 House Democrats will be representing these overwhelmingly conservative constituencies. “There are more of us than ever,” Tennessee Blue Dog leader Jim Cooper says of the size of the Blue Dog pack. “And we will have a bigger bite.”
Memo #1 to conservative Hill leaders: If you invest the requisite time, energy, and intellectual capital engaging these conservative citizens in the policymaking process, you will be surprised at the influence they bring to bear on their elected representatives - in both parties.
Now, to be clear, the exit polls also contain some sobering alarm bells for conservatives. Between 2004 and 2008 the conservative advantage shrunk in some red states, including Indiana (by 12 points), Virginia (9 points), New Hampshire, Maryland, and Oklahoma (seven points each), and Tennessee, North Carolina, Montana, and Michigan (five points apiece). Virginia, in particular, slipped on the ideological axis from a 2-to-1 bright-red conservative state to one whose residents’ philosophical disposition, while still conservative, merely matches the overall national mood.
True, some of these shifts may be nothing more than insignificant fluctuations from one presidential cycle to the next. But a couple clearly reflect the Left’s enormous effort to change the political (and, by extension, ideological) cultures in heretofore red states such as Virginia, North Carolina, Indiana, and New Hampshire. In Colorado, in contrast, while this political “surge” strategy may explain the Democrats’ gain of a seat in both the House and Senate, it did nothing to alter Colorado’s ideological profile. Between 2004 and 2008 the conservative advantage there actually grew unexpectedly, from 13 points (35 percent to 22 percent) to a more robust 19 point margin (36 percent to 17 percent). Go figure.
In short, Americans are measurably more conservative than the lawmakers (and president) who will represent them in Washington. Americans still prefer principled conservative policy solutions and remain instinctively skeptical of Big Government liberal alternatives. Imagine how much more difficult - and depressing - this analysis would be if the polls really did suggest we had reached that “new liberal moment” of which Noonan speaks?
And memo #2 to our conservative leaders on Capitol Hill: Even if you successfully recapture every conservative in America, self-described moderates remain the essential ingredient in any sustainable right-of-center governing majority. Imagine for a moment that every conservative in the nation had voted for McCain and every liberal for Obama. While the race would have been considerably tighter - electors in North Carolina, Ohio, Florida, and Indiana would have voted for McCain, Missouri would have been a clear three- or four-point McCain win, and the race in Virginia would have been a nail biter - Obama still would have pulled out a narrow win.
To prevail in the upcoming debates, conservatives need to rediscover the lost art of selling conservative ideas and how those ideas measurably improve lives. And they need to make that sale not only to conservatives but to the plurality of Americans who self-identify as “moderates.” The victories will follow.
Yes, conservatism has a bright future in Washington. Now, let’s get back to work.
By Michael G. Franc
 | "Arguably the most influential opinion journal at the White House" - The New York Times For more information and to subscribe, click here. |
More From Opinion
The secrets of tennis legend 
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 74 CommentsYour statement was an example of ignorant name-calling. It is obvious that you have no idea what the terms conservatism and fascism mean.
I stand by earlier statement that Americans were a more conservative nation than the Scandinavians. Few Americans would put up with a tax rate of more than 90%. The American voters have not elected nearly unchanged socialist governments since World War II. Unlike the Norwegians, Americans do not sparsely furnish the fronts of their homes and put up no curtains to show people how frugally they live.
Reagonomics did and still does work. It is THE best way to help the economy and the little guy. I know, I am one of the little guys. Free market works. It''s government intervention that has caused the problems we see.
Yes America is still a conservative nation.
No the country was not founded on the current liberal idealogy. The word liberal today is not the word liberal from 100 years ago. Conservatism and libertarianism is the closest thing in this country to what the founding fathers believed in. And is what started this great nation.
In order for Obama to be elected he had to move to the center and be more conservative. Not the other way around. Remember that.
It''s amazing some of the delusions people live under, primarily it''s on the left side of the spectrum, but I recognize there is some on the right too.
