May I be Frank?

The debate between Frank and Bartels is fairly simplistic to me. While a self admitted sucker, and easily swayed I can still full heartedly agree with Frank on this issue. The strongest point that Frank makes to me is the first. No, not the primary error, but the difference in studies and the subject matter that they use. This in itself is enough reason to understand the difference in opinions and terminology.

The primary error is very useful in understanding the errors that Bartels makes in his judgment of the original paper. Just switching a term, working – class, is not an adequate reasoning to say that voters are not “voting wrong”. Frank is correct in his assertion on the changes that happen in ones income but not social ideals, and ideas about class.

Personal experience comes in to play on this matter. I have several friends that are what Bartels calls “working class”. They make very littler money, but yet in the election of 2004 they voted Republican. Why is this? It is because they come from rich families that have always supported the Republican Party. This goes back to the idea of party mobility. You do not usually switch between parties. To add to this the friends are getting or have college degrees. They might be poor now but are most likely not going to be in the future. So while in the bottom earning class they still vote for republicans, allegedly the “wrong class”.

My grandparents also voted for the Republican Party. They happen to be part of the lowest income bracket. It is apparent that the argument that Frank makes based on social issues mattering more then economic issues is true for at lest some people. My grandparents are conservative just as a good portion of there age demographic is. Regardless of the amount of money they make they will always have the same conservative social values. It would be better to vote for the Democratic Party based on economic issues, it would also be better for Motley Crue to retire but….

Now, I do agree with Franks argument, but I would not go so far as he did and say that the Republican Party is forging a “dominate political coalition”. I believe that people cote “wrong” economically speaking, but who is to say what mattes the most and constitutes “wrong” or “right” voting or “wrong” or “right” reasons for doing so. The last few elections are going in between parties as they always have. The 2008 election shows this to us.

The 2008 election show that the presidency changes has between the parties. It, however, does not sway my ideas on Frank’s argument. There were several votes cased in the last election that were made for a reason different then ever before, race. This changes the entire concepts of how we relate this election to others, but also show that the republicans do not have a dominate coalition. If they did mobility between parties would not have been as elastic s they were in this last election.

So to answer the question, no I can not be Frank!