Silent Majority vs. Major Whinority

I’m interested in learning what others here think about whether there is a “silent majority,” and, if so, just how major is it? I don’t mean Republican and Democrat, or even Left and Right, I mean the percentage of people who believe in live and let live and mostly want to be left alone by government.

I had been thinking there are a majority of Americans who want the federal government services we have (maybe even more), but the last election caused me to think that may not be a majority. Still hard to tell, since so many registered voters didn’t vote.

But the ferocity with which Leftists have been attacking this administration gives me more concern. On the surface it’s very loud, very vocal, very impressive, but each instance dissipates quickly and much of it is beginning to look a little flimsy; like the fake village the citizens of Rock Ridge constructed in Mel Brooks’ documentary, “Blazing Saddles.” I wonder if, like the Great and Powerful Oz, it may be smoke, mirrors and amplified sound and projected imagery in a panic to keep us from pulling back the curtain?

10 comments to Silent Majority vs. Major Whinority

  • Magnus Caseus Formatis

    You’re on to something. The “being left alone by government” part: A majority of citizens just wanted to go to work and fulfill their version of the American Dream. Any interference by government was seen as intrusion into their productive time, and was to be avoided. How times have changed.

  • I think the tantrums ARE smoke and mirrors – for the benefit of the left. They are attempting to distract attention away from how miserably disconnected the Democratic Party is from the majority of Americans. The side effect of these protests is, however, to drive even more Americans away from the party.

    • Rufus

      But is some of the reason they’ve gotten so vocal and so demonstrative due to the fact that they really don’t have much of a defense against a strong push towards freedom and liberty?

      You know how some animals puff themselves up or put on a radical display to appear bigger than they are when confronted by a threat that is bigger than them? Could this be their only defense? Trying to convince us they are bigger than they are?

      We’re seeing signs of people walking away or increasing support across many, varied platforms; NFL viewership, ESPN viewership, CNN viewership, movies, awards shows, music sales, Target shoppers, Chik-fil-a eaters, Apple products… That woman who wore a Trump dress to the Grammy’s had a huge, positive response in iTunes sales. Are Meryl Streep DVD sales up or down?

      We believe they own the culture because Sarah Silverman shrieks a lot and draws a lot of attention to herself, but I’d rather have Jim Gaffigan or Jeff Foxworthy’s ticket and album sales.

      Maybe they don’t actually control the culture.

      • Jim Gaffigan isn’t on your side, I follow him on Twitter.

        • Rufus

          My “side” didn’t vote for Trump, but I know what you mean. Lady Gaga isn’t on the little government team either, but her and Jim are making money by being apolitical in front of large audiences.

          I hope Gaffigan is at least funny on Twitter.

          • He made some tentative steps into political topics, but went back to tweeting about his kids and food. He’s generally apolitical in his humor, but I doubt he would agree much with you and I regarding world affairs based on his limited comments.

            • I saw him do a show in Seattle about 10 years ago. Almost his entire act was apolitical, but completely out of the blue, he threw in an anti-Bush joke. It was a really disconcerting moment that took me out of the show, and it wasn’t even a funny or witty joke. He was doing a riff on how foreigners see Americans as stupid for some of the stuff we do, and he just added, “no wonder they elected Bush twice!” Of course, the rest of the crowd cheered at having their biases reinforced, so I guess he gets credit for knowing his audience.

              That kind of stuff reminds me of a line by Bill Burr about how when he jokes about race or politics, he worried that his stand-up show will accidentally turn into a meeting. I don’t go to comedy shows to attend a meeting, I go to be entertained and forget my problems for a while.

  • According to every poll I’ve seen, only about 20% of Americans identify as liberal. So yes, everything they do – the protesting in the streets, their media echo chamber, their abuse of the education institution, the propaganda they push through Hollywood and pop culture – is designed to put a huge microphone in front of that 20% minority and make it look like a majority. They figured out long ago that the dog that barks the loudest gets the attention, so they’re making sure to bark as loudly as possible.

    About 40% of the country is solidly conservative, and the other 40% is something else (centrist, independent, etc.) and that’s where things get interesting in regards to your “silent majority”. I believe that the other 40% (or most of them) comprise what Rush refers to as “low-information voters”. People who have no real political affiliation and are either too busy or too disinterested to follow politics. These people do largely want to be left alone, as you say, but only to a point.

    Basic human nature dictates that people will vote for what’s in their best interest. Often that means getting government out of the way, but sometimes it means creating jobs, keeping us safe from terrorists or illegal aliens, or just offering a change from the last eight years. It shifts depending on how people feel about how the country’s doing or how they feel about the party in power. There’s no one magic-bullet issue to win over low-info voters; you have to talk to them and find out what’s on their minds. More often than not, though, this 40% is won over by whoever they think genuinely cares about them more, and that’s an art, not a science.

    • Rufus

      With social media giving any clever person a platform we’re now seeing non-batsh*t leftists fighting back when batsh*t leftists momentarily steal the news cycle. There is a real possibility this could continue to have growing impact.

      What’s noticeably different is the plethora of directions the rebuttals come from. It’s no longer an echo chamber and it’s often very clever. I especially love things like the comparisons of the DeVos protesters with the historical images of other Democrats blocking school doors in the 60s. That’s the type of stuff that will cause some low information folks to go, hmmmmm.

      Night after night Tucker Carlson is creating entertaining youtube compatible 5 minute eviscerations where batsh*t leftists hang themselves by stating what they are all about. There’s a daily storm of twitter common sense and sarcasm as well as meme upon meme of clever folks disassembling the immature logic of so many of these attacks.

      Then there’s money and fame. Lady Gaga won the Superbowl by being apolitical. Taylor Swift, Matthew McCoughnahey (sp?) (who cares).. It’s cooler to be calm, civil and open-minded than a raving loon. When more eyeballs and dollars side with entertainers who stay above the fray some of the loons who have no ethics will change allegiances.

  • I know tons of folks who are raging 24/7 on social media about Trump. These are regular folks who feed on the hate … it’s alarming to see, really. You know they read all the worst/fake headlines and believe every syllable.