Reaganomics has finally been exposed as nothing more than an upward redistribution scheme.
My God. What nonsense.
This nation was founded by Liberals, and it''s still a Liberal nation.
Not ot mention the wonderful expample of conservatism being set by todays right wing nut jobs
Now if we could only get the Republicans to be a conservative party...
(conservatives don''t double the national debt while increasing overall government spending)
In all cases though, Republicans arn''''t "conservative", they''''re reactionary.
Too bad.
Posted by CBS_Oliver
They aren''t are also fascist!
There is no such thing as "the sum of values of the population," even if the values could be measured (and they cannot on a simple scale like are you X or Y; conservative or liberal). It would be easy to invent a measure that shows Scandinavians are more conservative than Americans. But why bother? It means zero or less.
Yes but they do not mean the same thing everywhere. For example, the "neoconservative" movement in the USA was called "neoliberal" in many other countries. In any case, no one is arguing the definition of the terms, just that they are meaningless when applied to a person--people are a complex and ever-changing mix of viewpoints and few would fit any definition of liberal, conservative or whatever--even if we could agree what those terms mean, and this discussion shows we cannot. And of course if the terms are ridiculous in labeling an individual, they are even more so in trying to characterize a country.
In fact, this proves it--America is known to have a majority of Democrats far outnumbering Republicans, so trying to argue "America is still Conservative" just shows how meaningless such a label is.
Are you totally insular? The terms liberal and conservative are recognized internationally. I studied politics in an overseas university and they were well-known terms. If you are taking a sum of values of the population, Americans would tend to be more conservative than, say, Scandinavia, therefore it would be legitimate to say that in comparison it is a more conservative society. Of course, the perfect political middle of the road from which to set your boundaries is in the eye of the beholder.
Not at all! extrovert and introvert are personality descriptors. Conservative and liberal are labels in America, brands like Chevy or Marlboro. Those terms once described schools of thought or philosophies and maybe still do, but they become absurd when anyone tries to apply them to a person, even more so when applied to a group of people, and completely ridiculous when applied to a nation of people. Trying to label people in simplistic terms is a disease of marketing and completely meaningless.
Don''t show your ignorance. Conservative and Liberal are legitimate political science terms, the same way extrovert(although the term was originally extravert) and introvert are legitimate psychological terms.
The UK and Canada have both Liberal and Conservative parties as does New York. To confuse the issue in Australia the Liberal Party is actually the more conservative of the two major parties.
I you go back to my original entry I said that liberal and conservative were a sum of beliefs. My point was that few would give all liberal or all conservative answers to the concepts and terms I presented.
Yes and smart, informaed people are not "conservtive" or "liberal" or any other label. THey adopt the actions that make the most sense based on the situation and options available. Labels are only for the convenience of spin doctors, pollsters and ad salesmen who find it convenient to make silly statements like "America is conservative because most of the people we talked to last week supported the conservative ideas we mentioned."
Are you scared to take the test?
Is it just that you wish to air your prejudices in this forum.
I can name many horrible Democrat politicians and many honorable Republicans just as I am sure you can do the opposite.
Show your true colors.
In all cases though, Republicans arn''t "conservative", they''re reactionary.
Too bad.
I would place you a few steps to the right of me and a couple of steps to the left of being a reactionary.
Thank you for taking the test.
Now I would like to see someone like timothyone, CBS_Oliver or incog-nito take the test to see if they are committed radicals or moderate liberals.
Public Money or Taxpayers Money - Taxpayers, duh.
Individual or the welfare of the whole of society is more important - Ideally, the whole of society is more important, but expecting a small percentage of the population to provide for the rest will only discourage production. The U.S. is unique in its opportunities and people are dying to get here. We have to remember that.
Utilities like telephones and power be owned by government or shareholders? - This is what I was referring to above in regulation. Regulation does provide for stability, but not efficiency.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 74 Comments