"Meet the Poor Republicans" -I'm calling Brooks out on his blatant lies.

[NightOwwl]

Meet the Poor Republicans
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: May 15, 2005

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.

<snip> prepare for outright lies ahead <snip>

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.

and so on...
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/15/opinion/15brooks.html\

This is a crock of shit. Here is my email to the NYTimes Public Editor (ccd to Media Matters):

Mr. Okrent,

The following paragraph in David Brooks column, “Meet the Poor Republicans” (May 15, 2005) is what in polite terms is called a “misstatement of the facts.” I would go further and call it a blatant lie.

Brooks says:

“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.”

End of quote

It’s amazing how easy it is to find the actual statistics. Here is a direct quote from the paragraph “Personal Empowerment” as reported by Pew Research Center online at http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=236 (Emphasis in bold is mine)

Americans not only overwhelmingly believe that all people have it in their power to succeed, they also see hard work as the key to success. About two-thirds agreed with the statement that "most people who want to get ahead can make it if they're willing to work hard." That is down a bit from the boom years of 1999 and 2000, but majorities of Americans at all income levels still think hard work can lead to success.

The supporting statistics can be found in chart below under the section labeled 'Personal Empowerment & Optimism.'



Funny, I don’t see anywhere in those figures a breakdown between Republicans and Democrats; in addition, there is no mention of a 76%/14% percentage difference. Therefore, I must come to the conclusion that David Brooks is playing very loose with the facts.

Please print a retraction with an explanation of the error, and this time, please print the correct statistics.

Respectfully,

.....

[Carolab]

1. He COMPLETELY misrepresented that study.

How can he represent that poor people of BOTH parties "like the GOP's social and foreign policy" WHEN THE STUDY SHOWS CLEARLY (for example)THAT:

"The war in Iraq is seen as the primary cause for the increasing divisiveness. The war has intensified partisan differences over long-term attitudes toward national security – notably, whether military strength, or good diplomacy, is the best way to ensure peace. On that measure and others, Republicans are more hawkish than in past values surveys, while Democrats have become more dovish."

AND

"Bush and Kerry voters also expressed starkly different views about the U.S. role in world affairs. While a majority of Bush voters endorsed an activist foreign policy, just as many Kerry voters instead agreed with the statement: "We should pay less attention to problems overseas and concentrate on problems here at home."

NOT ONLY THAT, BUT:

"Pew's December 2004 survey on political values found moderation in the public's attitudes toward government. Nearly half of all Americans – 45% -- thought government does a better job than it gets credit for; about the same number (47%) said that government is almost always "wasteful and inefficient." There was a similar split over the efficacy of government regulation – 49% believed it is necessary to protect the public interest, while 41% said it does more harm than good.

But Democrats and Republicans no longer differ on these questions as they did through the 1990s. As recently as 1999, there were gaps of about 20 percentage points between the parties on both of these values; and throughout the 1990s, responses to these questions were important predictors of voting preference.

Those differences have now narrowed or vanished, and the change has been largely driven by growing pro-government sentiment among Republicans. This no doubt has much to do with the fact Republicans now control both the White House and Congress. Even so, the GOP's increasing comfort with government represents a major shift from the days of the Republican revolution."

AND

"Attitudes toward the social safety net remain very partisan, but there have been major shifts on these measures among members of both parties over the past decade. In July 1994, nearly two-thirds of Republicans said that poor people have easy lives; late last year, half of Republicans expressed that view. Over the same period, the number of Democrats who believe that the poor have it easy has dropped from 44% to 24%.

A decade ago, 61% of Republicans felt that the government could not afford to do more to help the poor. In the 2004 values survey, as many Republicans said the government should do more to help the poor, even if it means going deeper into debt, as felt that the government cannot afford greater aid to the poor. The number of Democrats favoring increased aid to the poor also rose – from 59% to 68%."

[Carolab]

4. PLUS, DID ANYONE NOTICE DEMS HAVE BEEN GAINING???

IN just about EVERY demographic category?

NO WAY REPUBLICANS ARE WINNING THESE ELECTIONS FAIR AND SQUARE!!!

[NightOwwl]

8. Yeah, he's not even trying to hide his lies.

If I don't hear from the public editor within a couple of days I am going to email him again. Can I use your findings in my next email?

[Carolab]

14. Please DO! n/t

[ccarter84]

2. Good letter,

quick question...you didn't confuse Brooks w/ brock did you?
Otherwise yea this is still exactly the type of stuff media matters focuses in on, so well done.

[Demit]

3. huh? The OP is clearly referencing David Brooks of the NYT

[NightOwwl]

6. No, David Brooks is the author of the piece of fiction...

David Brock is head of Media Matters. Was my subject line confusing?

