I feel like people don't really care about tic-tacs. They get angry, but they don't seem to really care.

Suppose half the country thought tic-tacs were sentient, and half thought life-savers were sentient. What you'd expect to happen is that when a politician runs for president on the platform of banning both, everyone would vote for him. The pro-tic-tac party would dislike that he's banning life-savers, but it would be worth it for the increased chance of victory over someone who just bans tic-tacs. Similarly, the pro-life-savers would vote for him.

If there's another group that doesn't think either is sentient, then politicians would start catering to this group in other issues. Perhaps they think mentos should be taxed. They don't think they're sentient or anything. They don't think it's bad any more than other groups think it's good. But they still think it should be taxed. Since the politicians can secure the votes from the other two parties easily, they'll focus on the issues that this party thinks is important.

What seems to happen is that the pro-tic-tacs claim they're concerned about tic-tacs, but when push comes to shove, they care more about eating mentos than stopping the eating of tic-tacs. They only seem to care insomuch as it puts them in the same group as other tic-tac lovers.