mgin comments on 2013 Survey Results - Less Wrong

74 Post author: Yvain 19 January 2014 02:51AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (558)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: mgin 22 January 2014 02:07:18PM 2 points [-]

I find it odd that 66.2% of LWers are "liberal" or "socialist" but only 13.8% of LWers consider themselves affiliated with the Democrat party. Can anybody explain this?

Comment author: [deleted] 06 March 2014 10:10:59PM 1 point [-]

I was wondering about this word "liberal" -- when Will Wilkinson says he's a liberal, that means something entirely different from what you're describing. So, is it possible we have many right liberals here?

Comment author: taryneast 09 February 2014 05:31:07AM *  0 points [-]

As somebody who most definitely identified as liberal, but did not affiliate with the Democrats:

Your question reveals a hidden assumption:

There is no "Democrat party" in (almost) every other country in the world apart from yours* ;)

*(I am assuming you come from the USA based on this underlying assumption)

Comment author: Nornagest 09 February 2014 05:52:16AM *  4 points [-]

This is easily tested by comparing against the country of origin question. As it turns out, a bit over half of LW comes from the US. Wikipedia claims that about 33% of Americans identify as Democrats (vs. 28% Republican and 38% other or independent), so we'd expect about 17.5% of LW to identify as Democratic if the base rate applied, up to 35% if every American LWer identifying as liberal or socialist also identified as Democratic.

Bearing this in mind, it seems that party members identified as such really are underrepresented here.

Comment author: taryneast 10 February 2014 08:53:21AM 0 points [-]

Cool stuff. Thanks for going and checking against the numbers :)

Comment author: [deleted] 23 January 2014 10:27:56AM 2 points [-]

I'd interpret “affiliated” as ‘card-carrying’. If anything, it surprises me as high, but ISTR that in the US you need to be a registered member of a party to vote for their primaries, which would explain that.

Comment author: Nornagest 09 February 2014 05:54:35AM *  0 points [-]

I'd interpret “affiliated” as ‘card-carrying’.

It's probably meant to be interpreted as "registered". In the US, registering for a political party has significance beyond signaling affiliation, so it's fairly common: it allows you, in most states, to vote in your party's primary election (which determines the candidates sent by that party to the general election, which everyone can vote in). A few states choose their candidates with party caucuses, though, and California at one point allowed open primaries, though there were some questions about the constitutionality of that move and I don't remember how they were resolved.

Roughly two-thirds of Americans are registered with one of the two major parties.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 17 February 2014 04:57:20AM 0 points [-]

Roughly two-thirds of Americans are registered with one of the two major parties.

Do you have a source for that, or is this the same statistic you quoted from wikipedia about "identification"?

I think only half of eligible voters are even registered to vote, but I'd expect almost all registered voters to register in a party. Young people, like LW users, are less likely to be registered.

Comment author: Nornagest 17 February 2014 05:15:30AM 1 point [-]

I honestly don't remember, but I was probably trying to point toward the Wikipedia stats, in which case I shouldn't have used "registered". A quick search for registration percentages turns up this, which cites slightly under 60% registration in the most recent election (it's been going slowly down over time; was apparently just over 70% in the late Sixties). I haven't been able to turn up party-specific registration figures; I suspect but cannot prove that you're underestimating the number of Americans registered as independent.

Comment author: drethelin 22 January 2014 06:39:03PM 2 points [-]

The democrat party is only socialist in the republican party's eyes.

Comment author: nshepperd 22 January 2014 02:12:31PM 11 points [-]

First reason: by European standards, I imagine the Democrat party is still quite conservative. Median voter theorem and all that. Second reason: "affiliated" probably implies more endorsement than "it's not quite as bad as the other party". It could also be both of these together.