David Brooks Makes Sense!

I know! I'm as surprised as the next Times reader. To be fair, though, today's column is largely a book report on a Pew foundation study of the American electorate, so there's blessedly little Brooksian musing beyond his hook: "rich people are boring, but poor people are interesting." The Pew study looks at Republicans and Democrats by class and finds (in Brooks' words) that:

poor Republicans (over 10 percent of voters)... are hawkish on foreign policy and socially conservative, but like government programs and oppose tax cuts. [P]oor Democrats... oppose the war and tax cuts, but are socially conservative and hate immigration.

Not only that, but

Poorer Republicans support government programs that offer security, so long as they don't undermine the work ethic. Eighty percent believe government should do more to help the needy, even if it means going deeper into debt. Only 19 percent of affluent Republicans believe that.

Now, the inability of "poor Republicans" to think about the intersection of political and economic matters gives me a headache that's almost exactly the size, shape, and heft of What's the Matter with Kansas?, but Brooks winds up with some interesting facts to throw at the next GOPite who talks about the party of small government - "President Bush has... increased the growth of nonsecurity domestic spending at a faster rate than Lyndon Johnson and twice as fast as Bill Clinton." Further, Dave hints that the Democrats may be able to exploit this class divide if (let's say "when," shall we?) the Republicans show their true plutocratic colors. (Doctorgovernorchairman Howard Dean, are you listening?)