[Demit]

5. Also, where does Brooks get the 19%/11% affluent breakout he cites?

I can't see that in the Pew study either. In the final chart I see a 38% R, 29% D breakdown for those making $75K+, and a 33% R,32% D breakdown for College Grad+. Brooks is extrapolating from something--as only he can do in his inimitable way--but I can't see what. That fucker so hurts my brain, I can't bear to read him. God bless you for having a stronger stomach than I do.

[NightOwwl]

7. Yes, he is definitely misstating more than just the quote I reference.

But I tend to get angry when confronted with multiple bullshit points and I didn't want to destroy my computer, so I stopped at the one. :argh:

[slor]

9. That milquetoast brooks is...

always lying. He probably believes the chimp "made it" through his hard work too. And we all know what a crock of shit that is.

[NightOwwl]

10. If you look in the dictionary under "Milquetoast"

you will find a picture of David Brooks.




Bill O'Reilly and David Brooks compare penis size.

[depakid]

11. As long as the Times keeps Brooks around

they will never recover their reputation. It's almost like they don't even want to- despite their occasional mea culpas.

[muriel_volestrangler]

12. You have linked to a previous Pew report

The one Brooks is using is here: http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=242

Where it defines:

"PRO-GOVERNMENT CONSERVATIVES


PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Populist Republicans

9% OF ADULT POPULATION

BASIC DESCRIPTION: 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.

DEFINING VALUES: Religious, financially insecure, and favorable toward government programs. Support the Iraq war and an assertive foreign policy, but less uniformly so than Enterprisers or Social Conservatives. Back government involvement in a wide range of policy areas, from poverty assistance to protecting morality and regulating industry."

and

"DISADVANTAGED DEMOCRATS


PAST TYPOLOGY COUNTERPART: Partisan Poor

10% OF GENERAL POPULATION

BASIC DESCRIPTION: 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.

DEFINING VALUES: Most likely to be skeptical of an individual's ability to succeed without impediments and most anti-business. Strong belief that government should do more to help the poor, yet most are disenchanted with government. Strongly supportive of organized labor (71% have a favorable view of labor unions)."

and says:

"Pro-Government Conservatives and Disadvantaged Democrats have similar socioeconomic backgrounds and confront many of the same financial struggles. Both groups are predominantly female, both are relatively poor, and large majorities in both groups express dissatisfaction with their financial circumstances.

But these groups have strikingly different outlooks on their lives and possibilities that go a long way toward explaining the differences in their political attitudes. Feelings about the power of the individual are a major factor in this division. Pro-Government Conservatives are defined, at least in part, by their optimism in this area. About three-quarters (76%) believe that most people can get ahead if they are willing to work hard ­ and two-thirds (66%) strongly express that view. An even higher percentage of Pro-Government Conservatives (81%) say that everyone has it in his or her own power to succeed.

Disadvantaged Democrats have a gloomier outlook. Just 14% think that people can get ahead by working hard; 79% say that hard work is no guarantee of success, and 76% express that view strongly. Only 44% of Disadvantaged Democrats say that everyone has the power to succeed, while slightly more (47%) take the fatalistic view that success in life is determined by forces outside one's own control. "

So, the figures are there - but Brooks is being disingenuous in descrbing both groups as "poor". The survey clearly says the DD group is the least financially secure.

[Carolab]

15. Three key points:

1. The current study is based on two public opinion surveys ­ a nationwide poll of 2,000 interviews conducted Dec. 1-16, 2004, and a subsequent re-interview of 1,090 respondents conducted March 17-27 of this year. This is the fourth such typology created by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press since 1987. Many of the groups identified in the current surveys are similar to those in past typologies, reflecting the continuing importance of a number of key beliefs and values. These themes endure despite the consequential events of the past four years ­ especially the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the war in Iraq.

2. The value gaps for the GOP are, perhaps surprisingly, greatest with respect to the role of government. The Republicans' bigger tent now includes more lower-income voters than it once did, and many of these voters favor an activist government to help working class people.

3. Pro-Government Conservatives also are broadly religious and socially conservative, but they deviate from the party line in their backing for government involvement in a wide range of policy areas, such as government regulation and more generous assistance to the poor. This relatively young, predominantly female group is under substantial financial pressure, but most feel it is within their power to get ahead. This group also is highly concentrated in the South, and, of the three core Republican groups, had the lowest turnout in the 2004 election.

It becomes obvious to me that they are targeting this group, young females (probably lots of single mothers here, too) in the deep south. However, although they may respond that they feel it is "within their power to get ahead", this group feels the government should provide more help to the poor. Those are contradictory beliefs...the Disadvantaged Democrats are aligned with them in wanting a more activist government in aiding the poor, and have a less optimistic/ more realistic outlook that they can "do it alone".

Also, the study points out that the key division between these groups is really their attitude toward the war. "For the most part, opinions about the use of force are what divides Democratic-oriented groups from the Republican groups. On other foreign policy issues, even contentious questions about working with allies, the partisan pattern is not as clear."

[leftofthedial]

13. David Brooks is a liar